The Fastest Way to Make Your Calling and Election Sure

[Amonhi]

caught up by the Spirit and submerged

But what does that mean! Makes it sound like a) a resurrected being did it or b) God himself did it? You can't baptize without a body?

More and more you ponder the gospel the stranger it really does get. I wonder what the "perfect" order is in a celestial realm and not the laws of a telestial and terrestial order which seem to always have contradictions due to the fall.

It isn't strange, it makes perfect sense, it just doesn't match with what we are openly/commonly/currently taught over the pulpit, so, to see the truth you have to forget everything you have been taught and consider what the scriptures are telling us, as inspired by God.

Also, Experience is a far more valuable judge of truth than doctrine or dogmas as taught over the pulpit. If Alma baptizes himself and then starts baptizing others, and God accepts it, then regardless of the current doctrine, God accepted it/authorized it.

If a person says they received the Holy Ghost and with it the gifts of the spirit which only come by having received the Gift of the Spirit/Holy Ghost, are are we going to say, "No you didn't...Because you didn't get it from my recognized authority/process..." And all the while they are casting out devils, healing the sick, speaking in tongues and enjoying the other fruits of the spirit...LOL we're so funny and prideful as to think our way is THE ONLY way...

Amonhi

[Rose Garden]

I am coming to believe that the outward ordinances aren't entirely necessary, but I'm still hung up on baptism. Moses 6:59-60 talks about the three required baptisms: water, spirit, and blood. We know that spirit baptism is an immersion in the Spirit. I believe the baptism of blood is a physical change involving our blood which changes us from mortal to immortal upon completion. So both these phenomenon require an all body experience in the substance involved. So what about water? Could there be a spiritual counterpart besides the baptism of the Spirit for the water baptism? If not, then why are there three elements listed in Moses 6?

So in other words I'm saying that I could let go of the need for the reception of the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands, the initiatory, the endowment, and even the sealing ordinances, but I can't easily let go of the idea of water baptism. It sure seems pretty important in the scriptures.

On further reflection, I could let go of the idea of a person needing to actually go down into a body of water and being immersed there. There are stories of people being surrounded by clouds or mist or whatnot. I can't remember details right now, but I do suppose the Lord could take care of this ordinance in other ways. I just have a hard time believing that it might not be required at all.

[Amonhi]

On further reflection, I could let go of the idea of a person needing to actually go down into a body of water and being immersed there. There are stories of people being surrounded by clouds or mist or whatnot. I can't remember details right now, but I do suppose the Lord could take care of this ordinance in other ways. I just have a hard time believing that it might not be required at all.

From our point of view, we are taught that baptism is essential to salvation, and there are so many scriptures that support this idea.

How is it that you can justify not needing to be circumcised? Did you know that in Christ's time circumcision was considered essential to salvation? It was the first ordinance that every person goes through to join the faith. Jews still practice it.

Circumcision was the doctrine in dispute which embodied the entire law of Moses, including baptism. (Many people do not realize that baptism is part of the Lower Law or Law of Moses, which was fulfilled...)
From Acts 15 we read:

And certain men which came down from Judæa taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved.
2 When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this question.
...
4 And when they were come to Jerusalem, they were received of the church, and of the apostles and elders, and they declared all things that God had done with them.
5 But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.
6 ¶And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter.
7 And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.
8 And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us;
9 And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.
10 Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?
11 But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.

This is where the leadership of the church concluded that the law of Moses was fulfilled and was not required for salvation. So, they were taught very plainly that circumcision was required for salvation, and with it, the entire law of Moses. Nobody including Peter questioned that this doctrine was true, FOR A JEW, but for a Gentile it was not?!? They determined that if the preparatory gospel and law was meant to prepare us for the Holy Ghost in which the Fulness of the Gospel of Jesus Christ is received, and the Gentiles had received the Holy Ghost, (without circumcision, baptism, the laying on of hands or any other lower law ordinance), then why give them the preparatory law? Why send them backwards when they were given the Higher law, and received it. Peter says, "God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us."

Now, let's say that a person believed and was converted BUT DID NOT RECEIVE THE HOLY GHOST from the father as a witness... What then?
Then they would be put under the Aaronic Priesthood or preparatory priesthood and law. They would be circumcised, baptized, and would need to go through the law of Moses just like the Jews until they were prepared and received the Holy Ghost.

Did you notice that the ordinance used to "give" the gift of the Holy Ghost doesn't say, "I give unto you the gift of the Holy Ghost" or I bestow upon you the Holy Ghost" or any other way of "Giving" a "Gift". Instead, it orders or commands you saying, "I say unto you, RECEIVE THE HOLY GHOST!"

Going back to the Aaronic Priesthood: Pay attention to every ordinance of the Aaronic priesthood, they are ALL focused on making us worthy to receive the Holy Ghost. The Sacrament even tells us, "that you may always have his spirit to be with you... The Sacrament is the modern version of animal sacrifice, tells us the if we can remember the blood and body of Christ that was shed for us, then perhaps we will have His spirit to be with us. Every principle and ordinance of the Lower law aims to help us to be worthy of the Holy Ghost. Repentance, baptism, Sacrament, atonement, Laws of carnal commandments, etc...

Water Baptism is the physical symbol of the spiritual Baptism of Fire. Now, consider that not many people want to be Physically Baptized by fire as a symbol of the spiritual baptism of fire. It's not good for the hair or skin and if you aren't completely submersed in fire, then you have to do it again until you get it right... LOL, If you survive, then you are a Saint. If not, well we are glad you tried to convert all the same...

As you could imagine, there wouldn't be a lot of converts. The spiritual fire purifies us, like a refiners fire or burning a needle in a flame to burn off impurities. But it does so unseen from the inside out. So, water which is used to clean the outward vessel becomes a very good physical symbol for the Baptism of Fire. You can be dunked in it without any adverse effects, it is relatively safe. It doesn't hurt, uh, usually.

Water symbolizes being clean of purified. But the Fire actually does the cleaning and purifying. so, if you receive the baptism of Fire which actually cleans, then you do not need the symbol of being cleaned that doesn't do anything.

The water Baptism doesn't actually clean you spiritually, the Fire Baptism does. The water is only the symbol of becoming clean.

2 Nephi 31:17 - 17 Wherefore, do the things which I have told you I have seen that your Lord and your Redeemer should do; for, for this cause have they been shown unto me, that ye might know the gate by which ye should enter. For the gate by which ye should enter is repentance and baptism by water; and then cometh a remission of your sins by fire and by the Holy Ghost.

So, if a person were to receive the Gift of the Holy Ghost and the baptism of fire without being baptized with water, then the physical symbol becomes meaning less to the person receiving it. Of course there is the matter of the outward sign of the inward conviction, for others to observe.

It's like when we pray. folding arms, bowing head and closing eyes doesn't make a prayer heard by Father/Mother. But it is a sign and symbol for others that shows what is happening inside us. This is a great tool for teaching children who can't see the spiritual/inside actions. They can see the outward and so learn about prayer/how to pray inwardly by watching us go through dead motions.

So, if someone were to receive the Holy Ghost, really receive it, without baptism, then they are cleaned and prepared as evidenced by the reception of the Holy Ghost. Or, as Peter said, "God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us."

I personally know a number of people who have received the Gift of the Holy Ghost without Baptism or the Laying on of hands. And I know far more who have been baptized and had hands laid on them and have yet to receive the Gift of the Holy Ghost.

Also realize that physical ordinances are all dead works. They of themselves do nothing. Even with the power of the priesthood performing them, they are only symbols of the true works which are spiritual. We know this because the ordinance does nothing without the spiritual work. And the spiritual is living and beneficial even without the physical.

[AussieOi]

Hmm, lot to digest there.

OK, can I ask. Isn't the C&E about a G.A taking you and your spouse into the temple, washing you feet and doing a specific ordinance?

Rather than us here speculating its a spiritual thing

Just asking.

[Mark]

Hmm, lot to digest there.

OK, can I ask. Isn't the C&E about a G.A taking you and your spouse into the temple, washing you feet and doing a specific ordinance?

Rather than us here speculating its a spiritual thing

Just asking.

Since we are the only ones up mate based on our time zones I can help you there. You are referring to a sacred priesthood ordinance known as the second anointing. If you want to learn more about calling and election I recommend an excellent book written by John Pontius titled The Triumph of Zion. He provides many wonderful quotes from many of our earlier apostles and prophets discussing calling and election. Elder McConkie discussed this at great lengths. This is a sacred and holy opportunity and right reserved for the truly sanctified among us. The Lord stands at the door and waits for us to knock. The temple provides us the keys to open that door and receive our inheritance. It is ours to claim once we have the sufficient faith and belief.

[Original_Intent]

I agree with most of what I am hearing, but one things bothers me and I haven't been able to get an answer:

if al of the physical ordinances are merely symbolic and unnecessary, then why all the expense and effort to perform them vicariously for the dead in temples? Baptism in particular.

I do understand Joseph Smith's feelings regarding us acting like Methodists...we certainly have a tendency to say
No, you must follow these specific prescribed steps or it doesn't work."

I realize you claim that you and your wife were sealed before the temple ceremony, Amonhi. I don't dispute that at all, but I just wonder again - if the ordinances are not needed, then why all the expense to see them done? I certainly feel that temple work is an important part of the restored gospel and seems integral to the turning of the hearts of the children to the fathers, and the hearts of the fathers to the children. Any thoughts?

[ajax]

From our point of view, we are taught that baptism is essential to salvation, and there are so many scriptures that support this idea.

No kidding. So much so that I have a hard time wrapping my head around the idea of baptism by immersion not being required.

[Rose Garden]

Water Baptism is the physical symbol of the spiritual Baptism of Fire. Now, consider that not many people want to be Physically Baptized by fire as a symbol of the spiritual baptism of fire. It's not good for the hair or skin and if you aren't completely submersed in fire, then you have to do it again until you get it right... LOL, If you survive, then you are a Saint. If not, well we are glad you tried to convert all the same...

As you could imagine, there wouldn't be a lot of converts. The spiritual fire purifies us, like a refiners fire or burning a needle in a flame to burn off impurities. But it does so unseen from the inside out. So, water which is used to clean the outward vessel becomes a very good physical symbol for the Baptism of Fire. You can be dunked in it without any adverse effects, it is relatively safe. It doesn't hurt, uh, usually.

) In the last baptism I witnessed in Korea, the person baptizing held the baptizee under the water so long that the witnesses started calling out in alarm. I couldn't understand a word they were saying, but I didn't need to!

Anyway, here's my difficulty with accepting the idea that water baptism is not required:

Moses 6:

59 That by reason of transgression cometh the fall, which fall bringeth death, and inasmuch as ye were born into the world by water, and blood, and the spirit, which I have made, and so became of dust a living soul, even so ye must be born again into the kingdom of heaven, of water, and of the Spirit, and be cleansed by blood, even the blood of mine Only Begotten; that ye might be sanctified from all sin, and enjoy the words of eternal life in this world, and eternal life in the world to come, even immortal glory;

60 For by the water ye keep the commandment; by the Spirit ye are justified, and by the blood ye are sanctified;

So here it specifically says that we must be baptized by water and that it plays a separate part in our spiritual development.

Basically, I don't see the baptism of fire as the spiritual counterpart of the water baptism. Furthermore, I don't see the baptism of fire as merely a spiritual ordinance. I believe the baptism of fire has actual physical effects on our mortal bodies and that these effects begin when we have fulfilled the requirements of the water baptism which raises us from a carnal state to a spiritual state. Additionally, I see each baptism as a process with a beginning and ending, and the signs that we receive concerning them coming at the beginning or end of these processes.

The Savior certainly seems to uphold this idea of mine since the first thing He taught the Nephites in 3 Nephi 11 after teaching them who He was, was how to baptize and why. The why is because the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are one.

Here is another scripture that gives me pause when I consider that baptism is not necessary:

Doctrine and Covenants 124

29 For a baptismal font there is not upon the earth, that they, my saints, may be baptized for those who are dead—

30 For this ordinance belongeth to my house, and cannot be acceptable to me, only in the days of your poverty, wherein ye are not able to build a house unto me.

31 But I command you, all ye my saints, to build a house unto me; and I grant unto you a sufficient time to build a house unto me; and during this time your baptisms shall be acceptable unto me.

32 But behold, at the end of this appointment your baptisms for your dead shall not be acceptable unto me; and if you do not these things at the end of the appointment ye shall be rejected as a church, with your dead, saith the Lord your God.

This is the only ordinance that I know of in scripture that is mentioned as one to be done for the dead. And these verses make it sound pretty important, to the point that a) the temple is necessary specifically so that there can be a place to do baptisms for the dead and b) that the people and their dead will be rejected if they don't fulfill this assignment.

So throw out all the other ordinances, tell me that people have been baptized by fire before they ever received their water baptism, tell me whatever you like, but it seems to me that this one ordinance is important enough for salvation that it is taught extensively throughout the scriptures. It seems to me that it is important enough for Adam to be caught up in the Spirit to have it done. It is important enough that the Savior, who was sinless, was still baptized by water to fulfill all righteousness.

[AGStacker]

Amonhi, so how does one know if they've been baptized with fire?

I have had what I think is the Holy Ghost envelop me before? Should I assume that was the baptism of fire and the Holy Ghost?

I feel what I think is the Holy Ghost often even while writing this.

Thanks for your input.

[Rose Garden]

AGStacker, I suggest praying to ask if you have had the baptism of fire. I think that is probably the only way to know. When I experienced mine, I had no idea what it was. Afterward, the Lord stated testifying to me what had happened. So I didn't know it at the time, but learned later that I was baptized by the Spirit.

[AGStacker]

AGStacker, I suggest praying to ask if you have had the baptism of fire. I think that is probably the only way to know. When I experienced mine, I had no idea what it was. Afterward, the Lord stated testifying to me what had happened. So I didn't know it at the time, but learned later that I was baptized by the Spirit.

But what if I don't perhaps remember a specific event but have felt a flood of the Holy Ghost many times before?

[embryopocket]

I haven't read through this entire thread, but from what I've seen there is a lot of false doctrine being thrown back and forth.

The physical ordinances of the priesthood are indeed prerequisite to receiving eternal salvation and exaltation. However, merely receiving this ordinances is not enough. One must live according to the promises made in these covenants. For example, if I partake of the sacrament in church every Sunday yet fail to obey my Lord's commandments, remember Him always, and be willing to take His name upon me, I will not always have His Spirit to be with me.

Receiving the physical ordinances of the priesthood is like signing a contract with God saying that if we complete with everything that is written in the contract, we will receive the blessings that God has also stated in that same contract.

The idea that receiving the ordinances of the priesthood is not necessary for salvation is false. I believe that it was Original_Intent that said that A is B but B isn't always A. One can receive the ordinances of priesthood and not receive the blessings associated, but one cannot receive the associated blessings without first receiving the ordinances.

Study the words of the Lord's prophets and you will not be deceived. I have not read the writings of John Pontius nor Denver Snuffer, and I am sure that they are wonderful members of the church with great knowledge of the gospel, but their words are not to be esteemed higher than the words of the prophets. When I see more quotes from these authors or other authors than from the Holy Scriptures and General Authorities, I begin to worry a little.

[Rose Garden]

To be honest, I wasn't seeking to experience the baptism of fire, I was just trying to progress spiritually. I hadn't ever given the baptism of fire much thought. Along the way, I had many spiritual experiences that flooded me with the Spirit and made me feel almost as though I were being lifted physically to heaven. But there was one event which took place when the process was complete. In that instance, I felt as though someone had wrapped a garment around me, such as a cloak. Others have had different experiences when they received theirs.

So this is why I suggest praying about it. I wouldn't have figured it out myself. After my experience, the Spirit started teaching me about the baptism of fire and after a while I clued in that I was being told I had received mine. Then it took me quite some more time and learning to pinpoint the moment when it happened.

If you pray about it, either the Lord will help you see that you've attained it or will help you know how to attain it. Either way, take the strong spiritual experiences you are having as a sign that you are heading in the right direction, whether you've had your baptism of fire or not.

EDIT: There I go missing the last page again. This post is in response to AGStacker's.

[AGStacker]

Thanks Called to Serve. You gave me some good advice.

[Jeremy]

When I was searching to understand more about physical ordinances I came across the "required" physical ordinance of circumcision. In a discussion with a friend of mine I wrote up the following. Please forgive me if it doesn't all apply to the current discussion.

24 But they hardened their hearts and could not endure his presence; therefore, the Lord in his wrath, for his anger was kindled against them, swore that they should not enter into his rest while in the wilderness, which rest is the fulness of his glory.
25 Therefore, he took Moses out of their midst, and the Holy Priesthood also;
26 And the lesser priesthood continued, which priesthood holdeth the key of the ministering of angels and the preparatory gospel;
27 Which gospel is the gospel of repentance and of baptism, and the remission of sins, and the law of carnal commandments, which the Lord in his wrath caused to continue with the house of Aaron among the children of Israel until John, whom God raised up, being filled with the Holy Ghost from his mother’s womb.

23 But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.
24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.
25 But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.
26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.
27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

2 Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.
3 For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law.
4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.
18 But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.

Blessed are ye if ye shall give heed unto the words of these twelve whom I have chosen from among you to minister unto you, and to be your servants; and unto them I have given power that they may baptize you with water; and after that ye are baptized with water, behold, I will baptize you with fire and with the Holy Ghost; therefore blessed are ye if ye shall believe in me and be baptized, after that ye have seen me and know that I am.

30 All truth is independent in that sphere in which God has placed it, to act for itself, as all intelligence also; otherwise there is no existence.
31 Behold, here is the agency of man, and here is the condemnation of man; because that which was from the beginning is plainly manifest unto them, and they receive not the light.
32 And every man whose spirit receiveth not the light is under condemnation.

Laws, spheres, light, truth, knowledge. They are all related. The law that we are under is a form of condemnation because it does not allow us to progress into a higher sphere until we fulfill said law. The light and truth we have is often limited by our understanding and knowledge of the law we are currently in. But when one progresses beyond a sphere, or fulfills a law, their understanding of that fulfilled law grows.
All of a sudden it matters not that Joseph was baptized by someone who did not hold the authority of the priesthood. It doesn't matter that Joseph baptized without the authority. It doesn't matter that Joseph received the priesthood by one not yet holding the priesthood.

71 Accordingly we went and were baptized. I baptized him first, and afterwards he baptized me—after which I laid my hands upon his head and ordained him to the Aaronic Priesthood, and afterwards he laid his hands on me and ordained me to the same Priesthood—for so we were commanded.

It doesn't matter that Jesus Christ went to John, who was not recognized by the Jews to hold the priesthood, to be baptized. It doesn't matter that Alma baptized Helam and himself at the same time.

12 And now it came to pass that Alma took Helam, he being one of the first, and went and stood forth in the water, and cried, saying: O Lord, pour out thy Spirit upon thy servant, that he may do this work with holiness of heart.
13 And when he had said these words, the Spirit of the Lord was upon him, and he said: Helam, I baptize thee, having authority from the Almighty God, as a testimony that ye have entered into a covenant to serve him until you are dead as to the mortal body; and may the Spirit of the Lord be poured out upon you; and may he grant unto you eternal life, through the redemption of Christ, whom he has prepared from the foundation of the world.
14 And after Alma had said these words, both Alma and Helam were buried in the water; and they arose and came forth out of the water rejoicing, being filled with the Spirit.
15 And again, Alma took another, and went forth a second time into the water, and baptized him according to the first, only he did not bury himself again in the water.

What matters is that they were led by the spirit. The spirit must not only be present, it must seal the ordinance. And if this happens, the ordinance has taken place. At no time before this. The physical ordinance is a schoolmaster. And if the spirit directs you to participate it is in relation to the law which condemns you. Once you fulfill this law, the condemnation is lifted in relation to this law. Then you move on into a higher law...and new "condemnation". But it is only condemnation because it must be fulfilled in order to obtain higher.

The scriptures clearly teach...what they teach is only as clear as the light which shines in the sphere we find ourselves. The power is contained in the spiritual side...the spiritual side being the necessary side.

Why is so much put into temples and work for the dead? There are a lot of people that have a law to fulfill. This might be why in some cases we feel their presents when we do the work...but in other times we do not. I used to assume that in not feeling them there it was because they A) were not ready and/or B) they were not worthy. I think I was in error in that assumption. Possibly they had already fulfilled the preparatory law which leads/points to a higher/spiritual realm.

[AussieOi]

Hmm
Is there a thread anyone can recommended on the 2nd anointing?
Not sure I am comfortable with that

[MsEva]

Thank you Jeremy, that is how I understand things too.

[embryopocket]

All of a sudden it matters not that Joseph was baptized by someone who did not hold the authority of the priesthood. It doesn't matter that Joseph baptized without the authority. It doesn't matter that Joseph received the priesthood by one not yet holding the priesthood.

71 Accordingly we went and were baptized. I baptized him first, and afterwards he baptized me—after which I laid my hands upon his head and ordained him to the Aaronic Priesthood, and afterwards he laid his hands on me and ordained me to the same Priesthood—for so we were commanded.

It doesn't matter that Jesus Christ went to John, who was not recognized by the Jews to hold the priesthood, to be baptized. It doesn't matter that Alma baptized Helam and himself at the same time.

12 And now it came to pass that Alma took Helam, he being one of the first, and went and stood forth in the water, and cried, saying: O Lord, pour out thy Spirit upon thy servant, that he may do this work with holiness of heart.
13 And when he had said these words, the Spirit of the Lord was upon him, and he said: Helam, I baptize thee, having authority from the Almighty God, as a testimony that ye have entered into a covenant to serve him until you are dead as to the mortal body; and may the Spirit of the Lord be poured out upon you; and may he grant unto you eternal life, through the redemption of Christ, whom he has prepared from the foundation of the world.
14 And after Alma had said these words, both Alma and Helam were buried in the water; and they arose and came forth out of the water rejoicing, being filled with the Spirit.
15 And again, Alma took another, and went forth a second time into the water, and baptized him according to the first, only he did not bury himself again in the water.

Joseph and Oliver did have the priesthood to baptize. Here is the scripture that you quoted with the two verses that come before it.

Upon you my fellow servants, in the name of Messiah, I confer the Priesthood of Aaron, which holds the keys of the ministering of angels, and of the gospel of repentance, and of baptism by immersion for the remission of sins; and this shall never be taken again from the earth until the sons of Levi do offer again an offering unto the Lord in righteousness.

He said this Aaronic Priesthood had not the power of laying on hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost, but that this should be conferred on us hereafter; and he commanded us to go and be baptized, and gave us directions that I should baptize Oliver Cowdery, and that afterwards he should baptize me.

Accordingly we went and were baptized. I baptized him first, and afterwards he baptized me—after which I laid my hands upon his head and ordained him to the Aaronic Priesthood, and afterwards he laid his hands on me and ordained me to the same Priesthood—for so we were commanded.

John the Baptist gave them the Aaronic Priesthood, then they were baptized with the authority given to them, then they ordained each other to maintain the order of the Lord that priesthood ordination comes after baptism. So they did have the proper priesthood authority.

As for John the Baptist not having Priesthood authority when he baptized Christ:

But they hardened their hearts and could not endure his presence; therefore, the Lord in his wrath, for his anger was kindled against them, swore that they should not enter into his rest while in the wilderness, which rest is the fulness of his glory.

Therefore, he took Moses out of their midst, and the Holy Priesthood also;

And the lesser priesthood continued, which priesthood holdeth the key of the ministering of angels and the preparatory gospel;

Which gospel is the gospel of repentance and of baptism, and the remission of sins, and the law of fcarnal commandments, which the Lord in his wrath caused to continue with the house of Aaron among the children of Israel until John, whom God raised up, being filled with the Holy Ghost from his mother’s womb.

For he was baptized while he was yet in his childhood, and was ordained by the angel of God at the time he was eight days old unto this power, to overthrow the kingdom of the Jews, and to make straight the way of the Lord before the face of his people, to prepare them for the coming of the Lord, in whose hand is given all power. - D&C 84:24-28

In verse 27, it says "until John" clearly stating that he had the Aaronic Priesthood. Do note, however, that when the angel ordained him when he was 8 days old, it was not to the priesthood, but for his mission of preparing the way for the Savior.

And for Alma entering the water with Helam, here is what President Joseph Fielding Smith stated:

Therefore, when Alma entered the water with Helam, it was not a case of Alma baptizing himself; he was merely offering a token to the Lord of his humility and full repentance.

[embryopocket]

Do note, however, that when the angel ordained him when he was 8 days old, it was not to the priesthood, but for his mission of preparing the way for the Savior.

I am not 100% sure about this, I thought that I remembered reading that the angel ordained John for his special mission but that he was ordained to the priesthood by an angel in the desert? Is that right or am I making that up? I don't feel comfortable leaving that statement there without a quote to back it up. Anyone know of a quote on exactly HOW John received the priesthood?

[Jeremy]

embryopocket, thank you for your comments. I don't think I expressed myself clearly and would like to blame that on my lame attempt to "copy and paste"...but I wont. It was just a lame attempt to express myself.

In reference to Joseph being baptized by one not holding authority, I intended to point out the progression we see in the LDS church which is one is baptized and then one is able to receive the authority. You don't receive the authority before baptism. So by the understanding of current practice neither Joseph or Oliver had authority because they had not been baptized first...enabling them to receive the authority. Clearly this is a point I should have tried to make clear before omitting the verses you pointed out. I apologize if because of that mistake it seems as if I am trying to led people astray. :ymblushing:

This does raise a question for me that I had not thought about tell now.
The priesthood was conferred but Joseph and Oliver still "ordained" each other to the same priesthood...hmmmm

As for John the Baptist not having Priesthood authority when he baptized Christ:

In verse 27, it says "until John" clearly stating that he had the Aaronic Priesthood. Do note, however, that when the angel ordained him when he was 8 days old, it was not to the priesthood, but for his mission of preparing the way for the Savior.

Yes, John did have authority but I was trying to point out that he was not recognized by "the church" at the time to have authority or be ordained for a mission. This is because "the church" is not the giver of authority or mission...it comes from Him and Him alone.

And for Alma entering the water with Helam, here is what President Joseph Fielding Smith stated:

Therefore, when Alma entered the water with Helam, it was not a case of Alma baptizing himself; he was merely offering a token to the Lord of his humility and full repentance.

Exactly! Yes! Thank you for showing me that quote. I don't think I have ever read it before. Isn't that a description of everyone's physical baptism, "merely offering a token to the Lord of [our] humility and full repentance"? That said, I think it was a case of Alma baptizing himself. :ymblushing:

[Rose Garden]

Thanks Called to Serve. You gave me some good advice.

Glad to be of help!

[embryopocket]

embryopocket, thank you for your comments. I don't think I expressed myself clearly and would like to blame that on my lame attempt to "copy and paste"...but I wont. It was just a lame attempt to express myself.

In reference to Joseph being baptized by one not holding authority, I intended to point out the progression we see in the LDS church which is one is baptized and then one is able to receive the authority. You don't receive the authority before baptism. So by the understanding of current practice neither Joseph or Oliver had authority because they had not been baptized first...enabling them to receive the authority. Clearly this is a point I should have tried to make clear before omitting the verses you pointed out. I apologize if because of that mistake it seems as if I am trying to led people astray. :ymblushing:

This does raise a question for me that I had not thought about tell now.
The priesthood was conferred but Joseph and Oliver still "ordained" each other to the same priesthood...hmmmm

As for John the Baptist not having Priesthood authority when he baptized Christ:

In verse 27, it says "until John" clearly stating that he had the Aaronic Priesthood. Do note, however, that when the angel ordained him when he was 8 days old, it was not to the priesthood, but for his mission of preparing the way for the Savior.

Yes, John did have authority but I was trying to point out that he was not recognized by "the church" at the time to have authority or be ordained for a mission. This is because "the church" is not the giver of authority or mission...it comes from Him and Him alone.

And for Alma entering the water with Helam, here is what President Joseph Fielding Smith stated:

Therefore, when Alma entered the water with Helam, it was not a case of Alma baptizing himself; he was merely offering a token to the Lord of his humility and full repentance.

Exactly! Yes! Thank you for showing me that quote. I don't think I have ever read it before. Isn't that a description of everyone's physical baptism, "merely offering a token to the Lord of [our] humility and full repentance"? That said, I think it was a case of Alma baptizing himself. :ymblushing:

You're welcome, Jeremy. Haha, I didn't feel like you were trying to lead people astray...I just wanted to clarify a couple of doctrinal points. And thanks for bringing up the difference between "conferred" and "ordained." I do not know if when it states that they were commanded to "ordain" each other that it is different than conferring. Maybe someone has a quote clarifying that?

And as for the church not recognizing John's authority, the church was in a state of apostasy and the leaders were corrupt. The Church was in a fallen state by the time Christ was born into the world. Perhaps this is why the Lord ordained John to the priesthood seemingly "outside of the Church." However now that the Church is not in a state of apostasy, ordinations to the priesthood will always come through it.

[Jeremy]

However now that the Church is not in a state of apostasy, ordinations to the priesthood will always come through it.

I believe the scriptures show many different circumstances of how an individual receives the priesthood. Through the lines of the church (in apostasy or not) is not the only way. The priesthood isn't the church's to give. It is His priesthood and He can/will give it to ALL those who qualify.
We should be very slow to assume that being in the church is a qualification...especially a church under condemnation.

As for the church not being in a state of apostasy...hmmmm...if one has apostatized from a higher law and received a condemnation to a lower law...is that not a form of apostasy?

[embryopocket]

However now that the Church is not in a state of apostasy, ordinations to the priesthood will always come through it.

I believe the scriptures show many different circumstances of how an individual receives the priesthood. Through the lines of the church (in apostasy or not) is not the only way. The priesthood isn't the church's to give. It is His priesthood and He can/will give it to ALL those who qualify.
We should be very slow to assume that being in the church is a qualification...especially a church under condemnation.

As for the church not being in a state of apostasy...hmmmm...if one has apostatized from a higher law and received a condemnation to a lower law...is that not a form of apostasy?

I had never even considered that possibility before. Are you saying that there are people who are not members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints that hold the priesthood? Because that is not true.

[Rose Garden]

Embryopocket, might I suggest you ponder and pray about the idea before dismissing it forthright?