Oh the hypocrisy of Provo professors!!!!

[_Joey]

Since Chap seems to be gone, and since I can't be around here all day, I'll just go ahead and explain:

Latter-day Saints do not believe that vicarious baptisms "make" anybody Mormon. Such baptisms are offered to the dead, but the dead must choose whether to accept them or to reject them. (In this, they are quite different from ordinary baptism for living people, who must, in order to receive that ordinance, have already chosen to do so.) Freedom of choice is an absolutely central principle of Mormon belief.

People for whom vicarious baptisms have been performed are not added to Church membership rolls; we do not know whether the ordinance has been received or declined, and would not, in any case, knowingly enroll the dead among living members.

The basis, reasons, or justifications for proxy baptisms are not relevant to nor do they address or answer the question pertaining to "respect for religious sensibilities" in LDS proxy baptisms in the question presented.

Lets try this again. Just a simple question:

Why the need for the 1995 agreement to stop the baptisms if not out of "respect for religious sensibilities" ?


Jason, Peterson, ???

[I think it's safe to expect the likes of Peterson, Jason and other LDS members who find the upcoming Big Love episode so disrespectful to continue to avoid answering the above question as it will clearly demonstrate an obvious LDS hypocrisy. They all sound good on the other board or at some fireside where the critical questions, and answers to them, are not permitted for equally obvious reasons.]

[_Daniel Peterson]

Why yes. If only those Jews would listen carefully enough to the explanations furnished to them by representatives of the First Presidency, they could not possibly sustain their objections to having their dead relations vicariously baptized.

I understand Jewish sensitivities about conversion. I know many Jews, have spoken with them at length, have worked with them on joint projects and continue to do so, have visited and lived in Israel on various occasions, and etc. I realize that this is a difficult issue for them, and I do believe in being as sympathetic as possible.

I also believe, however, both in my faith and in the principle of religious liberty. Where these clash with the sensibilities of others, I do my best.

Maybe you need to explain again.

We probably do, since many (both Jews and non-Jews) seem not to understand our doctrine on this point.

I'm not quite sure why you feel the need to be so churlish about the issue (unlike Joey, you appear to be capable of civil conversation), but the simple fact is that we believe that the gospel needs to be, and will be, offered to everybody.

Not only that, but we believe that Christ's vicarious atonement was offered for everybody, whether they accept it or not.

[_Joey]

Not only that, but we believe that Christ's vicarious atonement was offered for everybody, whether they accept it or not.

If that is what the LDS church believes, why the need for the 1995 agreement?

[_Jason Bourne]

Jason,

If proxy baptism is not/was not disrespectful, perhaps you or Peterson could explain why the LDS church agreed to stop performing them in their 1995 agreement?

I can assure you the LDS still perform proxy baptisms. I think you may be referring to the LDS Church's agreement to stop baptizing deceased Jewish persons at the request of Jewish religious leaders. Of course the LDS Church did this to respect that request.

[_Joey]

Jason,

If proxy baptism is not/was not disrespectful, perhaps you or Peterson could explain why the LDS church agreed to stop performing them in their 1995 agreement?

I can assure you the LDS still perform proxy baptisms. I think you may be referring to the LDS Church's agreement to stop baptizing deceased Jewish persons at the request of Jewish religious leaders. Of course the LDS Church did this to respect that request.

And why do you think it was requested by Jewish leaders?

[_Jason Bourne]

Jason, Peterson,

If answering the above question proves too difficult, I could take the Robert Millet approach and ask a question you feel more comfortable addressing. Just let me know what the question should be! [In the context of " respecting religious sensibilities" of course.]

Your question was quite easily answered.

I mean you guys are last on the board at nite, first on in the morning and spend most of the day here. So I don't think it should be a "scheduling problem"!

Wow you are rather odd. Are you stalking me? But actually I go through large blocks of time when I am not here. And there are times I may be logged on but I am busy with other thing.

Cool your jets man. Nobody has to respond to any thing if they do not wish. And they can do it in their own time frame.

[_Jason Bourne]

Even dead people?
So I guess if Wiccans held a ceremony over your dead grandmother’s grave for reasons they felt were important and beneficial to the her.. you would be ok with that?

Would not bother me a bit especially if I did not believe it had any meaning.

[_TAK]

Even dead people?
So I guess if Wiccans held a ceremony over your dead grandmother’s grave for reasons they felt were important and beneficial to the her.. you would be ok with that?

Would not bother me a bit especially if I did not believe it had any meaning.

I will take your word on that but ask.. Can you see other people upset by it?

[_Chap]

I'm not quite sure why you feel the need to be so churlish about the issue ...

Believe me, I am transmitting a pretty muted version of opinions expressed by persons other than myself.

Maybe, until the CoJCoLDS has succeeded in persuading Jews that they have nothing to object to, it could turn its attention to the many many millions of unbaptised dead of some other religion? There are quite a few others around, after all - no font need remain unused for lack of vicarious candidates.

But perhaps some of those religions might express even more vigorous objections than the Jews.

[_Jason Bourne]

And why do you think it was requested by Jewish leaders?

Because is offended them. And when the church found out about the offense it stopped.