Reader comments
Holocaust survivors halt talks with LDS
297 comments | Read story
CuriousUt | 4:41 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
When a deceased person of another faith is baptized by the morman church does
that person then be counted as a lds member?
David K | 4:51 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
"Stealing from the dead"? Imagine you are living on one side of a
wall. There is a locked gate in the wall. Is it stealing from you if someone
comes along and unlocks the gate, so you can choose whether to go through?
It's the same thing. The principle behind baptism for the dead is that it gives them the *choice*. Nothing is forced on anyone. We don't add them to Church membership lists, we don't claim they believe now. We just let them choose.
That said? I absolutely agree that if anyone is trying to put Holocaust victims back on the lists despite the Church promising not to, that should stop. Now. We all promise to sustain our leaders, so let's not make liars out of them.
It's the same thing. The principle behind baptism for the dead is that it gives them the *choice*. Nothing is forced on anyone. We don't add them to Church membership lists, we don't claim they believe now. We just let them choose.
That said? I absolutely agree that if anyone is trying to put Holocaust victims back on the lists despite the Church promising not to, that should stop. Now. We all promise to sustain our leaders, so let's not make liars out of them.
Texas LDS | 4:55 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
Don't miss the point. This is not about what the church wants to or should
be able to do. The church has already, long ago, agreed to not do baptisms for
holicost victims, and had a working agreement to facilitate the identification
of those people. The church is still living up to its commitments to not do it.
But now that is not enough, it appears.
Comments continue below
Not kidding | 4:55 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
What part of "the one and only true church on the face of the earth"
do you not understand people? You will all be assimilated. Dead or alive.
Shocked | 5:01 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
I'm shocked that this issue is still raising its head. I thought this had
all been resolved years ago with the Church agreeing to discontinue the
practice. Did I miss something? I find this to be frighteningly disrespectful.
Ironic | 5:02 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
It's ironic that this issue has heated up right after the Proposition 8
issue. The Church seems to keep demanding people to respect its views and
rights, but they sure seem to have trouble respecting the views and rights of
others.
To realitycheck | 3:58 | 5:03 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
Of course, we believe it's neither sick nor cruel to conduct rites that
bless God's children. Your post merely shows a prejudice toward deeply
held beliefs of others, and a disrespect for those of us who hold them.
Please note, I would not be the least bit offended by a practitioner of another religion, be it Santeria or any other, charitably applying what he may believe to be a saving ordinance of his faith to my dead ancestors. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me to hear that Catholic last rites may have been administered to my Grandfather, who died in a Catholic hospital.
That is not to say that I believe these rites would have the least effect, but I can appreciate the intent of a faithful adherent of another religion charitably performing an act of love and human kindness.
Why can't you?
Please note, I would not be the least bit offended by a practitioner of another religion, be it Santeria or any other, charitably applying what he may believe to be a saving ordinance of his faith to my dead ancestors. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me to hear that Catholic last rites may have been administered to my Grandfather, who died in a Catholic hospital.
That is not to say that I believe these rites would have the least effect, but I can appreciate the intent of a faithful adherent of another religion charitably performing an act of love and human kindness.
Why can't you?
Church Integrity | 5:04 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
The Church is trying to keep it's side of the agreement. After the first
agreement the church removed all the names it could find. After they were
removed, individual members have submitted names which, have been removed once
the church has come to know that they are there. For the past six years, the
church has been developing a system which will hopefully stop individual members
from submitting holocaust victims names for baptism. I know some say this is an
easy thing to do but once you start to really dig into the issue it is not so
easy as it seems.
JohnB | 5:21 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
If it doesn't matter and nobody is hurt by it, then why do you care so much
about gay marriage? You are not hurt by it and it only affects those that are
married.
Why? | 5:33 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
LDS believe that they need to connect their whole family down through the ages
to each other. They do that through temple work which starts with baptism. If
their ancestors are Jewish they are going to want to have their work done too.
LDS don't want any holes in the connection. They don't want any empty
chairs at the dinner table when they sit down together in heaven.
Ghosts and Goblins Oh My! | 5:35 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
Baptism for the dead is such a silly concept. What about the millions and
millions of people who died prehistorically for whom there are no records? Do
you REALLY think that "God" cares? Why don't you just do a mass
baptism for ALL the dead if it is that important. This is just another example
of how silly religion really is.
re realitycheck | 3:58 p.m. | 5:38 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
"It would be like a voodoo priest trying to resurect your ancestor. Would
you like that"?
Well actually yes I would like that, my mother died before her time, If a Voodo priest, or Mormon or Hindu or Catholic or Athiest can and is willing to resurrect her, fantastic!!!
And even if I didn't like the idea and he wanted to do it, I think the choice would be between her and him don't you?
Freedom of choice, try it sometime, its the American way. I don't understand all the people in this forum that presume to know what these holocaust victims want, I certainly don't know,
These people are very pushy and presumptious to think they know best and not give people on the other side a choice if indeed that is what baptism for the dead does.
Anyway who cares, get a life.
Well actually yes I would like that, my mother died before her time, If a Voodo priest, or Mormon or Hindu or Catholic or Athiest can and is willing to resurrect her, fantastic!!!
And even if I didn't like the idea and he wanted to do it, I think the choice would be between her and him don't you?
Freedom of choice, try it sometime, its the American way. I don't understand all the people in this forum that presume to know what these holocaust victims want, I certainly don't know,
These people are very pushy and presumptious to think they know best and not give people on the other side a choice if indeed that is what baptism for the dead does.
Anyway who cares, get a life.
You remind me of my sister | 5:51 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
I have a sister who is very easily offended. Someone looks at her cross eyed,
she takes offense. I like and respect Jews, the ones in Israel, they are tough
and no nonsense kind of people.
The self appointed Jews who are fighting this fight remind me of my sister.
The self appointed Jews who are fighting this fight remind me of my sister.
Christian | 5:53 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
(It really is my name)
It seems that a lot of folks didn't read the church's official response.
To quote:
"The understanding reached in 1995 determined that the Church would remove Holocaust names from its public database immediately, which the Church has done. It further said that Jewish groups would provide to the Church any names that reappeared on the database so the Church could remove them. The Church cannot understand why Mr. Michel has refused now to provide those names to the Church so the Church can maintain the spirit of that 1995 understanding."
It seems that a lot of folks didn't read the church's official response.
To quote:
"The understanding reached in 1995 determined that the Church would remove Holocaust names from its public database immediately, which the Church has done. It further said that Jewish groups would provide to the Church any names that reappeared on the database so the Church could remove them. The Church cannot understand why Mr. Michel has refused now to provide those names to the Church so the Church can maintain the spirit of that 1995 understanding."
Human beings are interesting | 5:59 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
I wish all churches would agree to baptise people after they die, that way I
don't have to worry which one is right, I could just live my life.
Seems some people don't know a good deal if it hit them over the head.
Oh well I guess that is the human condition, we need something to tussel over, we love it.
Seems some people don't know a good deal if it hit them over the head.
Oh well I guess that is the human condition, we need something to tussel over, we love it.
Anonymous | 6:07 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
A Jewish group should not have to police the Church's databases to ensure
their ancestors are respected. The Church bears the responsibility to ensure
names that should not be in there are prevented from getting in there in the
first place! This is just wrong. The Church should respect the Jewish community
and go out of their way to show respect for their ancestors.
it is about time | 6:21 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
Mormons, let their people go. Jews, it is about time you stood up and said,
"Stop it."
Mormonism is not ... it is not......
Mormonism is not ... it is not......
Ya just dont get it | 6:23 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
One more time. This isnt about baptizing holocaust victims with LDS
descendants. This has nothing to do with what THE LDS PEOPLE BELIEVE. This is
simply about an agreement by LDS leaders to not baptize holocaust victims who do
NOT have an LDS descendent representing them. OTHER RELIGIONS COULD CARE LESS
ABOUT WHAT THE LDS RELIGION BELIEVES. Got it? You can sing all the praises of
baptism for the dead all day long and it still doesnt remove the offensiveness
of the actions you are taking. You are offending others. You made the
agreement and either the church leaders or some of the members in the church are
violating the agreement. You cry out the minute someone offends your sacred
rights and beliefs, cry when you are attacked, cry about past religious
persectution and many of you are totally insensitive and uncaring to the beliefs
of others. It's not for you to understand, not for you to interpret, not
for you to explain. You're being offensive to a culture, a race, a
religion. Offensive. So stop believing in your own need to set things right
and start believing that God is perfectly capable of the same without your help.
Walk the Walk | 6:24 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
When I die, I'd rather find out I was wrong doing baptisms for my dead
relatives than find out I was wrong for NOT doing them. It is what I believe,
and since I am a New York "mutt" some of my relatives have been
Jewish, Catholic, Lutheran, Methodist.
I truly believe that my baptising them will help them achieve heavenly glory. When I die and meet them, if I was wrong, let THEM tell me. At least they will know I cared about them, thought about their welfare, spent my time actively trying to be connected to them and LOVED THEM!!!
I truly believe that my baptising them will help them achieve heavenly glory. When I die and meet them, if I was wrong, let THEM tell me. At least they will know I cared about them, thought about their welfare, spent my time actively trying to be connected to them and LOVED THEM!!!
i think | 6:53 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
that more time should be given to the ones walking around here who are already
baptized acting all so arrogant and closed minded. then the ones on the other
side would know true love. but i say this has to happen along with prop 8 so
that the prophesy of being the most hated must take it's course. it's
all good, i won't hate ya.
Anonymous | 6:55 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
This is a matter of principle. I am tired of the LDS church thinking they are in
control of the world. You have no respect for anyone. If you had any respect for
other religions and cultutre you would stop your hidious practice of trying to
steal other peoples dead. Hands off!
Dan | 7:03 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
As a lifetime member of the LDS Church (technically, only since I was 8, but I
have been in the Church my whole life), I have been approached on at least one
occasion by a person of another faith who claimed if I but stated I accept
Christ as my Savior, I would be guaranteed salvation. Now, I don't believe
that, nevertheless, I certainly do accept Christ as my Savior, so I readily
agreed to state so.
The man was ecstatic afterwards, saying I was now automatically saved. I did not, nor do I now, believe that, but I was nonetheless touched by his sincere concern for the welfare of my soul, and so I accepted his well-meaning gesture in the spirit it was intended.
The man was ecstatic afterwards, saying I was now automatically saved. I did not, nor do I now, believe that, but I was nonetheless touched by his sincere concern for the welfare of my soul, and so I accepted his well-meaning gesture in the spirit it was intended.
To: Ya just dont get it | 7:16 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
Thank you!!!!! It's just a matter of mutual respect. Respect my religious
views and don't baptize my dead relative and I will respect you and your
religious views. Those who believe that their way is the only way don't
understand that some of feel the same way about our religion. The difference is
that I don't want to shove my views down your throat!!!! I've had
missionaries hold the door open after I've politely declined their
viewpoint. Please understand that our religions are as important to us as yours
is to you. It was a slap in the face to find that my father who was a die hard
Catholic was baptized by my cousin. It was very offensive to my mother and
siblings to be insulted in that manner.
Comical | 7:23 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
Even though I've known about this issue for years, it never ceases to bring
me to hysterical laughter. I mean, in all honesty folks, anyone against the LDS
church for doing the proxy baptisms either clearly believes that the church is
true or has a vendetta against it. It's either one or the other. Who else
could possibly care that some random religious organization was doing ANYTHING
about you or your ancestors or anyone else in proxy? I mean, if you don't
believe it, who cares?
If some Satanic organization was doing some rites for my name and my ancestors, seriously, I would not care. Why? Because I know it's not true, it's not affecting me, and they're doing it to everyone else anyway, so I know I'm not being singled out.
Get a grip, folks. Relax. Life is good. Life is way too short to get worked up over trite issues such as this.
If some Satanic organization was doing some rites for my name and my ancestors, seriously, I would not care. Why? Because I know it's not true, it's not affecting me, and they're doing it to everyone else anyway, so I know I'm not being singled out.
Get a grip, folks. Relax. Life is good. Life is way too short to get worked up over trite issues such as this.
Simple | 7:28 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
It it is the work of the Lord than it is valid. If not, then why should it
matter, it would have no validity upon those baptized. It is only valid upon
the acceptance of the person for which the work is done. It pure and simple:
If true, than it is important to their salvation. It it is falce, than it
doesn't matter, does it?
one too many | 7:32 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
I had a Sister tell me that my uncle Redneck Rufus had been baptized 3 times.
She thought that that was a lot of extra temple work.
Redneck Rufus partied most of his adult life and I assured her that 3 baptisms was not near enough.
/change their Jewishness?
lol
She thought that that was a lot of extra temple work.
Redneck Rufus partied most of his adult life and I assured her that 3 baptisms was not near enough.
/change their Jewishness?
lol
Anonymous | 7:45 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
I don't believe you can baptize someone that is not related until one
hundred years after their death. So is all the baptisms being done by
relatives?
We have about 300 relatives that died in the Holocaust, I will not have a none related person tell me what to do with my relatives.
We have about 300 relatives that died in the Holocaust, I will not have a none related person tell me what to do with my relatives.
ert | 7:50 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
It's not just a matter of doctrine, it's a matter of perception. If
one individual or a group feels threatened or offended by an action, better
communication needs to occur in order to help rectify the problem.
2 issues:
Apparently, there are LDS Church members who feel like the church's decision to abide by the Jewish leaders requests to stop baptizing Holocaust victims does not apply to them. They continue to submit names regardless of the decision by LDS Church leaders to discontinue the practice.
Then, there are Jews who are bothered regardless of any and all efforts taken by LDS Church leaders to fulfill their agreement with Jewish leaders.
It can be worked out if both parties can get their members to abide by the spirit of the agreement.
2 issues:
Apparently, there are LDS Church members who feel like the church's decision to abide by the Jewish leaders requests to stop baptizing Holocaust victims does not apply to them. They continue to submit names regardless of the decision by LDS Church leaders to discontinue the practice.
Then, there are Jews who are bothered regardless of any and all efforts taken by LDS Church leaders to fulfill their agreement with Jewish leaders.
It can be worked out if both parties can get their members to abide by the spirit of the agreement.
kitchy | 7:50 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
What ever happened to freedom of religion? We should be able to worship however
we wish. Your relatives do not have to accept what we do nor do you. But, what
if, you are wrong and are keeping something from them that they might want? It
does not matter as others have said if you don't believe. Let us worship as
we wish. This is ridiculous. Maybe you are wrong, have you ever even had the
thought that you might be wrong?
fred | 7:52 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
it seems like one group has kept its part of the agreement and has asked for
ongoing communication in relationship to the agreement and the other party
walked away with the understanding that they were most likely in error, so what
is happening will keep on happening and the agreement will be kept on the part
of the church, if you understand the agreement then you will understand they
have kept the agreement, and members will continue to perform proxy baptisms for
ancestors, the church is not doing the baptisms but individual members will
continue
In your face | 8:17 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
I just baptised all the people complaining about this into my new "Church
of Idiots". It was a very touching ceremony. I wish you all could have
been there. Will they now no longer be considered as jews or mormons? Will
they be known as those "church of Idiots" people.
John Pack Lambert | 8:22 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
To the 2:23 commentator,
On the one hand there are actually only about 4000 Family History Centers, but you were probably going for hyperbole.
On the other hand, with New Family Search submissions of names can be done from your own home.
Actually though I think it was easier to do mass submissions with the old system.
I think though you must start with the assumption that people acted in good faith. The people who submitted these names for temple work truly believed they were doing the best thing for these people.
I think another fact ignored is what if a member had a grandfather who was the only survivor out of all his cousnins and second cousins. Since this person would be the closest living relative to all these peole, is it not legitimate for him to do the work for all his grandfathers cousins?
On the one hand there are actually only about 4000 Family History Centers, but you were probably going for hyperbole.
On the other hand, with New Family Search submissions of names can be done from your own home.
Actually though I think it was easier to do mass submissions with the old system.
I think though you must start with the assumption that people acted in good faith. The people who submitted these names for temple work truly believed they were doing the best thing for these people.
I think another fact ignored is what if a member had a grandfather who was the only survivor out of all his cousnins and second cousins. Since this person would be the closest living relative to all these peole, is it not legitimate for him to do the work for all his grandfathers cousins?
re Anonymous | 6:07 p.m. | 8:25 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
"A Jewish group should not have to police the Church's databases to
ensure their ancestors are respected".
Don't fool yourself, the ones who do it, love what they do, or they wouldn't do it. Think of all the notariety this person gets from being able to report back to their fellows and report what the Mormons are up to.
Don't fool yourself, the ones who do it, love what they do, or they wouldn't do it. Think of all the notariety this person gets from being able to report back to their fellows and report what the Mormons are up to.
You are comical | 8:28 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
As a member of the LDS church, I can't help but laugh at "my own"
people. Comical, please repost and tell me you aren't stupid enough to
believe it is "one or the other." Don't fool yourself into
believing that people believe it is true because they don't like the
practice. Use your brain and show some ability to reason outside your tiny box
that convinces you that you have a clue about what faithful jewish people think
about our church.
Educate yourself beyond what you learned in sunday school so that the rest of us don't have to defend your ignorance.
Educate yourself beyond what you learned in sunday school so that the rest of us don't have to defend your ignorance.
John Pack Lambert | 8:31 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
To the 2:57 commentator,
There are multiple things you can not prove. One is that the agreement has been broken. You can not prove that people have not limited the work to their relatives.
Secondly, the attempt to represent the holocaust as a religious issue ignores the many Christian converts from Judaism who were killed in it. It also ignores the Gypsies who were the only other group marked for total extermination by the Nazis, but who are still hated and mariginalized in much of Europe.
Thirdly, and most importantly, the whole issue ignores the fact that the church wants as much temple work done as possible. The church removed the names from the IGI. If I understand correctly though, this actually may have made repeat temple work more likely.
The second issue that people ignore is that the church extracts records from various sources. If the church is extrating Italian birth records kept by the state, how are we supposed to know who is a holocaust victim. How many Luigi Del Campos do you think there are?
Another thing that people ignore is the church spends huge amounts of money on preserving records.
There are multiple things you can not prove. One is that the agreement has been broken. You can not prove that people have not limited the work to their relatives.
Secondly, the attempt to represent the holocaust as a religious issue ignores the many Christian converts from Judaism who were killed in it. It also ignores the Gypsies who were the only other group marked for total extermination by the Nazis, but who are still hated and mariginalized in much of Europe.
Thirdly, and most importantly, the whole issue ignores the fact that the church wants as much temple work done as possible. The church removed the names from the IGI. If I understand correctly though, this actually may have made repeat temple work more likely.
The second issue that people ignore is that the church extracts records from various sources. If the church is extrating Italian birth records kept by the state, how are we supposed to know who is a holocaust victim. How many Luigi Del Campos do you think there are?
Another thing that people ignore is the church spends huge amounts of money on preserving records.
John Pack Lambert | 8:34 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
Fredd,
Your statements are false. Jews were not judged on religious but on racial criteria. Many baptized Christian were sent to the camps where they died. There were many Christian "Jews" living in the Warsaw Ghetto. In Belgium the Nazis took special care to depaort every Jewish convert to Catholicism as a way to get back at the Catholic leadership in that country for speaking out against the Holocaust.
The Nazis hated Jews as racial and not religious enemies.
Your statements are false. Jews were not judged on religious but on racial criteria. Many baptized Christian were sent to the camps where they died. There were many Christian "Jews" living in the Warsaw Ghetto. In Belgium the Nazis took special care to depaort every Jewish convert to Catholicism as a way to get back at the Catholic leadership in that country for speaking out against the Holocaust.
The Nazis hated Jews as racial and not religious enemies.
John Pack Lambert | 8:40 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
I just realized that the 5:04 commentator is right. With New Family Search
you have to have some sort of documented relationship with everyone you submit
for temple work. It makes it easier to submit names, but you have to have
actually connected the person you are submitting to yourself.
Tom in Lazybrook | 8:44 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
Perhaps a reason why many Jews are offended by this is that their people died
for their religion. Judaism. Not Mormonism. Perhaps they don't want some
Mormon rite to come out in a few years including their deaths and persecutions
into your religion.
In light of your opposition to marriage equality for live consenting Gay people, I'd think you'd think about marrying any unconsenting dead people, period. But that's just me. It really looks creepy to everyone else.
In light of your opposition to marriage equality for live consenting Gay people, I'd think you'd think about marrying any unconsenting dead people, period. But that's just me. It really looks creepy to everyone else.
uncannygunman | 8:50 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
Every time this story comes up, I am moved to baptize all Mormons, living and
dead, into my own particular sect of agnostic hedonism, which I hereby do.
Amen! Welcome to the one true faith, but you must buy your own liquor.
John Pack Lambert | 8:55 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
I have a few thoughts on this matter.
One I would urge people to go back and read the article again. It has been throughly revised since it was first published, and now makes it even harder to understand Mr. Michel's response.
The church is going to flag the names of holocaust victims. New Family Search will make it harder to submit large amounts of names of unrelated people.
I have heard lots of people complain that new family search was released so soon. With the number of duplicate temple ordinaces done for some early church members and their ancestors, and with the dumping of five databases it is a huge mess. Many think they should have waited longer to start it, but the church did move forward.
Another thing people have ignored is that the church has removed 42,000 names that it identified itself.
Mr. Michel's claim that his parents would ever be identified as "Mormon victims of the Holocaust" is ludicrous. Does he think our doing proxy baptisms for Gypsies would make them no longer Gypsies?
One I would urge people to go back and read the article again. It has been throughly revised since it was first published, and now makes it even harder to understand Mr. Michel's response.
The church is going to flag the names of holocaust victims. New Family Search will make it harder to submit large amounts of names of unrelated people.
I have heard lots of people complain that new family search was released so soon. With the number of duplicate temple ordinaces done for some early church members and their ancestors, and with the dumping of five databases it is a huge mess. Many think they should have waited longer to start it, but the church did move forward.
Another thing people have ignored is that the church has removed 42,000 names that it identified itself.
Mr. Michel's claim that his parents would ever be identified as "Mormon victims of the Holocaust" is ludicrous. Does he think our doing proxy baptisms for Gypsies would make them no longer Gypsies?
CougarKeith | 9:04 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
As someone with "Jewish" ancestery I can understand how the Holocaust
Jews might feel. However on the same note, if they don't believe that the
practice is a true doctrine of God, what does it matter? The truth is, they know
of the truth of "Temple Worship", but they also know the doctrines
have been lost to them (The Jewish People) for centuries, and as such, they
should be the ones to be able to perform this work when they can do it, not
strangers. I think subconsciencely they may know this, and that may be what the
ruckess is all about. They don't even realize it. Why else would it be such
a huge deal?
Joseph Atwater | 9:16 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
Jesus of Nazereth "King of the Jews" -INRI who instituted the law of
"Justifiable Baptism for the dead for Redemption".
As a Christian Jew His laws are without time and beyond mans demands. If we are offended by His law, then we have offended Him and His creations by trying to make His will void. If we have have offense whether Jew or Gentile we should discuss it with its author and creator.
As a Christian Jew His laws are without time and beyond mans demands. If we are offended by His law, then we have offended Him and His creations by trying to make His will void. If we have have offense whether Jew or Gentile we should discuss it with its author and creator.
Fred | 9:18 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
If I'm an atheist and someone prays over me - does it do anything - in the
realities of life for me or against me - the atheist. You and the individual
saying the prayer - the Constitution gives you the right to speak your mind.
It's a name in history - hey - maybe as an atheist, I might be wrong and
the prayer did actually do something - but as an atheist - I'm right, what
did the words do to me - NOTHING. Likewise, if I'm not LDS and Jewish -
what does the water and words do spoken which I don't believe in - through
someone I don't hold as a authorized authority of Yahweh. Mountain out of
mole hills..
Am I not allowed | 9:18 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
To help my ancestors who have passed on? They are mine too. Just because I am
mormon now, does not mean that I am not also a jew. I can and will do work for
my dead.
Scary | 9:26 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
Both Holocaust victims and instigators have been baptized.
Whoaaaaaaa | 9:30 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
Okay I am a German-Jew latter-day saint. I want and can do this work. I am jew
from my mother's line and German from my father.
Stop telling me who I can't do the work for just because I'm a Jewish Mormon.
I have every right to practice the religion that I have chosen including doing temple work for my family members.
Stop telling me who I can't do the work for just because I'm a Jewish Mormon.
I have every right to practice the religion that I have chosen including doing temple work for my family members.
bilbo | 9:41 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
Baptizing a dead person by proxy does nothing except allow that individual dead
person to accept the doctrine IF THEY CHOOSE TO.
By dis-allowing the Baptism by Proxy, you are denying Uncle Herschel the option/free agency of making that informed decision!
This Baptism By Proxy GOES NOT MAKE THEM A MEMBER!!!!
to be a member of the LDS Church requires a deliberate decision by the affected person!!!!
No One Else is affected or involved...No One Else!!!!
By dis-allowing the Baptism by Proxy, you are denying Uncle Herschel the option/free agency of making that informed decision!
This Baptism By Proxy GOES NOT MAKE THEM A MEMBER!!!!
to be a member of the LDS Church requires a deliberate decision by the affected person!!!!
No One Else is affected or involved...No One Else!!!!
For: CuriousUt | 10:01 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
"CuriousUt | 4:41 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
When a deceased person of another faith is baptized by the morman church does that person then be counted as a lds member?"
Answer: "No".
When a deceased individual has a "proxy" baptism performed for them they are not counted as a member of the LDS faith. Why not? Because we have no way of knowing if they have accepted the baptismal ordinance performed for them here in mortality. All that is recorded is that the baptism was performed on their behalf.
Baptism for those who have passed away is, on the surface, a highly unusaul doctrine. But, if you really think about it, it makes perfect sense.
Why?
Because Christ said that everyone, repeat, EVERYONE, MUST be baptized to enter into His presence after their death (John 3:3-5). How then are those who have died with no baptism, or even no knowledge of Christ, able to be redeemed? Are we to believe that it is fair for a just and merciful god to simply say "Tough break that you were born in Africa in 1542, kid".
They are taught about Christ beyond the veil and baptism on their behalf is offered here.
When a deceased person of another faith is baptized by the morman church does that person then be counted as a lds member?"
Answer: "No".
When a deceased individual has a "proxy" baptism performed for them they are not counted as a member of the LDS faith. Why not? Because we have no way of knowing if they have accepted the baptismal ordinance performed for them here in mortality. All that is recorded is that the baptism was performed on their behalf.
Baptism for those who have passed away is, on the surface, a highly unusaul doctrine. But, if you really think about it, it makes perfect sense.
Why?
Because Christ said that everyone, repeat, EVERYONE, MUST be baptized to enter into His presence after their death (John 3:3-5). How then are those who have died with no baptism, or even no knowledge of Christ, able to be redeemed? Are we to believe that it is fair for a just and merciful god to simply say "Tough break that you were born in Africa in 1542, kid".
They are taught about Christ beyond the veil and baptism on their behalf is offered here.
Joseph Atwater | 10:07 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
It was Paul the Benjamite Jew who instructed on The Law
"Baptism for the dead"
Is mans edict greater than the creator of mankind and King of the Jews. (Jesus)Who are we accountable to?
Do we compromise doctrines to suit the world?
If so then we might as well approve same sex marriage,war as a means of Patriotism,Wealth for the rich,Health care only for the rich,Tithing payment into direct bank accounts and Police check cards for all members and promote the Holy Ghost as a man, yet to be mortalized and resurrected. Is this where we are heading? Are we pleasing the masses to reject the innocent dead? Judge yourselves!
"Baptism for the dead"
Is mans edict greater than the creator of mankind and King of the Jews. (Jesus)Who are we accountable to?
Do we compromise doctrines to suit the world?
If so then we might as well approve same sex marriage,war as a means of Patriotism,Wealth for the rich,Health care only for the rich,Tithing payment into direct bank accounts and Police check cards for all members and promote the Holy Ghost as a man, yet to be mortalized and resurrected. Is this where we are heading? Are we pleasing the masses to reject the innocent dead? Judge yourselves!
For: CuriousUt (more) | 10:08 p.m. Nov. 10, 2008
Baptisms performed on behalf of those who have died was practiced anciently by
Christians in the days of Paul, the tenacious Apostle. Go read 1 Corinthians
15:29. The question Paul was asking was not "What are you doing?",
but instead was "Why are you doing baptisms for those who have died if
there is no resurrection of the dead?"
And, finally, as I said it might seem odd that faithful LDS members believe in gospel ordinances performed on behalf of those who have passed away but isn't that what Christ did for you and I?, ie, a work or an act of service done for you and I?, an act that you and I could not in any way perform ourself?
And what was that act?
None other than the Atonement of our sins in the Garden of Gethsemanee and His suffering on the cross that ultimately led to the sure promise of our bodily resurrection.
Proxy acts done by Christ on OUR behalf because we could not do it ourselves.
Cool, huh?
The Gospel, or "good news" of Jesus Christ is simply beautiful and beautifully simple!
I hope that helps.
And, finally, as I said it might seem odd that faithful LDS members believe in gospel ordinances performed on behalf of those who have passed away but isn't that what Christ did for you and I?, ie, a work or an act of service done for you and I?, an act that you and I could not in any way perform ourself?
And what was that act?
None other than the Atonement of our sins in the Garden of Gethsemanee and His suffering on the cross that ultimately led to the sure promise of our bodily resurrection.
Proxy acts done by Christ on OUR behalf because we could not do it ourselves.
Cool, huh?
The Gospel, or "good news" of Jesus Christ is simply beautiful and beautifully simple!
I hope that helps.
Add your comment
Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.
Words Remaining
E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.
Elder Lance B. Wickman of the First Quorum of the Seventy with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints talks about the 1995 agreement not to submit list of names of Jewish holocaust victims to the practice of baptism for the dead.
Related content
- Colts remain perfect with win 2:31 p.m.
- The joy of a baby's love 2:26 p.m.
- Holiday shopping mildly encouraging 2:17 p.m.
- Woods cancels meeting with police 2:09 p.m.
- Venezuelan banks to be nationalized? 2:02 p.m.
- USA Today Top 25 Poll 1:48 p.m.
- The AP Top 25 1:45 p.m.
- No. 1 vs. No. 2 in SEC title game 1:43 p.m.
- Illustrator is living his dream 1:30 p.m.
- Swiss ban mosque minarets 1:05 p.m.
- Hall mouths off about hate of Utah
- BYU is champion of the state
- Cougars beat Utes in overtime
- Credit Coug defense for win
- Field goals, penalties doomed Utes
- Cave to be sealed with body inside
- Cougar defense rose to occasion
- Marriage definitions vary widely
- Jones' joy for life remembered
- Banged up Jazz get best of Blazers
- Hall mouths off about hate of Utah
583 - Cougars beat Utes in overtime458
- Thunder rolls by Jazz136
- Man trapped in Nutty Putty cave dies117
- Cave to be sealed with body inside115
- BYU is champion of the state113
- Editorial: Poor welcome for Palin113
- Rivalry Week is highly profane89
- Hall's legacy measured today77
- Y. focused on 10-win season73
I wanted to tell them not to go. I dropped subtle hints. "My money is on...
When I was a kid, I worshipped my grandpa. He was undoubtedly my hero....
Latest comments
I can't wait to get my hands on it.
Can't help but make the contrast between Mr. Hall and Tim Tebow. Tebow is a...
I thought that if you went to any hospial besides IHC, you'd die. That's...
I have followed the news about John and his attempted rescue with such...
Only 6% of Switzerland is Muslim (mostly white Muslims from East Europe), and...
@jr: First, please provide evidence that Obama is a Muslim. Second, please...
Maybe Max forgot to take his Prozac
The fact that BYU fans are defending Hall's comments is even more disturbing...
I just went online and purchased several Utah basketball tickets. We are...
I did honk when utah turned over - Good Game Cougars! and Max said it right!
Advertisements