Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Utah Girl
I Peter 4:6 speaks of when Jesus went to those in sheol and preached and these could then be judged as if men in the flesh ... and they didn't need a baptism to be judged. But I'm sure someone in Mormonism has taught you that such a verse in Peter--out of the whole Bible--and a verse in ICorinthians 15 are absolutely proof that Mormonism baptism for the dead is essential for the salvation of some who heard not the gospel or heard it and recieved it not during their life in the flesh.

Mormonsim sets Jesus aside and makes your church of Smith fabrications the source of Salvation and righteousness, doing violence to the Salvation of Grace in Christ by faith ONLY in Him. Your church is neither a source of God's righteousness nor of God's Salvation. Jesus is the author and finisher. Joseph Smith was a false prophet, a liar, an adulterer, and he has lead too many astray already. Now is the time to oppose this cult at every opportunity brought to the fore by the candidacy of Mitt Romney, Mormon cult follower extraordinaire.

If you want your church to claim Matt16:19 you'll have to get in line behind at least the Catholic Church which has been around a whole lot longer and accounting for millions and millions of Saved before your false prophet was even born.

407 posted on 08/07/2007 4:15:13 PM PDT by MHGinTN (You've had life support. Promote life support for those in the womb.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 403 | View Replies ]


To: MHGinTN
Here is a response to Luke Wilson of Gospel Truths Ministry, who questioned our belief in Baptism for the Dead. To me, it is comforting to know that the billions and billions of people who lived upon the earth and had no opportunity to hear the gospel of Jesus Christ are not condemned without a chance.

Salvation for the Dead:

Does Salvation for the Dead Contradict the Bible?
Romans 1:19-20

Wilson claims that the notion that those who died without a knowledge of the gospel need to have the opportunity to hear it is in conflict with the teachings of the Bible. According to Wilson, Romans 1:19-20 shows that, "those who do not have the written word of God are nevertheless without excuse according to Paul, because they have rejected God's revelation of himself through creation and the human conscience" (1995:1). No doubt, the wonders of creation testify to God's existence, but they do not explain the Gospel of Jesus Christ. While it is certainly true that all men and women have a conscience which helps them distinguish between good and evil, they cannot respond to and accept a gospel they have not heard and it is only the Gospel of Jesus Christ that saves. As Paul observed, "How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher?" (Romans 10:14). God is not arbitrary and unjust. Somebody, somewhere, has to teach these people so that they may hear and have the opportunity of accepting or rejecting the gospel message before the judgement.

When one examines Romans 1:19-20 carefully, it becomes clear that Paul is not speaking of those who die in ignorance of the Gospel, but is speaking of the consequences of willfully rejecting the gospel when it is offered. "The wrath of God," says Paul, "is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who hold the truth in unrighteousness." To hold the truth in unrighteousness, they must first have had the truth and then rejected it. "Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them (Romans 1:18-19). God always reveals the Gospel through his appointed preachers and messengers. When the Gospel of Jesus Christ is preached by the power of God, the conscience or light of Christ within all men and women shows them that what they are hearing is true. If they follow that light, it will lead them to accept the Gospel. If they reject it they will fall back into darkness and sin as Paul tells us (Romans 1:26-32). It is those who have been taught the Gospel who are "without excuse" (Romans 1:20), since even God's creations honor and obey God's power and will, even when man does not. The sin of man lies in knowing the truth and rejecting it anyway, "because that when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were they thankful, but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened" (Romans 1:21). Having openly rejected the Gospel message when it was offered, they brought divine judgements upon themselves (Romans 1:32). Those who die in ignorance of the Gospel message without having the opportunity to receive it, however, are another matter entirely.

Latter-day Saints are not the only people who recognize the importance of this issue. Stephen T. Davis, a professor of Philosophy at Claremont College has recently written a cogent defense of the resurrection that many evangelicals should gladly welcome.2 Addressing the issue of those who die in ignorance of the Gospel, Davis states:

Suppose there was a woman named Oohku who lived from 370-320 B.C. in the interior of Borneo. Obviously, she would never have heard of Jesus Christ or the Judeo-Christian God; she would never have been baptized, nor would she ever have made any institutional or psychological commitment to Christ or to the Christian church. She couldn't have done these things; she was simply born in the wrong place and at the wrong time. Could it be right for God to condemn this woman to eternal hell just because she was never able to come to God through Christ? Of course not.3
But how can God's mercy take effect, since salvation is only in the Gospel of Jesus Christ? As a solution, Davis suggests "post-mortem evangelism."4 He argues that a number of New Testament passages support this view including Ephesians 4:8-10; 1 Peter 3:18-20; 4:6; and 1 Corinthians 15:29. He notes the early Christian tradition that Christ during the interval between his death and resurrection descended to preach the Gospel to the spirits of the dead. "Despite the scores of interpretations of the difficult texts just cited that have been suggested in the history of Christian thought, this still seems to be a possible and plausible exegesis of 1 Peter 3:18-20; 4:5-6."5 Davis then reasons, "If the gospel was once preached to the dead, perhaps this practice continues. If so, perhaps the ignorant are preached to after death and receive then the chance they never had before to receive Christ and turn to God."6 Hebrews 9:27

This scripture merely states that the judgement follows death. Latter-day Saints do not question that, however it is what happens in-between death and resurrection before the judgement that is the issue in question. Jesus and the apostles understood there was an interval between the time of death and the resurrection.7 Luke 16:19-31

Wilson argues that the story related by Jesus in Luke 16:19-31, "makes clear that there is no opportunity to repent after death" and "excludes the possibility of repentance in the spirit world" (1995:2). Wilson's example, however, is ill-chosen since it does not describe the fate of one who died in ignorance, but the fate of one who sinned against light and knowledge. Unlike those who die in ignorance of the Gospel, the rich man and his family had already known of "Moses and the prophets" (Luke 16:29). These prophets had repeatedly taught Israel to treat the poor with mercy and kindness. Thus he had not died in ignorance of this truth, but had chosen a life of wickedness in spite of the commandments. Now dead, and having sinned against this light of knowledge, he finds himself suffering torment in hell. This example does not apply to those who die in ignorance.

410 posted on 08/07/2007 4:51:02 PM PDT by Utah Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 407 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson