So I think there must be some other aspect of why the rub.
Yeah, Jews are really an unreasonable bunch, aren't they. I've said all I want to say to you on this subject.
Zadok: I did not have a faith crisis. I discovered that the Church was having a truth crisis. Maksutov: That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
sock puppet wrote:My point is that there is no uninvited 'help' of which to complain unless the one holding that view concedes that there is after-life legitimacy to the practice. If the Jewish people think is not legitimate, then so what? The implication that Jews lead an incomplete life religiously speaking is nothing to be offended by compared to the express proclamations to that effect by Mormon leaders claiming that only Mormonism can validly provide people with the saving ordinances.
Here's the difference: The "express proclamations" and such are the Mormons doing what Mormons do, while leaving the un-consenting "everyone else" out of it-- which is just fine by me. The baptism issue presents a scenario in which the church refuses to leave everyone else out of it (as many of us would prefer).
Relatedly, I really don't understand the idea that being bothered by the practice somehow implies its efficacy. It simply does not follow and I am baffled that it keeps getting repeated by so many people in various places. Being bothered by the act and the disrespect implied does not entail a belief in the legitimacy of the ordinance. I could be bothered by a voodoo lady casting a spell on me or my dead relatives without believing in voodoo. I don't see what is different in the case of posthumous ordinance work.
Drifting wrote:In the spirit of reconciliation perhaps the Church could introduce a temple ordinance of posthumous circumcision...
Excellent idea! A new calling. Necro-Mohel.
It wouldn't be effective. Proxies could do it only once.
Who would want to do it twice?
“We look to not only the spiritual but also the temporal, and we believe that a person who is impoverished temporally cannot blossom spiritually.” Keith McMullin - Counsellor in Presiding Bishopric
"One, two, three...let's go shopping!" Thomas S Monson - Prophet, Seer, Revelator
The church is blaming the member that submitted the name. Does anyone know if the church has made any announcement to the members during church meetings instructing them not to submit jewish names? How are the members supposed to know if they don't hear about it on the news?
"We have taken up arms in defense of our liberty, our property, our wives, and our children; we are determined to preserve them, or die." - Captain Moroni - 'Address to the Inhabitants of Canada' 1775
DarkHelmet wrote:The church is blaming the member that submitted the name. Does anyone know if the church has made any announcement to the members during church meetings instructing them not to submit jewish names? How are the members supposed to know if they don't hear about it on the news?
No. But we have been encouraged to do 'indexing' which seems to be the process of putting non member names onto a system whereby they can be posthumously baptised wether they or their families approve or not.
Guess we just didn't get the memo...
“We look to not only the spiritual but also the temporal, and we believe that a person who is impoverished temporally cannot blossom spiritually.” Keith McMullin - Counsellor in Presiding Bishopric
"One, two, three...let's go shopping!" Thomas S Monson - Prophet, Seer, Revelator
angsty wrote:I could be bothered by a voodoo lady casting a spell on me or my dead relatives without believing in voodoo. I don't see what is different in the case of posthumous ordinance work.
Why would it bother you then if you do not believe there's anything to voodoo?
DarkHelmet wrote:The church is blaming the member that submitted the name. Does anyone know if the church has made any announcement to the members during church meetings instructing them not to submit jewish names? How are the members supposed to know if they don't hear about it on the news?
Dustin Hoffman, Ben Stiller, Owen Wilson you hear those names on the news. What about Barbra Jones, David Owens and Frank Kloshlibom. How can one know which name is Jewish and which isn't from reading an index card?... Mr. Helmet?
DarkHelmet wrote:The church is blaming the member that submitted the name. Does anyone know if the church has made any announcement to the members during church meetings instructing them not to submit jewish names? How are the members supposed to know if they don't hear about it on the news?
Dustin Hoffman, Ben Stiller, Owen Wilson you hear those names on the news. What about Barbra Jones, David Owens and Frank Kloshlibom. How can one know which name is Jewish and which isn't from reading an index card?... Mr. Helmet?
I would have no idea which names are Jewish and which aren't. It's not my problem. The church promised the jewish community they would stop baptizing Jews. I'm just wondering how they are planning to keep that promise.
"We have taken up arms in defense of our liberty, our property, our wives, and our children; we are determined to preserve them, or die." - Captain Moroni - 'Address to the Inhabitants of Canada' 1775
Doctor Scratch wrote:The hypocrisy here is that you get people like Scott Lloyd who claim that they wouldn't care if other religious groups were doing things on their behalf. Well, Scottie Dog--I hate to break it to you, but all that pamphleteering, protesting, and arguing about the LDS Church being a cult... *That* is them doing things on your behalf. These folks are concerned about your soul, you rather than dismissing them as anti-Mormon bigots, you really ought to be thanking them.
LOL!!! Wonderful, Doctor.
I am sure that Scottie Dog et alii would not have a problem with Evangelicals gathering in their chapels to pray for the souls of benighted Mormons. Being yelled at as one walks into the temple or into the Hill Cumorah Pageant is a little more irritating. I mean, are Mormons walking up to random Jews, grabbing them, and dunking them in water for their ancestors? That would be a little more invasive.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
So I think there must be some other aspect of why the rub.
Yeah, Jews are really an unreasonable bunch, aren't they. I've said all I want to say to you on this subject.
Yes, I do think there is something unreasonable about this complaint. No one has immunity from some jerk walking up to you and rudely proclaiming his personal political or religious views to you because he thinks his are better than yours. All of this bellyaching about proxy baptisms is the equivalent of saying that there should be a sacrosanct status accorded to one group that gives them immunity from proselyting or any symbolic gesture performed by another religious group that they do not approve of. It is, in short, absurd.
I want an injunction against anyone saying a prayer on my behalf. If I find that anyone of you has ignored my obviously just request, I will go on television and decry you as a barbarian who does not respect my non-belief. You are obviously a theocratic imperialist, if you don't respect my wishes.
Remember, we non-theists are a persecuted minority. We will not remain quiet while you oppress us with your prayers that disrespect our non-believing identities.
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist