Pt 1 The Dead Sea Scrolls Kabbalistic Council of the Gods

The Dead Sea Scrolls has an enormous impact on the Jedaic concept of the Council of the Gods which have Kabbalistic tie ins as this series of videos demonstrates using Michael S. Heiser's Doctoral Dissertation.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Council
• God
• Gods
• Kabbalah
• Qabalah
• Dead
• Sea
• Scrolls
• Archaeology
• Bible
• Mormon
• Mormons
• Mormonism

[tudungsenduk]

Is that a crack on your screen?

[TheBackyardProfessor]

It's a crack in my windshield.....

[TrueSaintsLDS]

Oh I found another great and interesting set of videos by the BYP.

Keep em coming!

[EphraimLDS]

Great video professor! Where would be a good, amateur starting point for researching the Council of the Gods?

[LDS4Life71]

@GmaM11 While the LDS concept of baptism for the dead is arguably consistent with the Bible, it required modern revelation to restore the practice, including the necessary knowledge and priesthood keys (Matt. 16:18; Heb. 5:9) to perform it in a valid and proper way so that what is sealed on earth might be sealed in heaven as well.

[LDS4Life71]

@GmaM11 (see 1 Peter 3:21 shown above; Romans 6:1-7; Acts 2:37-38; Mark 16:16; John 3:3-5, etc.), but this sacred ordinance requires a living body. The revealed solution: the dead can accept baptism performed in their behalf (1 Cor. 15:29) - a vicarious act of service.

[GmaM11]

@LDS4Life71 Marcion was a heretic who was excommunicated from the early church because he preached a "two god" theory. He was a very wealthy and corrupt man. Read his history. The fact he did provides absolute no Biblical support. Please find me one other Biblical scripture to support it or any historical evidence of its practice among non-pagans in Israel. 

[GmaM11]

@LDS4Life71 The word baptismo is not a good translation. The better words are "mikveh" ceremonial cleansing and "tahara" cleaning the dead body are better translations. Paul is asking why do they do the ceremonial cleansing if the dead do not rise. Furthermore, there is no 2nd or 3rd witness nor is there any historical support of the practice in all of scripture and Israel's BCE history.

[LDS4Life71]

If there is not a resurrection, then the Apostles are false witnesses (v. 15), their preaching is in vain (v. 14), their risks in preaching the Gospel have been in vain (v. 32), the believers have not been forgiven of sins (v. 17), and even Christ's resurrection is contradicted (v. 13 and 16). Paul uses IF ... THEN construction many times in this passage, always with precision and logic, and always using valid concepts to support the resurrection of the dead

[LDS4Life71]

@GmaM11 modern translations, such as the New English Bible or RSV, now use "on behalf of the dead").

[LDS4Life71]

@GmaM11 Cheesman: Does the church to which you belong practice it today?

Goodspeed: No.

Cheesman: Do you think it should be practiced today?

Goodspeed: This is the reason why we do not practice it today. We do not know enough about it. If we did, we would practice it.

Cheesman: May I quote you as a result of this interview?

Goodspeed: Yes.

[LDS4Life71]

@GmaM11 Interview between Dr. Edgar J. Goodspeed and Paul R. Cheesman, held in Dr. Goodspeed's office on the campus to the University of California at Los Angeles during the summer of 1945.

Cheesman: Is the scripture found in 1 Corinthians 15:29 translated properly as found in the King James Translation?

Goodspeed: Basically, yes.

Cheesman: Do you believe that baptism for the dead was practiced in Paul's time?

Goodspeed: Definitely, yes.

cont...

[LDS4Life71]

@GmaM11 1 Cor 15:29 ("Otherwise what are they to do, who have themselves baptized on account of the dead? If the dead are not really raised, why are they baptized on account of them?"

[LDS4Life71]

@GmaM11 about this. He's teaching that resurrection is a reality. If it weren't a reality, then, he asks, what sense would there be to the practice of baptism for the dead? This passage just doesn't make sense - using my basic and limited reading skills - if baptism for the dead were a practice he wholly rejected. He cites it as something that is valid and as something which is consistent with the doctrine of resurrection.