AO - Getting baptized for the dead is it Biblical? [∞]
Discussion
|
This is a great question to show the difference between the Greek [1] way to study and the way to study the 2nd book.
- 1. Where did the question come from? The Greek just makes up questions [2] We wish to ensure that we are seeking to know God, not merely satisfy curiosities. [3]
|
- ↑ Gentile church
- ↑ ▸ ± Tit 3:9 But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain.
- ↑ ▸ ± Isa 43:10 Ye [are] my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I [am] he: before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me. [{no … : or, nothing formed of God }]
|
- 2. The source? Collect scriptures which speak of baptism for the dead. This is where collaboration starts. The Rules for interpretation [1] say that it must be a complete study: Rule - Complete [2] It is unlikely that one would know all the references in both the literal and 2nd books. Ask for help in finding more. But since one does not know what is not known, the Rule - Humility [3] applies.
|
|
|
Let's collect some sources:
Is there a baptism for the dead?
▸ ± 1Co 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?
This is the verse that many use to justify their own practice of proxy baptisms; being baptized on behalf of a dead person. Rather than argue with them, we apply the Rules for interpretation [1]:
1. Rule - Rigorous [2] We are not permitted to make an interpretation with only one verse.
2. Rule - Complete [3] It is a lazy interpretation since there is no attempt to sum up and include everything the Bible says about it.
3. Rule - Self examination [4] When we start with a practice and attempt to justify it with scripture, our thought pattern is backwards.
|
|
|
Close reading
- what shall they do?: Though grammatically, Paul may include himself in 'they', it is likely that he did not. Here is the reasoning which should be studied as it's own topic: Paul knew that salvation came before baptism [1] [2] and he would not have considered himself among the dead.[3] He will say that he is in continual danger and dies daily, but he knows that he is alive in the midst of it. His religion is not of or for the dead. It is for the living. [4]
- our death in baptism
How do we know we are alive before baptism? Simple. We 'die' in baptism, which could not happen if we were not alive. [5]
- the dead: Who are they? Are they people who have lived and now are dead. Are they people who are physically alive but spiritually dead? Are they those who hear the cross being preached though baptism by people who do not believe in resurrection? Don't just choose one that you think is right.
- a purpose of baptism:
- One purpose is so that we should walk in the newness of life. Can those who have lived and then died able now to walk in newness of life if someone is baptized on their behalf? This suggests that proxy baptisms are not the subject.
|
- ↑ The Hebrews were saved by the blood before they crossed the water.
- ↑ ▸ ± Ex 12:7 And they shall take of the blood, and strike [it] on the two side posts and on the upper door post of the houses, wherein they shall eat it.
- ↑ ▸ ± Mt 22:32 I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.
- ↑ ▸ ± Mt 8:22 But Jesus said unto him, Follow me; and let the dead bury their dead.
- ↑ ▸ ± Ro 6:4 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.
|
