Report on the news that matters to your community and don't let us miss a beat. Send in your stories and photos.
My Recent Comments
@samkat I think there is a misconception here on the doctrine of Baptism for the Dead. The key word here is "for". Baptism for the Dead.. not Baptism of the Dead.
In life.. when one is baptized.. they normally choose it. All except those who baptize babies.. they have no choice. Baptism by proxy for the dead is offering those who have died, an opportunity to accept the baptism if they so choose to. Since you believe that you could NEVER change your mind.. neither in this life nor the next.. one must still ask the question.. what if you do?
Once you are dead.. if you were to accept the gospel of Jesus Christ.. and baptism being one of the requirements.. you could not be baptized. Therefore.. a way must be provided for one who is dead.. to either accept or reject a baptism that was done for them. Just because a person is baptized by proxy does not mean that the ordinance done is forced upon them. They must choose to accept it.. or it has no meaning. Just as if I currently baptized someone else in your name.. does that mean you are forced to accept the baptism I preformed? Certainly not! And so it is with those who it is being done for who have crossed to the other side. In the end.. they must chose.. yes they accept it.. or no.. no thank you. The choice is always theirs.Dec 24, 2011
The Bible says this.. the Bible says that. Does the Bible speak of the "Trinity" as described in Nicaean Creed?
It is well known that in the year a.d. 325 the Roman emperor Constantine (not even a Christian) convened the Council of Nicaea to address.. among other things... the growing issue of God’s alleged “trinity in unity.” What emerged from the heated contentions of churchmen, philosophers, and ecclesiastical dignitaries came to be known (after another 125 years and three more major councils) as the Nicene Creed, with later reformulations such as the Athanasian Creed. These various evolutions and iterations of creeds—and others to come over the centuries—declared the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost to be abstract, absolute, transcendent, imminent, con-substantial, co-eternal, and unknowable, without body, parts, or passions and dwelling outside space and time. In such creeds all three members are separate persons, but they are a single being, the oft-noted “mystery of the trinity.” They are three distinct persons, yet not three Gods but one. All three persons are incomprehensible, yet it is one God who is incomprehensible.
I would have to agree with the part that the Christian God as defined in their creeds is certainly incomprehensible!!
If Christians can agree on what is God by their creeds and the many meetings and votings it took to describe a God that is NOT in the Bible.. then why should members of The Church of Jesus Christ not be allowed to describe God based on revelations received by a prophet of God?
Who is to say that the current revelation received is wrong? The creed believing Christians?Dec 24, 2011