The LDS believe Jesus Baptized--why not you?

dberrie2020

Well-known member
dberrie2020 said: John 4:1-2---King James Version
1 When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John,
2 (Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,)
4Him said:
This is saying the apostles baptized, not that they were baptized....

I disagree. Here is the evidence:

The verse in John 4:2--- (Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,)--could have two possible meanings:

1) That Jesus did not do any baptisms, rather--- the disciples did the baptizing.
2) That Jesus did not baptize anyone other than His disciples.

Since the scriptures testify it was Jesus baptizing here:

John 3:22---King James Version
22 After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judaea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized.

John 3:26---King James Version

26 And they came unto John, and said unto him, Rabbi, he that was with thee beyond Jordan, to whom thou barest witness, behold, the same baptizeth, and all men come to him.

Those scriptures testify Jesus did baptize, and was baptizing.

That eliminates #1 choice above as being possible.

So--let's examine the scripture again---who was Jesus with, when the scriptures claimed Jesus was baptizing?

John 3:22---King James Version
22 After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judaea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized.

The scripture then comes into view once again---(Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,)--most likely having the meaning Jesus did not baptize anyone, with the exception of His disciples.(apostles)

The accusation was that Jesus baptized more than John:

John 4:1-2---King James Version
1 When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John,
2 (Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,)

The parenthesis clarifies that just wasn't true--Jesus only baptized His disciples(apostles)--whom He was with while He was baptizing.

The argument posed in John4:1 was not whether Jesus baptized or not--but rather--the number of people He baptized.
 

Richard7

Well-known member
I disagree. Here is the evidence:

The verse in John 4:2--- (Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,)--could have two possible meanings:

1) That Jesus did not do any baptisms, rather--- the disciples did the baptizing.
2) That Jesus did not baptize anyone other than His disciples.

Since the scriptures testify it was Jesus baptizing here:

John 3:22---King James Version
22 After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judaea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized.

John 3:26---King James Version

26 And they came unto John, and said unto him, Rabbi, he that was with thee beyond Jordan, to whom thou barest witness, behold, the same baptizeth, and all men come to him.

Those scriptures testify Jesus did baptize, and was baptizing.

That eliminates #1 choice above as being possible.

So--let's examine the scripture again---who was Jesus with, when the scriptures claimed Jesus was baptizing?

John 3:22---King James Version
22 After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judaea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized.

The scripture then comes into view once again---(Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,)--most likely having the meaning Jesus did not baptize anyone, with the exception of His disciples.(apostles)

The accusation was that Jesus baptized more than John:

John 4:1-2---King James Version
1 When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John,
2 (Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,)

The parenthesis clarifies that just wasn't true--Jesus only baptized His disciples(apostles)--whom He was with while He was baptizing.

The argument posed in John4:1 was not whether Jesus baptized or not--but rather--the number of people He baptized.
Great job of explaining baptism is for all...
 

dberrie2020

Well-known member
I disagree. Here is the evidence:

The verse in John 4:2--- (Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,)--could have two possible meanings:

1) That Jesus did not do any baptisms, rather--- the disciples did the baptizing.
2) That Jesus did not baptize anyone other than His disciples.

Since the scriptures testify it was Jesus baptizing here:

John 3:22---King James Version
22 After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judaea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized.

John 3:26---King James Version

26 And they came unto John, and said unto him, Rabbi, he that was with thee beyond Jordan, to whom thou barest witness, behold, the same baptizeth, and all men come to him.

Those scriptures testify Jesus did baptize, and was baptizing.

That eliminates #1 choice above as being plausible.

So--let's examine the scripture again---who was Jesus with, when the scriptures claimed Jesus was baptizing?

John 3:22---King James Version
22 After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judaea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized.

The scripture then comes into view once again---(Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,)--most likely having the meaning Jesus did not baptize anyone, with the exception of His disciples.(apostles)

The accusation was that Jesus baptized more than John:

John 4:1-2---King James Version
1 When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John,
2 (Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,)

The parenthesis clarifies that just wasn't true--Jesus only baptized His disciples(apostles)--whom He was with while He was baptizing.

The argument posed in John4:1 was not whether Jesus baptized or not--but rather--the number of people He baptized.

Would anyone like to engage this argument--as there are those here who have argued extensively about this point.
 

dberrie2020

Well-known member
According to LDS doctrine...only a recognized mormon priest can now baptize a person.

Such as this?

Revelation 1:6---King James Version

6 And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.
 

CrowCross

Super Member
Such as this?

Revelation 1:6---King James Version
6 And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.
Why do you post that? You know what I have posted in the past...you have seen the direct quotes from mormon websites...why are you being deceitful?
 

dberrie2020

Well-known member
Why do you post that? You know what I have posted in the past...you have seen the direct quotes from mormon websites...why are you being deceitful?

What do you consider as "deceitful" about Revelation1:6?

Revelation 1:6---King James Version
6 And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.

My point is--both the NT church--and the LDS church--have priests, so--your point about priests baptizing presents no problem for the LDS.

Jesus was a priest also--and He baptized.

The point addressed in my OP--was just that--Jesus baptized. Some here have argued that point, and that is the reason I opened this discussion.

Care to engage that point?
 

CrowCross

Super Member
What do you consider as "deceitful" about Revelation1:6?

Revelation 1:6---King James Version
6 And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.

My point is--both the NT church--and the LDS church--have priests, so--your point about priests baptizing presents no problem for the LDS.

Jesus was a priest also--and He baptized.

The point addressed in my OP--was just that--Jesus baptized. Some here have argued that point, and that is the reason I opened this discussion.

Care to engage that point?
I consider you to be deceitful.
Earlier I had posted..."According to LDS doctrine...only a recognized mormon priest can now baptize a person."
You are deceitful when you disagree with that statement.

Two priests or Melchizedek Priesthood holders witness each baptism to make sure it is performed properly. The baptism must be repeated if the words are not spoken exactly as given in Doctrine and Covenants 20:73 or if part of the person’s body or clothing is not immersed completely. LDS source

Instructions for Performing a Baptism​

Under the direction of the presiding authority, a priest or Melchizedek Priesthood holder may perform the ordinance of baptism. To do so, he:

  1. Stands in the water with the person to be baptized.
  2. Holds the person’s right wrist with his left hand (for convenience and safety); the person who is being baptized holds the priesthood holder’s left wrist with his or her left hand.
  3. Raises his right arm to the square.
  4. States the person’s full name and says, “Having been commissioned of Jesus Christ, I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen” (Doctrine and Covenants 20:73).
  5. Has the person hold his or her nose with the right hand (for convenience); then the priesthood holder places his right hand high on the person’s back and immerses the person completely, including the person’s clothing.
  6. Helps the person come up out of the water.

If you didn't do it correctly...as the LDS says you must do...then you missed out on the Gospel of baptism.
What does this mean? If you are not a Mormon and baptized the correct way....you can't be saved.

Bascially the Mormon doctrine says if you are not a Mormon and their baptism gospel is not part of your salvation...you're lost.
 

Slyzr

Well-known member
I consider you to be deceitful.
Earlier I had posted..."According to LDS doctrine...only a recognized mormon priest can now baptize a person."
You are deceitful when you disagree with that statement.

Two priests or Melchizedek Priesthood holders witness each baptism to make sure it is performed properly. The baptism must be repeated if the words are not spoken exactly as given in Doctrine and Covenants 20:73 or if part of the person’s body or clothing is not immersed completely. LDS source

Instructions for Performing a Baptism​

Under the direction of the presiding authority, a priest or Melchizedek Priesthood holder may perform the ordinance of baptism. To do so, he:

  1. Stands in the water with the person to be baptized.
  2. Holds the person’s right wrist with his left hand (for convenience and safety); the person who is being baptized holds the priesthood holder’s left wrist with his or her left hand.
  3. Raises his right arm to the square.
  4. States the person’s full name and says, “Having been commissioned of Jesus Christ, I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen” (Doctrine and Covenants 20:73).
  5. Has the person hold his or her nose with the right hand (for convenience); then the priesthood holder places his right hand high on the person’s back and immerses the person completely, including the person’s clothing.
  6. Helps the person come up out of the water.

If you didn't do it correctly...as the LDS says you must do...then you missed out on the Gospel of baptism.
What does this mean? If you are not a Mormon and baptized the correct way....you can't be saved.

Bascially the Mormon doctrine says if you are not a Mormon and their baptism gospel is not part of your salvation...you're lost.

Basically the doctrine is they want to baptize people in death. (servitude)

Some of the Mormon posters on this board have been admitting such.

You get baptized, and if you don't follow their doctrines

You are their servants.

As in the highest glory is going to the temple, to get married.

And those who don't are servants.

Not looking to misrepresent ...... their doctrine.

But seemed to me that was what was being said.
 

dberrie2020

Well-known member
Basically the doctrine is they want to baptize people in death. (servitude)

Some of the Mormon posters on this board have been admitting such.

You get baptized, and if you don't follow their doctrines

You are their servants.

As in the highest glory is going to the temple, to get married.

And those who don't are servants.

Not looking to misrepresent ...... their doctrine.

But seemed to me that was what was being said.

That's may be the same accusation the tradition Jews made against the first century church:

1 Corinthians 6:2-3---King James Version
2 Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters?
3 Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life?

Could you imagine what Paul's revelation would have done to the traditional Jews? The saints(heretics, to the traditional Jews)---judging the elect of God!!!!
 

Slyzr

Well-known member
That's may be the same accusation the tradition Jews made against the first century church:

1 Corinthians 6:2-3---King James Version
2 Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters?
3 Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life?

Could you imagine what Paul's revelation would have done to the traditional Jews? The saints(heretics, to the traditional Jews)---judging the elect of God!!!!

Ya ...... you already admitted to your glory temple thingy.
 

Slyzr

Well-known member
That's may be the same accusation the tradition Jews made against the first century church:

1 Corinthians 6:2-3---King James Version
2 Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters?
3 Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life?

Could you imagine what Paul's revelation would have done to the traditional Jews? The saints(heretics, to the traditional Jews)---judging the elect of God!!!!

Better resurrection?

Be elected to have better.

IMO ...... you guys are trying to make servants of others through baptism.

"For your higher calling".

Disagree?
 
Last edited:

CrowCross

Super Member
"I did" isn't a cite.

You claimed I disagreed with you that only a priest could baptize in the LDS church.

Please give us a cite for that claim.
I did. I created a link in previous post. Go click on it. 18.7.7 Performing priesthood ordinances and blessings.......from the General Handbook: Serving in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
 
Last edited:

dberrie2020

Well-known member
I did. I created a link in previous post. Go click on it. 18.7.7 Performing priesthood ordinances and blessings.......from the General Handbook: Serving in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Again--your claim was I disagreed with you, as pertaining to a priest must baptize one in the LDS church.

Where is that cite?

CrowCross said: I consider you to be deceitful. Earlier I had posted..."According to LDS doctrine...only a recognized mormon priest can now baptize a person." You are deceitful when you disagree with that statement.

Where do we find me disagreeing with "that statement"? ( If you like--you can apologize when you find there is no such disagreement--it would be the decent thing to do)
 

CrowCross

Super Member
Again--your claim was I disagreed with you, as pertaining to a priest must baptize one in the LDS church.

Where is that cite?
From your statement above it sounds like you are saying that a Mormon priest MUST baptize you under the LDS rules in order to be saved.
 
Top