Mormon Discussions

Mormon Discussions...because we all want the truth.Here is a place of free discussion. Whether you want to discuss the finer intricacies of doctrine, or whether you want to discuss the truthiness of the church in general, your word will be heard here.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Baptism for the dead - more robust solution.

View previous topic View next topic Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

1 Baptism for the dead - more robust solution. on Fri Mar 30, 2012 2:27 am

Jesus Christ was the Saviour of the world. He suffered and died for the sins of the world when he was crucified. His sacrifice was a symbolic act for and in behalf of every person who had ever lived or was ever going to live on the earth.

So...

It is therefore proven that one person could be symbolically baptised for and in behalf of every person who has ever lived in one act of posthumous baptism.

Thomas S Monson could visit the temple today and complete one posthuomous symbolic baptism that would cover everyone who has thus far died without hearing the Gospel.

This could be repeated annually by whoever was Prophet and would:

A. Save the cost of building and operating all those temples.
B. Be more effective in processing every single dead person.
C. Avoid human errors in genealogy work.
D. Be non offensive to other groups of non Mormon people.

It would be far more effective in delivering the objective of allowing all people the option of accepting the gospel. A similar process could be applied to all the other ordinances.

View user profile
Drifting1 wrote:Jesus Christ was the Saviour of the world. He suffered and died for the sins of the world when he was crucified. His sacrifice was a symbolic act for and in behalf of every person who had ever lived or was ever going to live on the earth.

So...

It is therefore proven that one person could be symbolically baptised for and in behalf of every person who has ever lived in one act of posthumous baptism.

Thomas S Monson could visit the temple today and complete one posthuomous symbolic baptism that would cover everyone who has thus far died without hearing the Gospel.

This could be repeated annually by whoever was Prophet and would:

A. Save the cost of building and operating all those temples.
B. Be more effective in processing every single dead person.
C. Avoid human errors in genealogy work.
D. Be non offensive to other groups of non Mormon people.

It would be far more effective in delivering the objective of allowing all people the option of accepting the gospel. A similar process could be applied to all the other ordinances.

Actually, your example is a little flawed. Christ, himself, was baptized. Before John the Baptist baptized him, John was perplexed and said "It is you who should be baptizing me!"

Christ, however, wanted John to baptize him as an example that baptism is an ordinance needed for all...even Christ, the only perfect person to walk the earth.

The ordinance of baptism is different from the atonement.

View user profile http://mormondiscussions.forumotion.com
AdminLiz wrote:
Drifting1 wrote:Jesus Christ was the Saviour of the world. He suffered and died for the sins of the world when he was crucified. His sacrifice was a symbolic act for and in behalf of every person who had ever lived or was ever going to live on the earth.

So...

It is therefore proven that one person could be symbolically baptised for and in behalf of every person who has ever lived in one act of posthumous baptism.

Thomas S Monson could visit the temple today and complete one posthuomous symbolic baptism that would cover everyone who has thus far died without hearing the Gospel.

This could be repeated annually by whoever was Prophet and would:

A. Save the cost of building and operating all those temples.
B. Be more effective in processing every single dead person.
C. Avoid human errors in genealogy work.
D. Be non offensive to other groups of non Mormon people.

It would be far more effective in delivering the objective of allowing all people the option of accepting the gospel. A similar process could be applied to all the other ordinances.

Actually, your example is a little flawed. Christ, himself, was baptized. Before John the Baptist baptized him, John was perplexed and said "It is you who should be baptizing me!"

Christ, however, wanted John to baptize him as an example that baptism is an ordinance needed for all...even Christ, the only perfect person to walk the earth.

The ordinance of baptism is different from the atonement.

Atonement used to be done individually too - animal by animal. Then Jesus sped up the process. Let's follow his example.

View user profile
White Buffalo wrote:Atonement used to be done individually too - animal by animal. Then Jesus sped up the process. Let's follow his example.

Actually, my understanding is that the animal sacrifice was done prior to Christ's crucifixion and resurrection. Christ's atonement fulfilled the law, and animal sacrifice was no longer necessary due to that fulfillment. Today, we symbolize Christ's atonement with the Sacrament.

I agree, however, that symbolism and processes can certainly change and evolve.

Drifting's suggestion does have merit, particularly with the current economy.

I do think that there is something very spiritual and satisfying about being baptized for a relative who has passed away.

I really think that if we focused primarily on those folks in our own genealogy who need temple work done, it would go a long way to alleviate offense taken for, say, Holocaust victims, etc. The random submission of names would be less likely to happen.

View user profile http://mormondiscussions.forumotion.com
AdminLiz wrote:
White Buffalo wrote:Atonement used to be done individually too - animal by animal. Then Jesus sped up the process. Let's follow his example.

Actually, my understanding is that the animal sacrifice was done prior to Christ's crucifixion and resurrection. Christ's atonement fulfilled the law, and animal sacrifice was no longer necessary due to that fulfillment. Today, we symbolize Christ's atonement with the Sacrament.

I agree, however, that symbolism and processes can certainly change and evolve.

Drifting's suggestion does have merit, particularly with the current economy.

I do think that there is something very spiritual and satisfying about being baptized for a relative who has passed away.

I really think that if we focused primarily on those folks in our own genealogy who need temple work done, it would go a long way to alleviate offense taken for, say, Holocaust victims, etc. The random submission of names would be less likely to happen.

As ordinances go, baptism is a pretty cool experience. Just the physicality of going underneath the water, and imagining that suddenly you're different. Pretty strong psychological stuff.

I'd much rather do baptisms for the dead than sit through two hours of Masonic handshake-o-rama.

View user profile

Sponsored content


View previous topic View next topic Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum