Today's funny: Pope John Paul II now a Mormon? ....
-
_Rollo Tomasi
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 4085
- Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 12:27 pm
Today's funny: Pope John Paul II now a Mormon? ....
The latest issue of Sunstone reports that Pope John Paul II, who has been dead the requisite one year, has already been baptized and confirmed by proxy no less than 4 times (by 4 different persons in different LDS temples). Is it just me, or does this seem like overkill? At this rate, by year's end the dear Pontiff will have become LDS 50 times over! ;)
"Moving beyond apologist persuasion, LDS polemicists furiously (and often fraudulently) attack any non-traditional view of Mormonism. They don't mince words -- they mince the truth."
-- Mike Quinn, writing of the FARMSboys, in "Early Mormonism and the Magic World View," p. x (Rev. ed. 1998)
-- Mike Quinn, writing of the FARMSboys, in "Early Mormonism and the Magic World View," p. x (Rev. ed. 1998)
-
_Dr. Shades
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 14117
- Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 9:07 pm
Didn't they institute a rule recently that you could only submit the name of a relative?
Since the Pope is celibate, I think there would be very few living relatives of his--much less Mormon relatives--to do the submitting.
Since the Pope is celibate, I think there would be very few living relatives of his--much less Mormon relatives--to do the submitting.
"Finally, for your rather strange idea that miracles are somehow linked to the amount of gay sexual gratification that is taking place would require that primitive Christianity was launched by gay sex, would it not?"
--Louis Midgley
--Louis Midgley
-
_MormonMendacity
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 405
- Joined: Wed Nov 15, 2006 12:56 am
I think he was good enough that he'll only need to be baptized 20 times.
But at least 20, for sure!
But at least 20, for sure!
"Suppose we've chosen the wrong god. Every time we go to church we're just making him madder and madder" --Homer Simpson's version of Pascal's Wager
Religion began when the first scoundrel met the first fool.
Religion is ignorance reduced to a system.
Religion began when the first scoundrel met the first fool.
Religion is ignorance reduced to a system.
-
_Polygamy Porter
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 2204
- Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 6:04 am
A well known Mormon author told me that his inside sources found that Elvis' had his necro work performed over 1500 times.
Each time the proxy finished an ordinance in The Kings name, they would hear "Thannk you, Thank you very much!"
Temple workers also reported hearing the following later after the session ended, "Elvis has left the temple!"
Each time the proxy finished an ordinance in The Kings name, they would hear "Thannk you, Thank you very much!"
Temple workers also reported hearing the following later after the session ended, "Elvis has left the temple!"
-
_OUT OF MY MISERY
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 922
- Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 2:32 pm
coffeecat wrote:Well I'm probably a Mormon one million times now.
Cause I'm not dead but I am pretty sure I am a TMB
And what, exactly, is a "TMB", coffeecat?
Shades - The former pope may have had brothers and sisters who have had children. It is possible at least that he has living relatives even though he was celibate - not that that makes it probable that a living relative of his submitted his name to a temple.
"Kill all the lawyers!" - Walmart. Shakespeare
_________________
_________________
I seem to remember that Adolf Hitler had been Baptized for the Dead at least eight times on record. I think that a few more times than Ann Frank.
The point I have wondered about is why folks who think such a baptism has no efficacy are so upset by it. It stands more our less as an expression of one groups own way of caring about others. Whenever somebody tries to do something nice for me, I usually just say thank you - even if it was something I could do without. If I knew a group was having a séance to bless one of my dead relative, I would not be creeped out by it - even if it meant sacrificing a live chicken, nude clogging or Jell-O wrestling. I would just smile and say, "That's nice".
The point I have wondered about is why folks who think such a baptism has no efficacy are so upset by it. It stands more our less as an expression of one groups own way of caring about others. Whenever somebody tries to do something nice for me, I usually just say thank you - even if it was something I could do without. If I knew a group was having a séance to bless one of my dead relative, I would not be creeped out by it - even if it meant sacrificing a live chicken, nude clogging or Jell-O wrestling. I would just smile and say, "That's nice".
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
-
_Dr. Shades
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 14117
- Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 9:07 pm
What if some group held "excommunications for the dead" which were intended to cancel out your baptism, endowments, and temple marriage?
Would you be a little bit miffed if they put your parents' names through such a ceremony?
Would you be a little bit miffed if they put your parents' names through such a ceremony?
"Finally, for your rather strange idea that miracles are somehow linked to the amount of gay sexual gratification that is taking place would require that primitive Christianity was launched by gay sex, would it not?"
--Louis Midgley
--Louis Midgley
-
_Mister Scratch
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 5604
- Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 8:13 pm
moksha wrote:I seem to remember that Adolf Hitler had been Baptized for the Dead at least eight times on record. I think that a few more times than Ann Frank.
The point I have wondered about is why folks who think such a baptism has no efficacy are so upset by it. It stands more our less as an expression of one groups own way of caring about others. Whenever somebody tries to do something nice for me, I usually just say thank you - even if it was something I could do without. If I knew a group was having a séance to bless one of my dead relative, I would not be creeped out by it - even if it meant sacrificing a live chicken, nude clogging or Jell-O wrestling. I would just smile and say, "That's nice".
Yeah, I think that Shades makes a good point. And the problem is that the act cannot simply be read as "an expression of one group's own way of caring about others." It can *also* be read as the group feeling that its beliefs supercede everyone else's. The dual nature of the way this can be read becomes especially acute when people from the same family fight over whether or not the ordinances should be performed.