Responding to — and explaining — LDS baptisms for the dead

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • sharrona layton, UT
    Feb. 20, 2012 8:15 a.m.

    RE; Bill in Nebraska, You say that Prophet ended with the Old Testament which is false as all of the Disciples (Apostles) of Christ were prophets.
    I said the office of prophet. (Jesus)The LAW and the* Prophets were until Johnâ¦(Luke 16:16).
    Donât misunderstand why I have come. I did not come to abolish the law of Moses or the writings of the prophets. No,I came to accomplish their purpose. (Mt 5:17 NLT).

    The N.T order of Church government, And God hath set some in the church, First Apostles, Secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers...,(1Cor 12:28). Apostles ranked first. Some Christians churches today have people who prophecy, but the office of prophet is done. See Hebrews (1:1-2).

    @Bill said Christ died for everyoneâs sin and it is conditional,(their decision].

    Wrong, Jesus replied, âVery truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again(from above, anothen,G.509).(John 3:3).
    You did not choose me, but I chose you â¦(John 15:16).
    In him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will. (Eph 1:11)

  • Bill in Nebraska Maryville, MO
    Feb. 19, 2012 6:11 p.m.

    The scientist and Sharrona: Christ spent the time between his resurrection and death preaching to the souls who had died in the spirit world. "Because of thi9s, is the gospel preached to them who are dead, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live in the spirit according to the will of the God." Baptism is required to enter into the Kingdom of God along with receiving the Holy Ghost. This is an earthly ordinance. D&C 138 spells out very well what transpired during the time of Christ's death on the cross and his resurrection. He formed his missionaries, just as he formed his missionaries and his Church on earth before the crucifixion. He spent 40 more days teaching his gospel even more to his twelve apostles. Peter pretty much explains this in Peter 4: 6. So they are taught the gospel whether in spirit prision or paradise. They have the option then to repent though it may be difficult because they have no way of retribution but it is possible. This is why the temples are there to redeem the dead. Malachi taught that before the great and dreadful day that ELijah would be sent to turn the hearts of the children to the fathers and the hearts of the fathers to the children, otherwise the earth would be cursed. This wasn't John the Baptist, in fact most Christians ignore this scripture all together.

    Again this is the creeds Joseph Smith taught against. They had drawn away from the pure gospel which has now been restored in its fullness.

  • A Scientist Provo, UT
    Feb. 19, 2012 2:53 p.m.

    The most obvious scriptural support for the doctrine that the dead cannot repent is found in Alma:

    And now as I said unto you before, as ye have had so many witnesses, therefore I beseech of you, that ye do not procrastinate the day of your repentance until the end; For after this day of life, which is given us to prepare for eternity, behold, if we do not improve our time while in this life, then cometh the night of darkness, wherein there can be no labor performed. Ye can not say, when ye are brought to that awful crisis that I will repent, that I will return to my God. Nay, ye can not say this; for that same spirit which doth possess your bodies at the time that ye go out of this life, that same spirit will have power to possess your body in that eternal world. For behold, if ye have procrastinated the day of your repentance, even until death, behold, ye have become subjected to the spirit of the devil, and he doth seal you his (Alma 34: 33-35).

    New Testament teachings support this.

  • Bill in Nebraska Maryville, MO
    Feb. 19, 2012 2:20 p.m.

    Sharrona: I see you really don't understand the scripture that you brought forth. Christ died for everyones sin and it is conditional just as I pointed out that you missed the first time and that is a person but repent and be baptized by water. You say that Prophet ended with the Old Testament which is false as all of the Disciples (Apostles) of Christ were prophets. In fact, in order to recognize the true Church Paul tells us that it must have prophets, apostles, teachers and evangleicals. Yet no other Church on Earth except the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints has such. Most Christian religions have already condemned all that never had a chance to hear of Jesus Christ. In many of the films the Church has produced has hit upon this quite well. If you aren't a Baptist then you are condemned. If you're not Catholic you are condemned and etc. However, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is the only one that says the Gospel is taught to all who didn't have a chance or didn't want to hear it here on Earth. Their work is done in the Temples of God. They then on the other side where taught can still reject it. This is the most justified thing of all that there is no respector of persons. Prophets are on earth today to give us the word of God. The BIBLE is not all inclusive and never was meant to be. Again the CREEDS that Joseph Smith came out against and which God the Father and The Son, JESUS CHRIST, both reinterated they are the commandments of man, they draw close to me with their mouths but their hearts are far from me. The heavens are open, God speaks to us again through prophets.

  • sharrona layton, UT
    Feb. 19, 2012 12:27 p.m.

    Bill in Nebraska. Christ was the first proxy for all mankind. He was unknown to a lot of people.

    He still is: (1Tim 3:16 KJV) And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifested in the flesh, Justified in the Spirit, Seen by angels, Preached among the Gentiles, Believed on in the world, Received up in glory. God becomes man, not man becomes God.

    Bill, yet he died for EVERYONEs sin, Wrong: (John 3:16-18) For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever Believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever Believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of Godâs one and only Son.

    John the Baptist fulfills the prophecy of Mal 3:1. I will send my messenger, who will prepare the way before me.
    The office of prophet ended with John. In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the Prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these Last Days he has spoken to us by his Sonâ¦(Heb 1;1-2)

  • A Scientist Provo, UT
    Feb. 18, 2012 9:50 p.m.

    Ccrobmd and RG,

    Your speculative apologetics have no scriptural support.

    Scripture supports the doctrine that people cannot repent after death. Baptism without repentance is empty and meaningless. Therefore, baptism for the dead is ineffectual.

  • Bill in Nebraska Maryville, MO
    Feb. 18, 2012 9:50 p.m.

    Again Sharrona you quote only what you want to quote. Mosiah 2: 38
    " Therefore a man who repenteth not, and remaineth and dieth an enemy to God, the demains of divine justice do awaken his immortal soul to a lively sense of his own guilt, which doth cause him to shrink from the presence of the Lord, and doth fill his breast with guilt, and pain, and anguish, which is like an unquenchable fire whose flame ascendeth up forever and ever."

    Everyone on who has ever lived upon the Earth must hear the Gospel of Jesus Christ. As someone else said, read D&C 138 as it pretty well spells out what is going on in the Spirit World that the Lord Jesus Christ preached to in his three days prior to being resurrected. This is why modern day prophets have been so important to us. Malachi's prophesy is being fulfilled in our life time.

    Alt134: Actually having an unknown person be a proxy for one that is dead makes perfect sense. Christ was the first proxy for all mankind. He was unknown to a lot of people yet he died for EVERYONEs sin, if they will only repent and be baptized. Baptism is an earthly ordinance thus the temple is where baptism for the dead are performed. It makes perfect sense.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Feb. 18, 2012 4:05 p.m.

    "But people can continue to learn after they die, as well as change their minds, just like they can before they die"

    Yeah, but requiring those people to have to rely on some random person on earth to take care of something for them or else their post-death learning will be for naught... doesn't make much sense.

  • iron&clay RIVERTON, UT
    Feb. 18, 2012 3:52 p.m.

    Elijah the prophet, who was taken to heaven without tasting death stood before Joseph Smith and his counselor on April 3, 1836 in the Temple at Kirtland Ohio "to declare that the time has fully come, which was spoken of by the mouth of Malachi-testifying that he {Elijsh] should be sent, before the great and dreadful day of the Lord come-
    To turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the children to the fathers, lest the whole earth be smitten with a curse-
    Therefore, the KEYS of this dispensation are committed into your hands (Josephs); and by this ye may know that the great and dreadful day of the Lord is near, even at the doors."

    Do not be angry with the church or it's members. They are only doing the work for their dead that they were commanded to do.

  • K Mchenry, IL
    Feb. 18, 2012 2:25 p.m.

    First, Catholics wouldn't bat an eye seeing seeing a Jewish or Muslim or Atheist in heaven. God decides who gets in. Mercy can be extended to the nonbaptised as well as the baptised. Some of the baptised aren't getting in.

    Second, not one's baby would be baptised in a Catholic hospital without the persmission of parents. You would need to ask for baptism in life threatening emergency.

    Third, you have answered that the proxy wasn't done for them and wouldn't be. Enough said.

  • sharrona layton, UT
    Feb. 18, 2012 11:23 a.m.

    Bill in Nebraska: Baptism for the dead is an act of service and an act of love.

    Except, he extent of the Atonement is not universal.
    And now I say to you, that mercy hath no claim on that man; therefore his final doom is to endure a never-ending torment.(Mosiah 2;39)
    Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell(gehenna).(Mt 10:28)Also see (Luke 12:5)

    The Lord will judge his people.â It is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God. (Hebrews 10:30,31)

    Mountanman; We each get to decide how much grace we will accept?
    For it is by grace you have been saved, through faithand this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God not by works, so that no one can boast. For we are Godâs handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.(Ephesian 2:8-10)

  • RG Buena Vista, VA
    Feb. 18, 2012 10:53 a.m.

    Halwrite says: "If a Jew prefered not to be baptised during his or her lifetime, it is, perhaps, best to honor that wish upon his or her death." If Jews, or anyone else, preferred not to be baptized during their lifetimes, it might be because they weren't given the option, or if they were, they didn't really understand it. But people can continue to learn after they die, as well as change their minds, just like they can before they die. Please don't be offended in my confidence that at least some Jews whose vicarious baptisms have been performed have accepted them, and are grateful for them. Sorry to anyone offended, but I sincerely believe it is true. And it in no way minimizes the suffering of anyone in the holocaust, nor dishonours anyone's memory. (Remember, we don't even know which of the dead have accepted the vicarious baptisms.) But claiming that those (eg Jews) in the spirit world cannot change their minds may be offensive to them, just like telling certain racial groups they have to vote Democrat (and that voting GOP "betrays" their race) may be offensive to them. This type of stereotyping is offensive; let everyone choose for themselves. That's all the LDS are doing: letting them choose.

  • gcrobmd GADSDEN, AL
    Feb. 18, 2012 10:45 a.m.

    I just understood why some Jews are offended by Mormons who selectively choose to baptize deceased holocaust victims. The Jewish point of view has not been communicated very well in the media.

    These Jews see that baptism is for remission of sins. They are angered that Mormons think that victims of the holocaust need to repent before entering the kingdom of God. I suppose they feel their suffering and death should be âbaptismâ enough to enter the kingdom of God, especially since God chose them to bring forth His word as the Old Testament (see 2 Nephi 29:4-6).

    I agree with this point of view.

    Now, will you hear the Mormon point of view?

    Baptism begins with faith. It is a physical act that results in a spiritual change that opens a channel between God and man. Through this channel the power of the Messiahâs atonement can be fully active. Through His atonement, He takes upon Himself our sins, so that justice is satisfied and mercy and grace can abound.

    By washing us of sin, whether great or small, our sense of guilt is likewise washed away so that we can face God with confidence. I would think of all people, the holocaust victims are aware of how people hurt each other, and they would keenly regret any hurt they ever caused. Of all people who deserve to be free of guilt, it is the holocaust victims.

    But there is more.

    Through the atonement, in a miraculous and timeless way that only God can accomplish, the Messiah also takes upon Himself our infirmities and sicknesses, our sorrows and sufferings to help us heal, and restores all that has been lost (BofM, Alma 7:11-12, Mosiah 14:3-5). Of all people in need of the healing atonement, it is the holocaust victims.

    It is this knowledge that makes it incomprehensible to Mormons why anyone would object to having their deceased ancestors baptized. After loving our neighbor, it is our best effort and highest honor to bring them peace and rest.

  • Bill in Nebraska Maryville, MO
    Feb. 18, 2012 10:31 a.m.

    Baptism for the dead is an act of service and an act of love. However, as many have said it is for our own ancestors. We can do the work of a worthy member upon their death if we are able to do so. The thing is only their work, not their family or ancestors. That means their baptism, which if a worthy member is not required, only their endowments and possibly a sealing. Other than that the work is left for a family member to do or until the millinieum.

    I've done lots of work for my own family. In fact I have traced some all the way back to about 1300. So what. I've done off shoots of the family such as some cousins. Many are well over 200 years old. The is for those who have died and not had the ability to learn the gospel. Maybe for mightymight and Pagan many of their ancestors if they really cared have already been baptized. In fact, the Church is doing most of the work for those 1500 and further back. I suggest to them to read Malachi carefully and you will see that it applies entirely to what the LDS Church teaches.

  • Halwrite Chicago, IL
    Feb. 18, 2012 10:12 a.m.

    I don't question the sincere and good intentions of the mostly young Mormons who engage in this practice of Baptising the dead nor do I question the sincerity of the church's effort to cease the posthumous baptism of Jewish Holocaust victims. However, defenders of this practice must realize that their rationale assuages no pain among Jewish men and women with a keen understanding of the suffering their forbears endured simply to remain true to their faith. If a Jew prefered not to be baptised during his or her lifetime, it is, perhaps, best to honor that wish upon his or her death. To many of us, it seems a gratuitous and an enormously insensitive practice.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Feb. 18, 2012 10:10 a.m.

    "CNN ran a couple stories about this and reading the comments on CNN made me realize it's not good when people learn "meat" before the "milk." "

    Sometimes it's good to learn meat before getting in the water(s of baptism). Converts like myself can end up feeling deceived if key details are left out intentionally before joining the church. I was able to get through it (though i did leave the church a couple years later)

  • Tekakaromatagi Dammam, Saudi Arabia
    Feb. 18, 2012 10:06 a.m.


    Some pagan religions have rituals to help the dead progress onto the next world. What about that? If they did it for me, I would thank them.


  • LauraG Concho, AZ
    Feb. 18, 2012 10:01 a.m.

    "Mormonism is the most nonexclusive religion in the Christian world." Well meaning perhaps, but nonexclusive? Just ask a member in "good standing" who will inherit the highest kingdom of heaven. (i.e. be with God and Jesus.)

  • IMAN Marlborough, MA
    Feb. 18, 2012 9:48 a.m.

    With all due respect to members of the LDS church, as a non-member, I can perceive the act of proxy baptisms as nothing more than an act of supreme arrogance by the LDS church. I am sorry if members find this offensive but it is how I personally perceive this issue.

  • Mick Murray, Utah
    Feb. 18, 2012 9:04 a.m.


    You constantly point out how many people are narrow minded or discriminatory on other topics. But yet here you are doing the same thing.

    How do you know the deceased haven't given their consent? If you believe in life after death then it is a possibility that they have learned or been introduced to something they now believe in. If you don't believe in life after death, your argument is all for naught.

    There is life after death. Some will accept the gospel of Jesus Christ then, some will not. Just like on this earth, it will be a free choice.

    I am conviced your hatred of the church is so deep you would argue against the church's humanitarian aid.

  • Theeng2 Holladay, UT
    Feb. 18, 2012 8:22 a.m.

    CNN ran a couple stories about this and reading the comments on CNN made me realize it's not good when people learn "meat" before the "milk."

  • Tiger5 Cache county, USA
    Feb. 18, 2012 8:12 a.m.

    All this talk makes me want to do temple work today. Thanks for inspiring me to get to the temple!

  • RG Buena Vista, VA
    Feb. 18, 2012 8:10 a.m.

    To MightyMite and Pagan,
    Baptism for the dead is neither "invasive" nor "offensive," at least not if you are thinking logically. Not invasive because maybe (probably?) some of your ancestors have been posthumously baptized and you don't even know about it. If it were invasive it would be having effects on your life. And it may be offensive to those who are thinking 100% emotionally and 0% logically, but I ask you and everyone else to try a little logic for a change. You already know that the LDS believe that the dead get a choice. Plus, you don't believe the LDS priesthood has real power, so what do you care if someone gets wet pretending to be your ancestor? Are you also offended if I pray for you? Is that invasive? Should Hindus be offended when we tell them Christ died for their sins? When my (LDS) baby died, Catholic friends lit a candle for her. I was touched, not offended. Learn from my example.

  • iron&clay RIVERTON, UT
    Feb. 18, 2012 7:55 a.m.

    For all those who truely want an understanding of the necessity and importance on the subject of baptism for the dead.....

    Please read from the Church of Jesus Christ of Later-day Saints scripture:

    Doctrine and Covenants Section 138

  • RG Buena Vista, VA
    Feb. 18, 2012 7:50 a.m.

    The photo that accompanies this article, of the Logan Temple baptismal font, actually shows the font in the temple before its renovation in the 1970s. The current font looks different.

  • Mountanman Hayden, ID
    Feb. 18, 2012 7:36 a.m.

    For those who are in disagreement about his issue I have some suggetions that my help you.

    #1: If, when you die and someone has you baptised by proxy and you don't agree with it, just tell the Lord, "no thanks".. End of issue.
    #2:Disagree if you will but understand that Mormons are the only Christian religion that places no limit on the Lord's grace, even for people who have passed on. We each get to decide how much grace we will accept, the Lord has never limited His offering. That's why we do baptisms for the dead, for those who may choose to accept an unlimited grace of Christ. Its an act of service and grace. Again, if you object or don't want the offer, that's every person's choice.
    #3: Of all God's children who have lived on this earth, a relativily small percentage have even heard of Jesus Christ. Therefore baptism for them, who have passed on is a beautiful act of Christs grace extended beyone the grave for billions of these people, if they accept the Lord's grace.
    #4:It is a beautiful act of faith and grace, even if you don't agree with it, that's everyone's choice.

  • gcrobmd GADSDEN, AL
    Feb. 18, 2012 7:01 a.m.

    Nice article! Thank you.

    Wow! What a lot of wresting of motives over an expression of love and honor of oneâs neighbors that stretches beyond the mortal realm! Those who criticize speak evil of things they do not know.

    Christians accept baptism as a public expression, a beginning and end of their commitment to take upon oneself the name of God, and a sacred ceremony through which one opens a channel to the heart to receive Godâs grace. Even God, as the mortal Jesus, submitted to this public expression.

    Baptism for the dead was not invented by Mormons, as the Bible records in 1 Corinthians 15:29, as well as many other fragments from the ancient records. Mormonâs see the symbolism of baptism antedating Jesus in the molten sea and the lavers of ancient Israel.

    Mormons offer baptism to those who never had a chance for it because of geography and tradition. It is an expression of invitation and inclusion. We do it because we think they are righteous, not because we think they are stuck in hell. The act itself says that our God wants all to inherit His kingdom. If we are guilty of anything with respect to the holocaust victims, we are guilty of honoring them for their suffering. They are the souls under the alter of God in heaven of those who were slain for being chosen to bear the word of God to the world (Rev 6:9).

    Baptism for the dead is done largely by teenagers who selflessly spend half a day every few months, usually on Saturdays, to go to the temple and do for others what they cherish having done for themselves. We do it because we love God and love our neighbor. We say the names of those who have passed on with reverence and love. In serving these through sacred and reverent ceremony, we learn to connect better with the living through selfless service. At times, we think we can feel their gratitude, and their joy brings tears to our eyes.

    Rather than condemning Mormons for being Godâs instruments to bring His greatest gift to all, you, whose religions make no such provision, should feel guilty for leaving the unlucky dead behind.

    Jews have been maligned and unfairly persecuted. Our Book of Mormon acknowledges this and reprimands all who reverence the Bible for this persecution (2 Nephi 29:4). Those upset with Mormons should pause to consider that the persons who entered the names may have been trying to bring condemnation on the Mormon Church, and were not acting according to Church policy. If persecution is bad, it is bad when applied to any people, not just the Jews.

  • Bluto Sandy, UT
    Feb. 18, 2012 6:23 a.m.

    A few years back while I was working at the FHL, in town that week was the National Jewish Geneaogical Society. They were holding their annual convention here in SLC. I spent a day working side by side with a Jewish Lady from NYC. She was using the great resources available to one and all. And just how do you think the LDS Church aquired these priceless records that they were now utilizing?

    Elie Weisel is Grandstanding, and it's very unfortuante. He is politicizing this current event.
    His political leanings are well known. The Church has apologized for a rogue charachter. These things can happen, but that is not good enough for him. However, Mr. Weisel needs to understand, LDS' have a right to their Religion just as he does. And they have a right to have their hearts turned to their own ancestors. Being familiar with Malachi, he might better understand this concept.

    In this particular case, there were simply names added to the Family Search database. That's all. And quite frankly, anyone with access to the data base can add names. I do it just about every day, as we follow and build my wife's Italian Family tree.

    Here is what people need to understand.
    There are clearly published protocols as to how to govern yourself while accessing Family Search.

    1-You are only to do work on your own family trees. Even the Jewish organizations have agreed that if a Jewish name is in your famly line, you can add those names to the database.

    2-There is the 95 year rule.
    Meaning, that if a person is not a direct ancestor, then permission must be obtained by a direct family relative before adding that deceased persons name. There are to be NO Living persons added to the database unless submiting your own family's names.

    3-Famous persons are not to be added at all, unless they are a direct descendant.

    People with sincere hearts understand these rules. Others have other motives for creating these dust-ups.

    I maintain that there are indeed people with nefarious intent, who purposefully add names, ie Hitler, Mussolini, Ted Bundy etc.. in order to intentionally embarass the Church. There are well known folks who just happen to always find such names and then immediately report such infractions to the National Media.

    Really? Just a Coincidence? Or are these sustained and carefully crafted planned assaults?

    It's time someone in the Media investigates this aspect of the story.

  • Swartzy Arlington, TX
    Feb. 18, 2012 5:36 a.m.

    intolerance mounts on all sides. ALL SIDES. I spend much of my younger life in a Jewish home, my best friend was and still is Jewish. I have found as I went to synagogue with him that I was not really welcomed by most as I was a christian and what was I doing in their temple? I quit going. SO did he, well he changed Jewish faiths, he went to a much more liberal group( reformed Jews) Mr. Weisel seems to feel that anything said or done that does not agree with his view is taboo. Yes there is a lot of anti Jewish sentiment, also anti LDS Sentiment. All you have to do is read posts here and on the other paper to see it. Lighten up people. This isn't like grabbing you and dunking you in the water.

    We are told to only do the direct line of our ancestors. The person who did this was wrong. But to get your panties in a tight wad is silly. YES SILLY and that is with full compassion and understanding that I say that. SILLY

  • MiP Iowa City, IA
    Feb. 18, 2012 12:39 a.m.

    It's amazing how so many people are "outraged" on these boards.

    To one guy, even, "billion" of people are outraged. Really?

    "What I am sure of is that the mormon church is not God's restored church (as you claim) and it's teachings are false... And before you ask, yes I have prayed upon it and God has led me to a Christian faith with valid teachings...."

    Perhaps you could share what the name of this "faith" is? You see, it's easy to tear up someone elses' beliefs, it's something entirely different to defend your own. By staying generic, you remain above the fray, able to jab at Mormon beliefs while not mentioning specifics of your own. I'm sure it's all valid teachings.

    "To be blunt, it is INVASIVE and OFFENSIVE to have a faith 'baptize' you...against your wishes and the wishes of their family."

    Get over your rage. How do you know it's against the wishes of the individual? They are dead (well, except Elie of course). There's a lot of things that people do/lifestyles that I find highly offensive, and there are many things I'd rather you not explain to me, Pagan. But here we are.

    It's nice to be American. When people are outraged at something they are not at all involved in, I can roll my eyes and say "next."

  • Janet Ontario, OR
    Feb. 17, 2012 11:41 p.m.

    One of my children was born in a Catholic hospital. I wouldn't be surprised if, seeing that the mother was LDS, a caring priest didn't sprinkle my child to save his soul. If so, I think it was an act of kindness. There is no arrogance, no rancor, no animus, from those who quietly labor to b bring others to God -- here or hereafter. If my Catholic neighbor wishes to light a candle and pray for my soul when I am gone, I will be grateful for the kindness. The same goes for my neighbor of any faith.

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Feb. 17, 2012 11:35 p.m.

    'I'm outraged that my Dad was part of the 3rd Army that risked their lives for three and half years and liberated people that have no tolerance for religious freedom.' - ute alumni | 10:43 p.m. Feb. 17, 2012

    And yet, you post on a newspaper...

    owned by a church.

    To rally against, birth control for Catholic women...

    that over 80%, already use birth control.

    Your religion stops at you.

    And should not be FORCED, onto people, who never factually asked you for it.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Feb. 17, 2012 11:34 p.m.

    "What about those the never have heard of Jesus Christ?"

    Many christians, and large chunks of many denominations that don't personally express this view, believe that God will sort things out in some fair manner. Here's how you can tell they believe this: ever notice how so few Christians proselytize? If they really thought that it was so necessary to accept Christ they'd probably be trying a little harder on that front. Instead you get people like me who really don't care what religion anyone belongs to.

    " God has provided a way, through baptism for the dead"

    You believe that, but most including myself disagree with that interpretation of scripture. Personally, I do believe something close to the LDS view that everyone will have fair opportunity to accept the truth before final judgment (my beliefs are very much a mix of many denominations and since I don't believe there is a "one true church"... I'm okay with that). I just believe that being baptized in spirit in the afterlife would be valid.

  • ute alumni Tengoku, UT
    Feb. 17, 2012 10:43 p.m.

    I'm outraged that my Dad was part of the 3rd Army that risked their lives for three and half years and liberated people that have no tolerance for religious freedom. Some people have to be outraged at something all the time, one of which cut and pastes others thoughts multiple times on every article.

  • mightymite DRAPER, UT
    Feb. 17, 2012 10:19 p.m.

    RE: SammyB

    Your wrong.... I am not exactly sure where the mormon church thinks they have the right to invade another per persons faith or lack of faith through this ritual but I can tell you Christian and non-Christian faiths alike do not subscribe to this ritual and it is highly offensive - and in some cases taboo. What I am sure of is that the mormon church is not God's restored church (as you claim) and it's teachings are false... And before you ask, yes I have prayed upon it and God has led me to a Christian faith with valid teachings....

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Feb. 17, 2012 9:59 p.m.

    'Responding to and explaining LDS baptisms for the dead' - Title


    I don't want it 'explained' to me.

    I want baptism's for people who did not give their CONSENT to them, to stop.

    Everyone is asking 'what's the big deal'?

    This is not a counter point.

    We have this same 'explanation' from the LDS church, every few years. About who 'whoops! We baptized ANOTHER non-believer against their wishes. My bad!'

    To be blunt, it is INVASIVE and OFFENSIVE to have a faith 'baptize' you...against your wishes and the wishes of their family.

    And yet, it keeps happening.


    You are not welcome to invade the memory of a person's faith.

  • sbc Mesa, AZ
    Feb. 17, 2012 9:56 p.m.

    I am sure there are many Christian faiths that believe you just have to accept Jesus as the Savior. However, most of those churches, if not all, believe that if you don't, while here on earth, well, then that is it. What about those the never have heard of Jesus Christ? Some denominations believe that God is merciful and will just let them into Heaven while others believe that cannot happen.
    To those that believe they will be just be let into heaven I have asked where that doctrine comes from? The answer has been, "God is merciful". Even Jesus Christ was baptized. God has provided a way, through baptism for the dead, for those that never had the opportunity, for whatever reason, to accept this ordinance. That covers it from those that believe "God is merciful", to those that believe it cannot not happen, and everything in between.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    Feb. 17, 2012 9:51 p.m.

    This has been a highly sensitive issue with the Jewish community for awhile. So, Wiesel's reaction needs to be viewed in light of this. It's not an isolated incident. They view it as just more of the same.

    Sure, the Church can do whatever it wants and ignore the criticism. But that's not likely to facilitate the church's mission to convert people to Mormonism.

    Poor Romney:
    "Im running for office, for Petes sake,"

  • SammyB Provo, UT
    Feb. 17, 2012 9:29 p.m.


    The Church does this because we believe God wants us to. Should we fear man more than God? Also, we are supposed to only do work for our own ancestors. Yes, they are also ancestors to non-LDS but that doesn't take away our rights.

  • mightymite DRAPER, UT
    Feb. 17, 2012 9:04 p.m.

    I am not sure they need to explain but evaluate the entire process -- not only for Jews but Christians as well. I personally (and billion) who are not mormons to not appreciate there ancestors or family members undergoing this process.

  • Ken Sandy, UT
    Feb. 17, 2012 7:12 p.m.

    While I am very glad the church is sympathetic to the wishes of the jews in this matter, I am surprised at the demanding attitudes of many towards the church. At the end of the day, the church can do as they wish and do baptisms for the dead for whomever they want. Not many people would be as accommodating as church leaders in similar circumstances. Seems the jews should be grateful for every jew baptism the church doesn't do instead of demanding an apology in anger for every one that accidentally slips through

  • John Pack Lambert of Michigan Ypsilanti, MI
    Feb. 17, 2012 7:03 p.m.

    The Church has done nothing to Wiesel. It is one individual somewhere who did it. He of all people should realize that it is wrong to attack a whole group for the actions of one person. The Church did not create the database. To act like the contents of a databse are the fault of the Church is just to ignore reality.

    Wiesel is also showing his unwillingness to even try to interact with other religious traditions on their own terms. Jews might respond to the advice of well placed notables in their community with no religious authority, but that is not how The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints works.

  • John Pack Lambert of Michigan Ypsilanti, MI
    Feb. 17, 2012 6:58 p.m.

    The first point of new family search is to include the names of your family. I entered the name of my living great-grandmother in there so that I could connect my further back decesed ancestors to me. Just putting a name in that database does not indicate intentions to submit it for temple work.

    Secondly, I think it would help if people did not start with the assumption of maliciousness. The people involved here truly were trying to do good. They were clearly also acting unwise, but if people tried to understand the actions of others instead of shouting "I am outraged" there would be more good feelings. Some people spend time talking about being civil, but seem only to be able to respond with anger.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Feb. 17, 2012 6:39 p.m.

    [Mormons say, "No, salvation is open to all people.' In that sense, Mormonism is the most nonexclusive religion in the Christian world.")]

    There are plenty of christian denominations like the United Methodist church that don't think it matters if you're of a different denomination. That's how I inherited my tendency to just go to whatever church service I feel like going.