Still Baptizing Jews

[_Kishkumen]

Heh. Well, okay. But many Evangelicals do this in a very kind and compassionate way. E.g., publishing works that are meant to persuade people away from Mormonism, warning people that it's a "cult," pointing out that ways in which the LDS Church is not actually "Christian," etc. What I mean to say is that their motives are basically kind and considerate, which is usually the basis upon which the Mopologists like Scotty Dog build their case re: proxy baptisms. I.e., the Mopologists say, "Hey, this is just a kind gesture we're doing on your behalf, so you shouldn't complain." Of course, Jews and others don't see it that way. Similarly, I think that many Evangelicals and others think that their "anti-Mormonism" is being performed in the spirit of Christian goodwill.

Christian anti-Mormon ministries may be populated by a number of decent, well-meaning people, but there is far too much of the hateful, prejudiced, and distorted representation of Mormonism delivered with anger, shouting, and spit to expect me to buy your depiction of the situation. I may be an apostate, but I remember proxy baptisms well. The mood that prevails in those rituals is completely different from the torrent of bile and bigotry that floods anti-Mormon ministries.

[_Doctor Scratch]

Heh. Well, okay. But many Evangelicals do this in a very kind and compassionate way. E.g., publishing works that are meant to persuade people away from Mormonism, warning people that it's a "cult," pointing out that ways in which the LDS Church is not actually "Christian," etc. What I mean to say is that their motives are basically kind and considerate, which is usually the basis upon which the Mopologists like Scotty Dog build their case re: proxy baptisms. I.e., the Mopologists say, "Hey, this is just a kind gesture we're doing on your behalf, so you shouldn't complain." Of course, Jews and others don't see it that way. Similarly, I think that many Evangelicals and others think that their "anti-Mormonism" is being performed in the spirit of Christian goodwill.

Christian anti-Mormon ministries may be populated by a number of decent, well-meaning people, but there is far too much of the hateful, prejudiced, and distorted representation of Mormonism delivered with anger, shouting, and spit to expect me to buy your depiction of the situation. I may be an apostate, but I remember proxy baptisms well. The mood that prevails in those rituals is completely different from the torrent of bile and bigotry that floods anti-Mormon ministries.

I see what you're saying, Kish. But I'm not really talking about the hardcore, bile-inflected stuff here. That does tend to get lumped in with the Christian criticisms that are more level-headed, but as I think we both know, there's a clear difference. The thing is: what is the ultimate justification for the process? Some TBMs will argue that it's a gesture of goodwill--e.g., "We want you to get into heaven." In other instances, though, you see another picture emerge: e.g., "It has been commanded of us by God." So my question is this: Is this more an issue of trying to help people? Or is this simply a case of Mormonism thinking that it can do whatever the hell it wants, regardless of who it steamrolls or offends? I don't know that I know the answer. I guess the question is: What's the best, most reasonable course of action to take? Should the Church stand its ground and insist on its "rights," basically saying "Eff you!" to anyone who objects? Or should it try to be more sensitive?

Regardless, my own two cents is that the LDS Church just shouldn't do this if it's upsetting people to this extent. And I get what you're saying re: the "mood" that actually transpires during the process (though don't you think it can be somewhat rote and robotic?). Further, from the point of Church doctrine and theology, isn't this impeding on people's free agency a little bit?

[_Kishkumen]

I see what you're saying, Kish. But I'm not really talking about the hardcore, bile-inflected stuff here. That does tend to get lumped in with the Christian criticisms that are more level-headed, but as I think we both know, there's a clear difference. The thing is: what is the ultimate justification for the process? Some TBMs will argue that it's a gesture of goodwill--e.g., "We want you to get into heaven." In other instances, though, you see another picture emerge: e.g., "It has been commanded of us by God." So my question is this: Is this more an issue of trying to help people? Or is this simply a case of Mormonism thinking that it can do whatever the hell it wants, regardless of who it steamrolls or offends? I don't know that I know the answer. I guess the question is: What's the best, most reasonable course of action to take? Should the Church stand its ground and insist on its "rights," basically saying "Eff you!" to anyone who objects? Or should it try to be more sensitive?

Last point first, at this point their only acceptable option is to stop. They brought that on themselves by fumbling the ball.

Now the first point: the word anti-Mormon is self-explanatory. Historically, anti-Mormonism was the product of a combination of religious disagreement, xenophobia, and political competition. Its similarity with antisemitism is remarkably striking, a fact that is not lost on Jewish writers, by the way. In other words, anti-Mormons are much more like antisemites than the Mormons who baptize all peoples by proxy.

Regardless, my own two cents is that the LDS Church just shouldn't do this if it's upsetting people to this extent. And I get what you're saying re: the "mood" that actually transpires during the process (though don't you think it can be somewhat rote and robotic?). Further, from the point of Church doctrine and theology, isn't this impeding on people's free agency a little bit?

My experience of the temple was not robotic, but very positive. I know it is depicted as robotic in the Godmakers and other anti- Mormon films. Since those baptized by proxy are given the option to accept or reject it, no free agency is trampled.

[_EAllusion]

Why would it bother you then if you do not believe there's anything to voodoo?

It wouldn't bother me, but that sort of thing usually bothers people because they feel it disrespects the memories of the dead, which is all we have of them. To do something symbolically to the dead that runs in opposition to what they would've wished while living is like an act of corruption to their enduring presence in our minds. Again, I wouldn't be offended, but I get why others are.

[_EAllusion]

If I died and my funeral was turned into a giant proselytizing attempt by relatives of mine who didn't respect my atheism, which I've seen happen to others, I'd be bothered by that. I'd be dead, so I wouldn't care then, but the idea of it happening bothers me and it would be an insult the memory of me for anyone who cared about who I actually was.

That's the closet analogy I have to something that actually would bother me.

[_Tobin]

It is these kind of practices that get Mormonism in trouble. If you wish to get your own endowment, great. If you wish to get your immediate parents or grandparents sealed to you, great. Stop all the other non-sense. All the rest of this work will be done during the millenium anyway and nobody will stand in the way then. Mormons are wasting their time with all these unreadable records and worrying about getting their great-great-grand-cousin-twice-removed baptized, who's name they can't even pronounce. Plus, I don't discount human error. I wonder how many of these sealings have just been screwed up and will need to be redone during the millenium too. It is just such a huge waste of time and causes so many problems. The church should use these wasted resources to help the living that are poor in spirit and those in need instead.

[_Kishkumen]

Some Mormons like going to the temple regularly. Proxy ordinances give them a real reason to do so.

[_Tobin]

Some Mormons like going to the temple regularly. Proxy ordinances give them a real reason to do so.

They should try-on serving in the community and helping the poor and those in need. I think it will get them a lot closer to God.

[_kairos]

Some claim the LDS church is carrying out a sacred ordinance on behalf of the dead ones. my understanding is that these baptisms for the dead are more of a sacred assembly line rapidly dunking and naming and dunking and naming.one poor fellow apparently wrenched his back doing 50 names/dunking in quick succession. how sacred is that? seems like a numbers game.

forget the jewish problem, consider a change in policy like this.

a room is set aside for the proxies for the dead in a ward like setting- appropriate music is played , a talk given about the meaning of baptism, testimonies given, then each proxy is led to the fount and baptized, then gets dressed and comes back to the room where he/she is hugged and loved, refreshments served. then after a time, the second person is treated the same way;,, no, no you cannot get baptized for another person until you dress into a new dry white jumpsuit(uhoh there goes the temple laundry bill).

now maybe this would bring dignity to the proxy baptism and the worldly autolike assembly line routine would be disbanded-and that poor guy would not have to risk his back to rapid dunkings.

by the way is their a record for successive dunkings in an hour, sorta like a guiness book of world record for proxy baptisms in an hour, day, month year, lifetime- like cal ripken playing baseball over 5000 times without a day off.

unfortunately i do not thk jews would agree- they want the dunking to stop Now!!!
just sayin

[_Tobin]

Some claim the LDS church is carrying out a sacred ordinance on behalf of the dead ones. my understanding is that these baptisms for the dead are more of a sacred assembly line rapidly dunking and naming and dunking and naming.one poor fellow apparently wrenched his back doing 50 names/dunking in quick succession. how sacred is that? seems like a numbers game.

forget the jewish problem, consider a change in policy like this.

a room is set aside for the proxies for the dead in a ward like setting- appropriate music is played , a talk given about the meaning of baptism, testimonies given, then each proxy is led to the fount and baptized, then gets dressed and comes back to the room where he/she is hugged and loved, refreshments served. then after a time, the second person is treated the same way;,, no, no you cannot get baptized for another person until you dress into a new dry white jumpsuit(uhoh there goes the temple laundry bill).

now maybe this would bring dignity to the proxy baptism and the worldly autolike assembly line routine would be disbanded-and that poor guy would not have to risk his back to rapid dunkings.

by the way is their a record for successive dunkings in an hour, sorta like a guiness book of world record for proxy baptisms in an hour, day, month year, lifetime- like cal ripken playing baseball over 5000 times without a day off.

unfortunately i do not thk jews would agree- they want the dunking to stop Now!!!
just sayin

I agree 100%. I have been endowed in the temple and been in a sealing group. I find the current version of the Temple filled with exactly that corporate, assembly-line mentality. I do not believe God is very pleased with the Mormons that are doing this either. They regularly schedule time to go to the temple, but I wonder how many of them also regularly serve in a soup kitchen, or do charity drives, and so on? Many are more impressed by how many sessions (time through) that they can fit in. It is like an amusement ride for them. I bet if you asked them the name of the person they stood in for, they wouldn't even know it (nor care who they were).

Plus, there is a large amount of hypocrisy involved. One of the requirements to attend the temple is that you live the Word of Wisdom (a health code). I have sat next to so many fat people that can barely fit on their chair. Yeah, they really have some high standards there.