Is baptism for the dead really Christian?

[_Melchett]

Another newbie with a question.

If baptism for the dead is done through genealogy, then surely there are millions of people that are undocumented that this ritual couldn't be carried out on? What happens to these? Are they damned for all time?

no one has said they are "damned" at all either for short time or all time.
However, the assumption that those who are undocumented will never ever be documented is unsupported.
Perhaps there will always be those who remain in the tomb of the unknown, but for us to speculate at what the future will or will not bring is rather irrelevant.
I would be curious how you would go about proving that there is, in fact, someone incapable of ever being undocumented or that has never been documented by any means.


winkle out the spy

Okay, let's say that they won't get into the Kingdom of God.

You have support that the undocumented will be documented? How do you prove that?

[_Melchett]

winkle out the spy

I suggest putting 'something' between two flowery baps, and shouting "Dinner time Fido" ;)

[_subgenius]

You have support that the undocumented will be documented? How do you prove that?

By the US Census?
By Immigration and Naturalization Services?
Here is a mild example, albeit anecdotal.
My mother was not a member of the LDS Church. She was undocumented within the LDS church....she was "unknown" to the church.
Since my conversion and baptism i have since documented her existence and relation to myself and other members of my family.
Now she is documented.

your turn.

[_Melchett]

By the US Census?
By Immigration and Naturalization Services?
Here is a mild example, albeit anecdotal.
My mother was not a member of the LDS Church. She was undocumented within the LDS church....she was "unknown" to the church.
Since my conversion and baptism i have since documented her existence and relation to myself and other members of my family.
Now she is documented.

your turn.

Why thank you!

What about ancestors from Europe, let's say 13th Century. Where would you go to get the documents of these individuals so that these people can be baptized?

[_subgenius]

What about ancestors from Europe, let's say 13th Century. Where would you go to get the documents of these individuals so that these people can be baptized?

well, i no longer subscribe to ancestry.com, but that is one potential source, especially since i have lineage already traced back across the pond...another is to actually travel to Birchfield England and reference their records, etc..
interestingly enough i knew a fellow whose only mention of a distant relative was in a court journal, it was an obscure reference about an incident where a Spanish (Moorish) soldier had shot this relative with an arrow. Time period was about 750ad. or some such time.
Point being, with diaries, official records, and other various archaeological evidences, it is likely that one could "document" most people that have "been" since this particular ordinance came into effect.

now, i believe it was your turn

[_Melchett]

This is where I get lost. The particular ordinance came into effect in 1840? Everyone up to that point was ushered into the kingdom without any problem, or are they in a celestial waiting room until their name is called?

I've looked into my family history, went to Ireland to try and get more information, but the trail went cold. Records lost and destroyed of family that were living after 1840. There is nothing in existence that I can find before 1878. I'm also a member of Ancestry, and there is nothing there too. That's 38 years of missing family before the (possible) magic date.

[_Darth J]

Based on Subgenius' couple of anecdotes, I think we can safely infer that every human being who has been born since Christ walked the Earth has reliable documentation somewhere that will prove his or her existence.

[_canpakes]

Another newbie with a question.

If baptism for the dead is done through genealogy, then surely there are millions of people that are undocumented that this ritual couldn't be carried out on? What happens to these? Are they damned for all time?

no one has said they are "damned" at all either for short time or all time.
However, the assumption that those who are undocumented will never ever be documented is unsupported.
Perhaps there will always be those who remain in the tomb of the unknown, but for us to speculate at what the future will or will not bring is rather irrelevant.
I would be curious how you would go about proving that there is, in fact, someone incapable of ever being undocumented or that has never been documented by any means.

Interesting. Even today there are small bands of indigenous peoples living within South America who survive in relatively primitive fashion and who have never had a need to record anything, let alone keep birth records stretching back thousands of years.

Within Europe, the same lack of record-keeping seems to have been the norm through the greater part of that continent's history.

I appreciate the optimism in your statement above but practical realities make it a hard sell.

Any thoughts on why a proxy ceremony for an individual who has passed away still would be valid if baptism is a personal choice of personal conviction? I've heard this described as 'offering the option' to the dead but I'm not quite following that rationale.

[_canpakes]

This is where I get lost. The particular ordinance came into effect in 1840? Everyone up to that point was ushered into the kingdom without any problem, or are they in a celestial waiting room until their name is called?

i gt a bit lost here as well. My understanding is that Joseph's vision of his brother Alvin being in the CK sans baptism led Joseph to institute baptism for the dead. But, that would not seem to make much sense.

I am related to LDS through marriage and would like to understand the LDS point-of-view on many things but I have discovered that asking the kinds of questions that would lead me to gaining a better perspective on LDS positions either yield answers that are lacking in detail or end up being awkward exchanges... hence my turn to this forum.

[_subgenius]

Interesting. Even today there are small bands of indigenous peoples living within South America who survive in relatively primitive fashion and who have never had a need to record anything, let alone keep birth records stretching back thousands of years.

then how could one possibly make the brash proclamation that these people have been living there "thousands of years".
In fact you can only speak to their current existence, and with that they become "documented".

Within Europe, the same lack of record-keeping seems to have been the norm through the greater part of that continent's history.

pretty sure no one has ever seen Christ's birth certificate, or even Ghengis Khan's....try not have such a narrow focused post.

I appreciate the optimism in your statement above but practical realities make it a hard sell.

exactly what practical realities are you referring to?
200 years ago if you described ancestry.com to a person they would think you were nuts and would likely claim that such "documentation" would be impossible, because it was not a "practical reality".

Any thoughts on why a proxy ceremony for an individual who has passed away still would be valid if baptism is a personal choice of personal conviction? I've heard this described as 'offering the option' to the dead but I'm not quite following that rationale.

then i suggest you also reference Elaine Pagels work on Gnostics, and, of course, read the Book of Mormon.