Originally Posted By utahjosh I don't really have access to put you on such a list, 2oony. We work to provide a specific baptism for people who never had one. It's for them to either reject it or accept it during the next life. We don't claim that make anyone "Mormon." We don't add them to membership records. Why you believe we're forcing anything upon the people for whom we are baptized baffles me.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>Why you believe we're forcing anything upon the people for whom we are baptized baffles me.<< Clearly it does. And yet, I've explained it as clearly as I possibly can.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>The practice has not been without controversy, however. In the mid-1990s, there was a backlash when it was uncovered that the names of about 380,000 Jewish Holocaust victims had been submitted for posthumous baptism by what church historian Marlin Jensen calls "well-intentioned, sometimes slightly overzealous members." In 1995, the church agreed to remove the names of all Holocaust victims and survivors from its archives and to stop baptizing Jews unless they were direct ancestors of a Mormon or unless they had the permission of all the person's living relatives. However, Jewish names have periodically been discovered since the 1995 agreement, including that of Holocaust survivor and Jewish human rights activist Simon Wiesenthal, which was found and removed in 2006. Catholics and members of other faiths have also been upset at the practice.<< <a href="http://www.pbs.org/mormons/etc/genealogy.html" target="_blank">http://www.pbs.org/mormons/etc...ogy.html</a>
Originally Posted By utahjosh Honestly, I can't quite grasp why people would be upset about it. If years after you'd gone, someone baptizes themselves for you, you are welcome to have one of your grandkids have the name removed. Maybe they'll feel a disturbance in the force or something when the terrible deed is done. I'm sure you'll want them to spend their time watching and waiting for the chance to get your name erased immediately from the record that shows someone was baptized for you.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>If years after you'd gone, someone baptizes themselves for you, you are welcome to have one of your grandkids have the name removed. << Because your church knows what's best for me.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>Honestly, I can't quite grasp why people would be upset about it.<< Let me give it one last try. Imagine that you are a Jew in WWII Germany. Your family's home and belongings have been taken, and your relatives rounded up and placed in concentration camps, where they are starved and raped and beaten. You're there merely because you are a Jew, and horrid lies have been told about you and your religious faith and now you're at the mercy of thugs. Your family members are murdered in these camps. Somehow, you survive and live to tell the tale so that it never happens again. Then, after you die, someone comes along and says "Hey, your religion and what you believed doesn't really count after all, you see, so we're going to go ahead and be baptised in your name and make a record of it because we honestly know what's best. No offense, Jewish person, but that faith you suffered and died for really wasn't the right answer, you see, so we'll fix it for you." If you can't see why that would be offensive, then you're just not trying very hard to understand it.
Originally Posted By utahjosh I'll continue the story with some different endings: We're all hanging out in the afterlife, and it turns out the Jews were right all along. The Jewish person in your story meets a Mormon who performed a baptism for the Jew. Obviously the baptism means absolutely nothing, has no power whatsoever. How would the Jewish person react? I guess it depends on the person. Or another ending. Turns out the Mormons were right. This faithful Jewish person is milling about, meeting others up in heaven, and has learned that Jesus really was the way to salvation, and an authorized baptism was necessary to enter God's kingdom. He meets the Mormon who was baptized for him. How would the Jewish guy react this time? How about a third ending? Turns out that there is no life after death. The Mormon guy who did the baptism is dead. The Jewish guy is dead. In the long run, everyone is dead. How would they react? They wouldn't. ______ I guess the one part i'm leaving out is the grandson of the Jewish guy. He may choose to be offended. And if he is, the Mormons will take his grandpa of the list of people who aren't Mormon but for whom someone was baptized.
Originally Posted By melekalikimaka <<>>If years after you'd gone, someone baptizes themselves for you, you are welcome to have one of your grandkids have the name removed. << I am dedicating your soul to Satan once you're gone. I'm putting it in my will so it will happen. If you don't like it, you can have one of your grandkids remove it. You can just call him using your Heavenly Inter-Planetary After You Kick The Bucket text message plan (HIPAYKTB plan for short). Seriously, after you die, have your grandkids remove the name? Why would anyone consider such a comment insideous? JESUS CHRIST, talk about sick!!!
Originally Posted By utahjosh <I am dedicating your soul to Satan once you're gone.> So, unlike an LDS baptism, you are actually dedicating my soul to Satan? That really isn't up to you. If you want to try, go right ahead.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>He may choose to be offended.<< You see how you phrased that? He is "choosing" to be offended. Obviously, the LDS church at least pretends to understand why some would find the practice objectionable, as they agreed to stop doing it for Holocaust Jews without the permission of EVERY surviving family member. Anyway, you believe your church knows what's best, and you choose not to allow yourself to understand why people find the practice offensive. Just remember that the next time some other faith's wishes intrudes upon yours, okay?
Originally Posted By utahjosh I can understand why someone might find it offensive. I don't agree with that way of thinking, but I can understand it.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>I can understand why someone might find it offensive. I don't agree with that way of thinking, but I can understand it.<< THANK YOU!
Originally Posted By ecdc Mormons have a long history of excitedly baptizing deceased celebrities and famous people. Fun story: Mormon leader Wilford Woodruff claimed to have a visitation by the Founding Fathers in the late nineteenth century asking why their baptisms had not been performed and essentially telling him they couldn't wait to become Mormon. A plaque even commemorates this vision and the story is still told among Mormons today as evidence of the truthfulness of their claims. Problem is, later historians learned that every single one of the Founders had already been baptized--multiple times in most cases--as Mormons years earlier. Yet here they are, supposedly asking for it to be done when it already had. Barack Obama's deceased parents and grandparents have been baptized for the dead. There is a shocking inability among Mormons (as well demonstrated in this thread) to understand why this might be offensive. But when people are so convinced they know what's best for you, they aren't inclined to respect your feelings or your wises, whether you want to be married when you're living or not baptized when you're dead.
Originally Posted By Princessjenn5795 The problem with the whole baptism-by-proxy thing, from a religious standpoint, is that if you read the Bible, baptisms were something you had to choose to do in life. There is absolutely nothing in the Bible that would suggest that baptism is something you can do for someone else. I also don't believe you get do overs. You make your choices while you are alive, and then you have to live them. Of course, I also do not believe that baptism or lack of baptism is the deciding factor on whether or not you get into heaven, so I personally do not see what good baptizing a dead person would do, since they would already be wherever it is they are going. I am Lutheran, and my dad's side of the family is Catholic, and in both denominations parents baptize their children, typically when they are babies, as a promise to raise their children as Christians. Then, when that child is about 13 or 14 they have to decide for themselves if they want to confirm their baptism, and that they believe what it stands for, and there is a confirmation service if they do. But it is their decision and something that they have to do themselves.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip Go ahead and baptize me Mormon after I'm dead. I really don't think it will make me a whole lot of difference one way or the other, but if it makes you feel better have at it. I was baptized as a Baptist but that one apparently didn't "stick"... I became Catholic when I married Rose. Maybe the Mormon baptism will work better... especially if I receive a posthumous pair of the secret underpants. That would make it all worthwhile. I truly don't mean to insult your traditions... I just don't think they will make me much difference once I am gone. Lord know when I'm dead I'm sure people will say much worse things about me than being baptized Mormon.
Originally Posted By utahjosh <There is absolutely nothing in the Bible that would suggest that baptism is something you can do for someone else.> There aren't really instruction for doing it in the Bible, but it is mentioned in 1 Corinthians 15:29.
