Difference between revisions of "Talk:D&C 128:6-18"
From Feast upon the Word (http://feastupontheword.org). Copyright, Feast upon the Word.
Rob Fergus (Talk | contribs) (bombshell) |
(→"Bombshell" interpretation of verse 12) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==="Bombshell" interpretation of verse 12=== | ==="Bombshell" interpretation of verse 12=== | ||
OK, I've never really caught this before. Or, since some prophets have taught that resurrection of the dead is an ordinance, is that the ordinance that is instituted "to form a relationship" with baptism for the dead? Admittedly a more clumsy reading, but how else to make sense of this? Perhaps at some level, if these are both eternal ordinances that have existed throughout the eternities, there may never have been one before the other?--[[User:Rob Fergus|Rob Fergus]] 18:25, 24 Oct 2006 (UTC) | OK, I've never really caught this before. Or, since some prophets have taught that resurrection of the dead is an ordinance, is that the ordinance that is instituted "to form a relationship" with baptism for the dead? Admittedly a more clumsy reading, but how else to make sense of this? Perhaps at some level, if these are both eternal ordinances that have existed throughout the eternities, there may never have been one before the other?--[[User:Rob Fergus|Rob Fergus]] 18:25, 24 Oct 2006 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | :I think this phrasing is indeed interesting. There's a certain sense in which establishing baptism for the dead first makes sense: all of us who have need of baptism will die, but not everyone who lives will have the chance to be baptized. So if we had only baptism for the dead, possibly everyone could be saved, even if baptism for the living weren't possible. Another thought is that this passage makes me think in terms of purification rites for the dead, perhaps that's the best perspective from which to understand baptism? (BTW Joe, did you get the article on "The River Ordeal in Israelite Literature" I emailed you?) --[[User:RobertC|RobertC]] 19:05, 24 Oct 2006 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 15:05, 24 October 2006
"Bombshell" interpretation of verse 12
OK, I've never really caught this before. Or, since some prophets have taught that resurrection of the dead is an ordinance, is that the ordinance that is instituted "to form a relationship" with baptism for the dead? Admittedly a more clumsy reading, but how else to make sense of this? Perhaps at some level, if these are both eternal ordinances that have existed throughout the eternities, there may never have been one before the other?--Rob Fergus 18:25, 24 Oct 2006 (UTC)
- I think this phrasing is indeed interesting. There's a certain sense in which establishing baptism for the dead first makes sense: all of us who have need of baptism will die, but not everyone who lives will have the chance to be baptized. So if we had only baptism for the dead, possibly everyone could be saved, even if baptism for the living weren't possible. Another thought is that this passage makes me think in terms of purification rites for the dead, perhaps that's the best perspective from which to understand baptism? (BTW Joe, did you get the article on "The River Ordeal in Israelite Literature" I emailed you?) --RobertC 19:05, 24 Oct 2006 (UTC)
