Originally Posted By melekalikimaka <<Baptizing someone into the church who doesn't really desire to know the doctrine is pretty pointless.>> It's better to wait till they're dead.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Why not accurate, though? If someone lived his whole life as a practicing Jew or Catholic, say, and was active in his/her synagogue or church and was obviously very happy being a Jew or a Catholic and showed "no desire to know the doctrine" (of Mormonism) while he was alive... if there's no point baptizing someone into the church who doesn't desire to know the doctrine (your words), what's the point of doing it after they're dead if they expressed no desire of knowing the doctrine in all the time they were alive?
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< Not accurate at all, but funny! >>> utahjosh, I am curious: what specifically is not accurate about the notion of the LDS church baptisms of dead people that had nothing to do with the faith?
Originally Posted By oc_dean >>LDS stike again!<< I'm not sure what their presence is here in Australia. But if they were here ... or planning to show up ..... watch out for realists like me .. Who think a lot of Religion is the making of some very creative minds ... who made this stuff up ages ago ... and have tried to pass this stuff off, now, as fact! I particularly liked how they received a "revelation" from God in 1978 overturning the church's view of black people for ages. Just at a time pressure was put on them, for this discrimination! How utterly CONVENIENT! Which is why .. I would tell every single follower of this religion - Do you ever rationally question any of it? Or do you just blindly follow it? Even at the mere idea some teachings were never a "revelation from God" .. but just out of the mind of men of the period, and their "creative imaginations"! The story of Joseph Smith is quite a "colorful" _tale_. As in - fairytales. You know ... fiction. Stuff you just make up out of thin air.
Originally Posted By utahjosh What wasn't accurate about mele's funny comment was saying it's "better" to wait until they are dead. We'd rather share our message with everybody who's living. And sure, our goal is to offer baptism to all of our ancestors who have gone before, and eventually, offered to every person who's ever lived. We believe that no man enters into God's kingdom unless he's been baptized by proper authority, so we offer that to everyone. It's a lot of work, but worth it.
Originally Posted By dshyates Sooo, Josh. You baptise dead people into the Mormon faith because their chosen faith is spiritually inferior to the almighty Mormons? And you don't think that that may be a tad bit offensive?
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Not to mention the idea that Catholic, Presbyterian, Methodist, et al churches do not represent "proper authority.". It's also a bit of a disconnect to see why you wouldn't want to baptize someone into the faith who showed no interest in it while alive, yet don't afford him the same respect after he's dead. I'm sure there's some other sect somewhere who does the same thing, (let's call them the Nomroms) and I'm picturing this sort of dueling baptisms in the afterlife, with one doing the ceremony and saying "now you're a Mormon!" followed by the other doing it and saying "now you're a Nomrom!" back and forth, like the sleeping beauty fairies changing the dress from blue to pink to blue to pink over and over.
Originally Posted By u k fan I have my own issues with the LDS church (but that's another matter), what I will say is that Mormon Missionaries have a tendancy to pick up the waifs and strays (it sounds harsh to say it, but for want of a better term the flotsam and jetsam of society) who get baptised and then disappear from regular church going very quickly. I'm talking particularly about single people here. The flipside of this is that the ones who do settle into churchlife are some of the strongest members you'll ever meet. IMHO, it doesn't matter where you serve, but how you serve. You don't have to baptise anyone to be successful!!!
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>We believe that no man enters into God's kingdom unless he's been baptized by proper authority, so we offer that to everyone.<< "Offer" suggests there's a choice involved. Which is really rather dishonest. I've said it before, but I swear I will mercilessly haunt anyone who performs any sort of post-mortem baptism on me. And I've read a lot of Stephen King, so I can think up some really dreadful ghostly antics. You've been warned.
Originally Posted By ecdc In fairness, Mormons do believe there's a choice involved. They believe that after death, everyone will go to a sort of temporary Mormon purgatory, which Mormons call spirit prison. Mormons reside in spirit paradise, and they teach what they believe is the true gospel to those in prison, who now have one last chance to accept it. And yes, those people must be baptized by the living. While baptism receives all the attention, the deceased receive, by proxy, all the ordinances Mormons believe are essential to live with God in the next life. They also receive the Holy Ghost and temple tokens; when Mormons go through their temple, they go through a ceremony with the name of a deceased person that they stand as proxy for. Also in fairness, while to outsiders this makes it look like Mormons think everyone needs to be a Mormon, they don't see it that way. They see Mormonism as simply the incarnation of the true gospel of Jesus Christ, restored on the earth after the great apostasy by the early Christian church upon the martyrdom of the apostles. It's not so much that you need to be Mormon, in other words, but you just need to follow all the teachings Jesus set, which Mormons happen to have. Personally, proxy work for the dead strikes me as a rather obvious manmade invention, a sloppy way to makeup for shortcomings in Mormon theology that insists that every man, woman, and child must accept the gospel before the final ascendancy of Christ. And I understand why it's offensive to nonbelievers, but I also think some understanding of the theology behind it would perhaps make it more palatable.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>temporary Mormon purgatory<< I've been there. I watched Donny & Marie's show in the 70s.
Originally Posted By utahjosh Nice post ecdc. I would add that it's hardly and exclusive believe that that every man, woman, and child must be baptized and accept Christ to "make it to heaven."
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <And I understand why it's offensive to nonbelievers, but I also think some understanding of the theology behind it would perhaps make it more palatable.> You've explained this before (which I appreciate), and while it makes it a bit more palatable, it doesn't make it any less condescending. Which, as Josh points out, is hardly exclusive to Mormonism. < I've been there. I watched Donny & Marie's show in the 70s.> Noooooooooooooooo!!! My denomination doesn't really "have" a purgatory (which is ironic, since it's one of the Catholic concepts that made a certain sense to me), but if it did, a big room full of uncomfortable folding chairs and a giant-screen TV with D&M reruns would be enough to get me to watch my p's and q's from now on!
Originally Posted By ecdc >>it doesn't make it any less condescending.<< No, it sure doesn't. Most faiths, especially those exclusive ones, have managed to soften this recently. But at the end of the day, the message boils very clearly to "I am right (not at all convenient!), you are wrong, and if you don't believe the stuff I believe, my God is going to punish you." Believers see this is a charitable act; I see it as a shocking inability to self-evaluate and apply basic critical thinking skills.
Originally Posted By skinnerbox I am a strong believer in the 'one river, many wells' foundation of deep ecumenicism. The very notion that dead individuals outside the Mormon religion must be baptized as Mormons in other to be saved is completely anathema to the deep ecumenicism philosophy. It's arrogant, hateful, and worst of all, xenophobic. The LDS church was born on American soil that basically hijacked another religion created elsewhere on the globe, but one that does not regard those who practice the original incarnation as true believers. There is no acknowledgment of the validity of other religious perspectives outside Mormonism let alone Christianity, so much so that living Mormons are willing to waste what little time they have on the planet by baptizing non-Mormons post-mortem. That is the height of arrogance and self-indulgence, which strikes me as very non-Christ-like. Until more 'religious folk' embrace the philosophy of deep ecumenicism, the holy wars and politicization of religious dogma will continue to worsen. I have no tolerance for intolerance at this point in my life. This is now a matter of survival.
Originally Posted By utahjosh <The very notion that dead individuals outside the Mormon religion must be baptized as Mormons in other to be saved is completely anathema to the deep ecumenicism philosophy. It's arrogant, hateful, and worst of all, xenophobic.> It's not hateful in the least. In our understanding of the next life, God had 3 kingdoms of Glory - places that most people would call "Heaven" - that nearly every person who ever lived will end up. However, we do believe that to live in the highest of the kingdoms, and to become like God our Father, baptism and other things are necessary.
Originally Posted By utahjosh < by baptizing non-Mormons post-mortem. That is the height of arrogance and self-indulgence, which strikes me as very non-Christ-like.> Baptizing for the dead - essentially offering a path to Christ and salvation to others who can't do it themselves - is one of the MOST Christ-like things being done on this planet. Christ suffered for our sins - offered salvation to us who can't do it for ourselves.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 But what it does is essentially say that a Catholic or Orthodox or Presbyterian baptism... or heck, a BAPTIST baptism... isn't "good enough." I was baptized. That IS good enough. Moreover, I don't believe in what this 19th century American sect tries to sell, and I find it just as offensive that they would try to "correct" my baptism as if some Muslim sect tried to "undo" it and make me "correctly Muslim" or if a Jewish sect tried to do the same... you get the idea. In fact, one thing I've always appreciated about Judaism is the non-proselytizing. When I had a beard I would often be stopped by a Hasidic group on the street at lunchtime with "excuse me, Sir, are you Jewish?" I'd say "no," and they'd say "have a nice day." My curiosity got the better of me, and one day I asked them what they'd say if I said "yes." In that case - if you ARE already Jewish - they try to get you to be more observant. But if you're not Jewish, they respect you enough to not try to convert you. I like that.
