Baptism for the dead?

[godofthunder9010]

To break it down to brass tax:
1.) Mormons believe that the ordinance of baptism is essential for eternal salvation.
2.) Mormons likewise believe that just because you didn't accept the Gospel and Jesus Christ in this world, it does not doom you to burn in hell for all eternity -- a significant departure from Christian thinking.
3.) In order for 1 and 2 to work - and also to offer a second chance to those who accept it - you have to sort out a way to perform the rite of baptism for the deceased.

NO Offense but the MORMON'S "According to Scriptures" does just about everything wrong lol. When the BIBLE talks about the dead getting baptised, it doesn't mean that they were dead literally, but they were "Spiritually DEAD". After someone gets baptised you're walking in a "NEW LIFE" and you dont serve sin anymore. It has absolutley nothing to do with dieing litterally, then getting baptised later LOL. Thats's a decision that's only to be made by the person while they are still alive. You just cant wait until you die, then get baptised later and think that the LORD will except it.

I fail to see how Mormonism is anymore out of touch with Biblical Christianity than any other faith. Pretty much all of them pick and choose what they want to believe and come up with wildly creative interpretations in order to ignore the passages of scripture they don't like. "Nontraditional" does not mean wrong. All sorts of traditions are complete BS - both in religion and throughout the history of the world. Mormonism actually fits the Biblical pattern better than most Christian religions if you actually read it without predetermined conclusions. In the end, if you can have 33,000 religions and call every one of them Christian, then why hate on the Mormons? 33,000 interpretations of the Bible ... what difference does one more make?

In the case of this particular passage:

29 Now if there is no resurrection, what will those do who are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized for them?

You explanation of the passage requires a massive amount of reading into things and assumptions. In this case, the Mormon interpretation requires far less "ad libbing facts to make the passage fit my beliefs." The Mormon interpretation takes the passage at face value and adds nothing to it.

[thetechnologyvault]

One thing that should be clarified in this discussion is the method by which baptism for the dead became a doctrine of the Mormon Church. We don't believe that Joseph Smith and his successors went through the Bible and tried to figure out what the ancient prophets were trying to teach. Instead, the doctrine is revealed to them from Jesus Christ. This is the case with baptism for the dead. It didn't come from a somewhat random scripture in the New Testament. It came from Jesus Christ to Joseph Smith.

You only have to look at the thousands of Christian churches, each of them differing from each other in teachings and practice, to see what happens when people attempt to read that inspired but not perfect book of scripture. None of the groups seem to agree on points as simple as the nature of God and Jesus Christ, the purpose of the atonement, the necessity of baptism and other ordinances, etc. Just as the people who wrote the Bible didn't get their teachings by interpreting the writings of prophets before them, Mormons believe that our modern prophets get their teachings directly from the source. We use scriptures such as 1 Corinthians 15:29 to understand more about how ancient Christians practiced the doctrine of salvation by proxy.

You can read more about our doctrine on baptism for the dead here: [URL="http://mormon.org/faq/#Baptism%7Cquestion=/faq/baptism-for-the-dead/"]FAQ | Mormon.org[/URL]

[Katzpur]

Originally Posted by DMV

NO Offense but the MORMON'S "According to Scriptures" does just about everything wrong lol.

What do you mean, "no offense"? Don't say "no offense" when your whole point is to offend.

When the BIBLE talks about the dead getting baptised, it doesn't mean that they were dead literally, but they were "Spiritually DEAD".

I know of several non-LDS Christian scholars who would disagree with your interpretation. Besides, in the context of what Paul was talking about, your your explanation makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

You just cant wait until you die, then get baptised later and think that the LORD will except it.

Nobody has suggested that this is the case.

[DMV]

Originally Posted by Katzpur

What do you mean, "no offense"? Don't say "no offense" when your whole point is to offend.

I know of several non-LDS Christian scholars who would disagree with your interpretation. Besides, in the context of what Paul was talking about, your your explanation makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

Nobody has suggested that this is the case.

GOD doesn't Give his oracles to Scholars, so you can relieve yourself from that statment. The true Oracles (answers) of GOD was given to the Physical Children of Isreal, not BIBLE SCHOLARS. GOD doesn't deal with Scholars he deals with his own people. Let me give you an example according to scripture on what spiritual dead is and what it means.


Matthew 8:21-22 And another Deciple said unto him, LORD suffer me first to go and Bury my father. But Jesus said unto him, Follow me; and let the Dead bury the dead.

^^ So your telling me that Dead people can bury other dead people? NO.... Jesus calls them dead because they are DEAD SPIRITUALLY and without understanding of the word of GOD, like what most of the world is today.

[Katzpur]

Originally Posted by DMV

GOD doesn't Give his oracles to Scholars, so you can relieve yourself from that statment.

I can relieve myself from that statement? Well, maybe I don't want to. What biblical scholars say doesn't line up with what you believe so you'd like me to retract the statement. Sorry, it doesn't work that way.

^^ So your telling me that Dead people can bury other dead people?

Uh... I am? Where did I say that?

Jesus calls them dead because they are DEAD SPIRITUALLY and without understanding of the word of GOD, like what most of the world is today.

Oh, I see. So the word "dead" has only one meaning throughout scripture. I guess Lazarus was just "dead spiritually," too.

[Mathguy]

Originally Posted by Katzpur

I really thought you understood, ptsum. We can't possibly know what's in anybody's heart, so we perform the ordinance of baptism as a free-will offering. If the person wishes to accept it, it's as if he had been baptized himself while alive. If he doesn't wish to accept it, it's considered to be null and void. We simply perform the baptisms and let the spirit of the deceased person make the choice. I don't know how much more simply I can put it.

Here's one more analogy, which I'm sure somebody will delight in tearing apart. Hopefully, people will understand that while no analogy is perfect, I am doing nothing more than trying to explain the belief behind the practice. Suppose I had a thousand tickets to a concert. Not knowing who among my friends, family and associates might be interested in attending it, I mail a ticket to each of them. I pay for the postage and take the time to address the envelopes. When each of these friends gets the ticket in the mail, they have a choice. Either they can choose to attend the concert or not. If they choose to attend, they'll have a ticket, purchased by me for them. They need do nothing more than show up, ticket in hand, at the concert. If they have no interest in attending, they can simply throw the ticket in the trash. I'm out the cost of the stamp and the time I spent addressing the envelope. They're out nothing.

As far as I'm concerned, people who get all worked up over the practice of proxy baptisms must harbor some irrational fear that they really are going to make a difference. As I said before, I don't care what rituals people may wish to perform after my death. Baptism itself doesn't convert anybody to anything.

I wonder what the reaction would be if I were to go to a whole bunch of LDS graves around Salt Lake City and start performing voodoo rituals, maybe some satanic rites or Jewish ceremonies and so forth JUST IN CASE the LDS got it wrong. Surely it's not offensive and does no harm....I mean unless they have some irrational fear right?

We all know what would happen and why, just pointing out the blatant hypocrisy in performing rituals on someones corspe without consent and what would happen if you started doing that to dead LDS members. There would be a witch-hunt, you can bet on that one.

[Katzpur]

Originally Posted by Mathguy

I wonder what the reaction would be if I were to go to a whole bunch of LDS graves around Salt Lake City and start performing voodoo rituals, maybe some satanic rites or Jewish ceremonies and so forth JUST IN CASE the LDS got it wrong. Surely it's not offensive and does no harm....I mean unless they have some irrational fear right?

We all know what would happen and why, just pointing out the blatant hypocrisy in performing rituals on someones corspe without consent and what would happen if you started doing that to dead LDS members. There would be a witch-hunt, you can bet on that one.

I see a difference in desecrating a grave or actually exhuming a dead body to do something with it. I'm not sure whether or not you'd agree. But, if anyone from any other religion were to simply perform a ceremony on my behalf, I seriously would not be offended because I don't believe it would make God see me any differently than He already does. I would hope that the ritual would not be done out of hatred, though. People have asked me how I would feel if a Catholic performed a Catholic proxy baptism on my behalf. The truth of the matter is that when I die, if I were to learn that the Catholic religion was the Church Jesus Christ established as part of His ministry, the first thing I'd do is go look up the Catholic who had been baptized for me and thank him. You probably won't believe that. It doesn't matter. I'm telling the truth.

[Hueffenhardt]

Originally Posted by Katzpur

But, if anyone from any other religion were to simply perform a ceremony on my behalf, I seriously would not be offended

Just because you wouldn't be offended doesn't negate the fact that other people are offended by it. Can't you have some empathy for people who are offended by this Mormon practice and that see it as disrespecting their loved ones who have passed on? It communicates the message that they are not good enough the way they were, and that their religion is inferior. For some people, they feel violated, that some outsider has invaded their personal space, their tight knit little family by grabbing their dead granddad or great granddad's name and birth date/place and speaking it in some strange place in a secret ritual that they cannot attend and did not give permission to do. And then the Mormons record their granddad's name in their records. It is creepy and offensive to some people.

When the holocaust victims were baptized for the dead, they were someone's granddad or dad or mom.

[june 7th]

So as to not have duplicate threads on this topic, members should be directed to http://www.city-data.com/forum/relig...mon-proxy.html in order to continue to discuss this topic.