What is the Gospel? – Kelly Powers!

 

I noticed the above short video by Kelly Powers in which he criticizes the beliefs and teachings of Latter-day Saints. He raises two main objections. The first relates to the need for water baptism for salvation; and also the gift of the Holy Ghost necessarily following water baptism. His argument is that water baptism is not a requirement for salvation; nor a necessary prerequisite for receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost. That is his first argument—which is unbiblical. Here are some references:

Acts 2:

38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.

40 And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation.

41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.

Peter does not qualify his statement by adding, “But if you are not baptized, don’t worry about it, you will still be okay.” Here is another:

Acts 19:

1 And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples,

He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.

3 And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John’s baptism.

4 Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.

5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

6 And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.

Again, baptism is made both a requirement for salvation, as well as a necessary prerequisite for receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost. If the baptism of John which they had previously received was sufficient, why did they need to be baptized again, in the name of Jesus, before they could receive the gift of the Holy Ghost? Here another:

Acts 8:

14 Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John:

15 Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost:

16 (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.)

17 Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost.

Again, baptism in the name of Jesus precedes receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost. Another example:

Acts 22:

16 And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.

Again, baptism is made a prerequisite for the remission of sins, which in turn is a prerequisite for obtaining the gift of the Holy Ghost. Here are some more:

Romans 6:

3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?

4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.

1 Corinthians 6:

11 And such were some of you: but ye are washed [of their sins, by baptism], but ye are sanctified [made holy, by receiving the Holy Ghost], but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.

1 Corinthians 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.

Galatians 3:

26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.

27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

Titus 3:

5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration [baptism], and renewing of the Holy Ghost;

1 Peter 3:

21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:

In the video, he focuses a lot on John 3:5:

John 3:

3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

4 Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother’s womb, and be born?

5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

His argument being that verse 5 does not explicitly mention water baptism—as if that is somehow the only biblical proof text for baptism, which of course it is not. He also focuses on Mark 16:16:

Mark 16:

15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.

16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not [and consequently not baptized] shall be damned.

His argument being that in verse 16, it does not explicitly mention “not baptized”—which is a meaningless and nonsensical objection, because it doesn’t need to. Baptism follows faith, belief in the gospel, and repentance. Why would they want to be “baptized” if they haven’t “believed”?

Another objection he raises to LDS theology is belief in vicarious baptisms (and other sacraments) for the dead—his argument being that once you are dead, you don’t get a “second chance”. He has badly misunderstood that as well. The LDS doctrine of vicarious baptism for the dead doesn’t mean that you get a “second chance”. If you have knowingly and willfully rejected the message of the restored gospel in this life, you don’t get a “second chance”. LDS doctrine of vicarious baptisms are intended for those who have not had a first chance. There are two points to be made here. Firstly, in LDS theology, the various ordinances or sacraments of the gospel—including baptism, confirmation (laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost) etc., require a valid priesthood authority to perform them, which currently only the LDS Church possesses, and no other church does—nor has had since the first century. Therefore if you have previously been baptized, or received such ordinances through other channels, that doesn’t count. You need to receive them again, by proper priesthood authority—in order for it to be valid, and be in force in heaven—which only the LDS Church possesses, and is able to provide; no other church does. Vicarious baptisms (and other sacraments) for the dead are intended to fulfil that requirement. That is the first point. The second point is that once you have had a proper chance to accept the fullness of the gospel in this life, and knowingly and willfully rejected it (like he is now doing), you don’t get a second chance; your fate is sealed. And as far as biblical references are concerned, the Bible affirms baptisms for the dead:

1 Corinthians 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?

Baptisms for the dead were performed in the ancient church, in the days of Paul. We also have this biblical passage:

1 Peter 3:

18 For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:

19 By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;

20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.

21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:

22 Who is gone into heaven, and is on the right hand of God; angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him.

Jesus after his crucifixion, and during the three day period between his death and resurrection, spent his time in the spirit-would, preaching the gospel to the spirits of the dead. Why would he want to do that, if it didn’t provide them with the chance to repent, accept the gospel message, and obtain salvation through faith, repentance, (vicarious) baptisms for the dead, and other necessary (vicarious) sacraments?

And lastly, he has titled  his video, “What is the Gospel?”. That also requires a response. The “gospel” is literally the “good news” of the salvific and redemptive work of Jesus Christ, which is received through faith, repentance, baptism, and the gift of the Holy Ghost, by the laying on of hands of those having proper priesthood authority to perform them, as expressed in the Bible verses quoted above, as well as in articles 3-5 of the LDS Articles of Faith (emphasis added).

Articles of Faith:

3 We believe that through the Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel.

4 We believe that the first principles and ordinances of the Gospel are: first, Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ; second, Repentance; third, Baptism by immersion for the remission of sins; fourth, Laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost.

5 We believe that a man must be called of God, by prophecy, and by the laying on of hands by those who are in authority, to preach the Gospel and administer in the ordinances thereof.

And that is not the same as “works salvation”. We don’t “save ourselves by our own works”. We are saved by God when we do what he says—not the same thing. And the LDS Church is the only church on earth at the present time which has the necessary priesthood authority to perform those sacraments—both for the living and the dead. No other church does.

Hayden Carroll’s Obsession is Getting Boring

 

After I had posted my previous message, discussing Hayden Carroll’s issues with Sola Scriptura and the biblical canon, I found two more short video clips from him (seen above), in which he again questions the canonicity of the 66 books of the Bible. It is not necessary here to discuss in detail what he has said, because I have already given enough detailed discussion in my previous posts. In this post I am going to focus on only one issue. In the first video, responding to Jeff Durbin, he says the following:

“Do you see the issue here? They are literally admitting they can’t justify their [66 book Bible] standard. They are self-admittedly presupposing it as the infallible, ultimate authority. Jeff, unless you can justify your standard, the 66 books you hold today, why should we believe it? If God didn’t say it, why are you?”

In the second video, again addressing Jeff Durbin, he says the following:

“Jeff, using your own standard, you are just kicking the can down the road; in other words, how do you know that the 66 books you use today are God speaking? Again, where did God publicly reveal this? …”

My question for him is, if he has such a serious issue with the canonicity of the 66 books of the Bible, why is he still LDS? Because the LDS Church fully accepts the canonicity of the 66 books of the Bible:

Doctrine and Covenants 42:

12 And again, the elders, priests and teachers of this church shall teach the principles of my gospel, which are in the Bible and the Book of Mormon, in the which is the fulness of the gospel.

If he has such a serious issue with the canonicity of the 66 books of the Bible, then why is he still LDS? He is in the wrong religion. He should go and find himself some other church or religion that agrees with his theological views—because the LDS Church doesn’t.

More on Sola Scriptura from Hayden Carroll!

 

I noticed the above short clip from Hayden Carroll in which he criticizes Jeff Durbin on account of his support for the doctrine of Sola Scriptura (scripture alone). Here is the video transcript:

Jeff Durbin:

So, Sola Scriptura, the scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, being given by divine inspiration, are the sole, infallible rule of faith and practice for the church—Sola Scriptura. And so really, Sola Scriptura is a doctrine that is based upon revelation.

Hayden Carroll:

Sorry Jeff, did you say that Sola Scriptura is a doctrine based on revelation? Can you please show us when God publicly identified your 66 book canon, and declared it as infallible and the ultimate authority? If you can, you would be the first person on earth to produce such an artifact. If you can’t, please don’t say that this presupposition that you hold out of necessity is based upon revelation from God. God has never taught Sola Scriptura. You know this, Jeff.

Jeff Durbin is a known anti-Mormon; and the last thing I would want to do is to come out in support of Jeff Durbin! But truth is truth, and must be upheld—even if it happens to come from Jeff Durbin! There is no question that the Bible teaches and supports Sola Scriptura. The quotes given below are some of the more prominent references. There are many more. But before giving the quotes, it should be pointed out that Hayden Carroll conflates “scripture” with the “66 books of the Bible”, which is not what “scripture” has meant throughout history. The canonical books have not been the same throughout history. In the days of Moses, the “canon” consisted of the five books of Moses (the Pentateuch) only—and “Sola Scriptura” in his day would have been applicable to those five books only—as indeed God informs Joshua about:

Joshua 1:

7 Only be thou strong and very courageous, that thou mayest observe to do according to all the law, which Moses my servant commanded thee: turn not from it to the right hand or to the left, that thou mayest prosper withersoever thou goest.

8 This book of the law [of Moses] shall not depart out of thy mouth; but thou shalt meditate therein day and night, that thou mayest observe to do according to all that is written therein: for then thou shalt make thy way prosperous, and then thou shalt have good success.

That is what God said to Joshua about the five canonical books of Moses. That was Sola Scriptura in the days of Joshua—refering to the Pentateuch, the five books of Moses—because that was all the canon of scripture that existed at the time. But the underlying principle was, and still is, applicable to all the subsequent books of scripture that might be added to the canon later on. Joshua was himself a great prophet, received many revelations, and added his own book of scripture to the canon, known as the book of Joshua. So after Joshua, the canon consisted of six books—the five books of Moses, plus the book of Joshua; and what God says in Joshua 1:7-8 about the Pentateuch, would be equally applicable to the book of Joshua. In the days of the prophet Samuel for example, the “canon” of scripture would have consisted of everything that God had revealed to subsequent prophets up to that time; and what God says to Joshua, in Joshua 1:7-8, about the Pentateuch (Sola Scriptura), would have been equally applicable to those additional books of scripture up to that time. The same applies to all subsequent generations. In the days of Isaiah, the canon consisted of everything that God had revealed up to that time; and what God says in Joshua 1:7-8 (Sola Scriptura) about the Pentateuch, would have been equally applicable to those additional books of scripture. And likewise in the days of Jesus, the biblical canon would have included everything that had been revealed to prophets up to that time; and the principle taught in Joshua 1:7-8 (Sola Scriptura), would have been equally applicable to them at that time—as indeed Jesus testifies: “… and the scripture cannot be broken” (John 10:35). That is Sola Scriptura—coming from none other than Jesus himself. You can’t have it more authoritative than that. Here are some more quotes, first from Jesus:

Matthew 4:

4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

Matthew 5:

17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law [books of Moses], or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law [of Moses], till all be fulfilled.

Matthew 22:

29 Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.

Mark 12:

24 And Jesus answering said unto them, Do ye not therefore err, because ye know not the scriptures, neither the power of God?

Matthew 24:

35 Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.

John 5:

39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

John 17:

17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.

That is Sola Scriptura—according to the words of Jesus himself. And this has been the verdict of all the biblical writers, who have spoken on the subject; of which the following is a selection. From the New Testament:

Romans 15:

4 For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope.

2 Peter 1:

20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

2 Peter 3:

16 As also in all his [Paul’s] epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

2 Timothy 3:

16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

Hebrews 4:

12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

James 1:

22 But be ye doers of the word [scripture], and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves.

Revelation 1:

3 Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand.

And from the Old Testament:

Psalm 12:

6 The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.

Psalm 119:

89 For ever, O Lord, thy word is settled in heaven.

Psalm 119:

105 Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path.

Isaiah 40:

8 The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever.

Isaiah 55:

10 For as the rain cometh down, and the snow from heaven, and returneth not thither, but watereth the earth, and maketh it bring forth and bud, that it may give seed to the sower, and bread to the eater:

11 So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.

That is Sola Scriptura, expressed in the perfect biblical language of the Old and New Testaments. So the Bible is absolutely 💯 Sola Scriptura—and so is LDS theology and doctrine, as previously discussed (see here, here, here, and here). So I have good news for Jeff Durbin! LDS theology and doctrine is very much Sola Scriptura—the only difference being that we have a lot more scripture than traditional Christianity does. In addition to the Bible, we also have the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, and the Pearl of Great Price—which together with the Bible, constitute the scriptural canon of the LDS Church; and the theology and doctrine of the LDS Church is strictly and exclusively derived from that scriptural canon—and from no other source. So LDS theology and doctrine is likewise 💯 Sola Scriptura. The theology and doctrine of the LDS Church is strictly and exclusively derived from that scriptural canon—and therefore is Sola Scriptura.

Hayden Carroll likes to think that he is speaking for the LDS Church—but he doesn’t. I am LDS, and I don’t agree with half the things that he says.