In a recent video presentation, Unitarian apologist Anthony Buzzard embarrassed himself again on the topic of "Mormonism":
Q&A 10/24/17: Original Sin, Parousia, Trinity, God the Son, Incarnation
(question begins around the 51:28 mark)
I have previously responded to Buzzard's arguments, some of which he alludes to, here:
Responding to Anthony Buzzard's Misinformed Comments on Mormon Theology
On the topic of 1 Cor 15:29, the LDS reading is much better than Buzzard tries to make it out to be as if it would be a practice Paul would have condemned. Note the following, which are just representative of the scholarly literature on the topic:
Q&A 10/24/17: Original Sin, Parousia, Trinity, God the Son, Incarnation
(question begins around the 51:28 mark)
I have previously responded to Buzzard's arguments, some of which he alludes to, here:
Responding to Anthony Buzzard's Misinformed Comments on Mormon Theology
On the topic of 1 Cor 15:29, the LDS reading is much better than Buzzard tries to make it out to be as if it would be a practice Paul would have condemned. Note the following, which are just representative of the scholarly literature on the topic:
It cannot be denied that Paul is here speaking of a vicarious baptism: one is baptised for the dead to ensure for them a share in the effect of baptism, and this must relate to a post-mortal life. It is also clear that Paul himself refers to this baptismal practice, and without distancing himself from it (This is the embarrassing perception which is the reason for some (comparatively few) interpreters making an imaginative attempt to ignore that this relates to a vicarious baptism). (Søren Agersnap, Baptism and the New Life: A Study of Romans 6:1-14 [Langelandsgade, Denmark: Aarhus University Press, 1999], 175-76)
The presence of Christians receiving baptism on behalf of other persons who died unbaptized was evidently a common enough practice in the apostolic church that Paul can use it as a support for his argument without qualification. and the form of the Greek (ὑπὲρ τῶν νεκρῶν [hyper tōn nekrōn]) leaves no doubt that it is to just such a posthumous proxy baptism that he is referring. (David Bentley Hart, The New Testament: A Translation [New Haven: Yale University Press, 2017], 348 n. ac)To see how "suspect" Buzzard's Socinian Christology is, one should check out the following:
Jesus was not a Unitarian (leads to a full review by David Paulsen et al. of Anthony Buzzard, Jesus was not a Trinitarian: A Call to Return to the Creed of Jesus [2007])
John 17:5 and the Personal Pre-Existence of Jesus
Answering an objection to the personal pre-existence of Jesus
Answering an objection to the personal pre-existence of Jesus
