Mormons

Started by tlbauerle119 pages
Originally posted by Darth Jello
i'd like to bring up the strained relationship between mormons and jews. see, we were some of the biggest supporters of mormons after they emerged as a new faith since we were the most tolerant towards their beliefs. Unfortunately, since the holocaust relations are bad. The church of latter day saints has made it a policy to baptize holocaust victims. We consider that grave desecration and have told mormons to stop. and each time they said they would, only to lie and continue doing it. Now, we don't pee on mormon graves so stop desecrating ours. If you are mormon and know of any of these sermons or projects taking place, tell whoever's running them that no means no.

Baptism for the Dead is seen as one of the most important doctrinal practices in the Church, and something we believe is essential for the afterlife. Now Baptisms for the Dead, as I understand, are only done for people who have family names submitted to the church by a family member.

If someone is related to holocaust victims, they have a right to submit that name for Baptism by proxy. I cannot submit a name I am not related to.

However, the doctrine of Baptism for the Dead is based upon that individual's acceptance of the ordinance in the afterlife. It doesn't mean anything otherwise.

Therefore, if people are confident a person, of Jewish faith for example, would reject having this done in the afterlife...being baptized doesn't matter then.... it doesn't force them to be LDS. It doesn't change the past in regard to how that person lived their life as a Jew.

We feel we have a right to do the work for people we are related to.

from wikipedia-
Baptism for the Dead

A longtime practice of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has been to vicariously baptize their ancestors, both direct lineal ancestors and related lines. This stems from the LDS belief that all individuals must receive all saving ordinances to achieve exaltation. To receive the ordinances of baptism and other temple ordinances does not make an individual a Mormon, but rather allows them the option of accepting said ordinances performed on their behalf. From time to time zealous Latter-day Saint genealogists have submitted the names of other prominent individuals, including at one point the Holocaust's Jewish victims and others. Official Church policy states that Church members submit the names of their own relatives for these type of ordinances, and requires that a surviving family member's permission be obtained for any Baptism that is to be performed of deceased individuals that have died within a certain time period (usually 50–75 years).

However, some Baptisms were done for Holocaust victims, without proper approval or permission. When this information became public, it generated vocal criticism of the LDS Church (though not rising to the level of anti-Mormonism) from Jewish groups, who found this ritual to be insulting and insensitive (though not rising to the level of anti-Semitism). Partly as a result of public pressure, Church leaders in 1995 promised to put into place new policies that would help stop the practice, unless specifically requested or approved by relatives of the victims.

In late 2002, information surfaced that members of the Church had not stopped this practice despite directives from the Church leadership to its members, and criticism from Jewish groups began again. The Simon Wiesenthal Center, Los Angeles, is on record as opposing the vicarious baptism of Holocaust victims. Rabbi Marvin Hier of the Center said: "If these people did not contact the Mormons themselves, the adage should be: Don't call me, I'll call you. With the greatest of respect to them, we do not think they are the exclusive arbitrators of who is saved." Recently Church leaders have agreed to meet with leaders of the World Gathering of Jewish Holocaust Survivors.

In December 2002, independent researcher Helen Radkey published a report showing that the Church's 1995 promise to remove Jewish Nazi victims from its International Genealogical Index was not sufficient; her research of the Church's database uncovered the names of about 19,000 who had a 40 to 50 percent chance of having "the potential to be Holocaust victims...in Russia, Poland, France, and Austria."

Genealogist Bernard Kouchel conducted a search of the International Genealogical Index, and discovered that many well-known Jews have been vicariously baptized, including Rashi, Maimonides, Albert Einstein, Menachem Begin, Irving Berlin, Marc Chagall, and Gilda Radner. Some permissions may have been obtained, but there is currently no system in place to verify that these permissions were obtained, which has angered many in various religious and cultural communities.

In 2004, Schelly Talalay Dardashti, Jewish genealogy columnist for The Jerusalem Post, noted that Jews, even those with no Mormon descendants, are being rebaptized after being removed from the rolls. In an interview, D. Todd Christofferson, a church official, told The New York Times that it was not feasible for the church to continuously monitor the archives to ensure that no new Jewish names appear. The agreement referred to above did not place this type of responsibility on the centralized Church leadership.

On April 11, 2005, Jewish and Mormon officials met and created a joint Jewish/Mormon committee with the goal of preventing future issues. The committee will attempt to determine how the names kept getting on the list, and how the problem can be solved. Jews will have their names removed from the vast LDS genealogy database, and any new names of deceased Jews will require approval from both Jewish and Mormon members of the committee.

See also: the Holocaust memorial http://www1.yadvashem.org/remembrance/names/site/home_names.html Mormon Genealogy search - http://lds.about.com/od/mormongenealogy/

i mean, we view it as insulting as when romanian communities used to dig up graves and stake corpses basd on tradition.

Okay...I see nothing new in that article I didn't already know.

It hasn't been an official practice of the church to baptize those whom members are not related to for years. Yeah, it happens sometimes. But its not condoned.

We just believe differently on its importance.

Originally posted by ~dorkerina~
And uh.. 😱 Cinafran! *glomps* took you long enough!

*points to cinafran*
She is my good pal. 😊

😮 Don't be mad at me. I don't get online all that much anymore.

😄 Thanks for the good pal thing. Makes me feel special. 😆

But you do agree with my basic premise that it is grave desecration, don't you?

No, I don't believe that is 'grave desecration'.

how is it not?

How is it grave desecration? It's not like we baptize the actual bodies of the deceased. We baptize by representing the deceased. If in the end, the Mormon church is true, then we will have given those without the chance at baptism the chance. If it's not, what harm is there?

um, it's disrespectful and in the case of jews, against the wishes of the deceased. How would you like it if jews started coming in and ritually circumcizing everyone on their deathbeds just so they would supposedly have a free pass to heaven? Besides, isn't baptism only genuine if the person is willfully baptized?

I'm having issues. Like...the kind that got me onto probation. I need my Bishop, but we keep missing each other's calls! WAAAHHH!

I think I'll read my scriptures tonight....for a long time. 🙁

Oh...I wanted to post my favorite song...or one of them.

In Gethsemane

Holy man...that holy place...moments away from being betrayed.
What made Him stay there and bare the weight of all my sins?
King of Kings...on bended knee...descending below all things and feeling such pain. And though He trembled He never shrank from the bitter cup.

And bitter winds may blow and the world may be cold, but when I kneel with broken dreams, I see Him there in Gethsemane...and I am saved by the gift He gave, cuz He changed everything for me...in Gethsemane.

From creations dawn, till the end of time...no greater sacrifice...no greater love.
So much humility the son of God…suffering all for me.

And bitter winds may blow...and the world may be cold, but when I kneel with broken dreams I see Him there in Gethsemane...and I am saved by the gift He gave...cuz He changed everything for me…in Gethsemane.

Holy man…that holy place. He saved me…He saved me.

________________________

It's on a CD called Heal Me. It's a very beautiful Cd that I happened upon in the temple bookstore over in Baton Rouge. I'm really glad I bought it.

🙂

because it's ****ing insulting especially when a faith doesn't listen and baptizes jews anyway. that's called disrespect and intolerance.

I've been baptised for hundreds of Spanish women named Maria. Other than that...I've been baptised for about 100 to 200 German and French named women.

If they don't approve...then they have the choice to deny it. If our religion is a bunch of crap...then apparently it has no meaning anyway right? So your low tolerance of our practices must mean that you find some validity in our faith. thanks for that.

I'm not trying to start a fight. I understand your feelings about it. Still, it's not your choice. It's a name...that's all it is. If there is someone that belongs to that name...they have the choice whether to accept it or not. The dead are not as dead as you may think. They are alive and well in a place that we are not familiar with. They are perfectly capable of making the choices to accept or deny. Just as if you took LDS names and baptised them as Jews. In the next part of the journey I still have choice. I can choose to accept your gift of salvation or deny it.

Out of the hundreds I've been baptised for I have only seen one or two deny it...well, they just weren't there. So many though are there (in spirit of course) and they are eagerly awaiting their turn.

Don't be so offended though Darth...no one in this forum is to blame for any "desecration" of the Jewish beliefs. Most of us deal with family baptisms. I do anyway.

let me go get my stake, mallet, a shovel, and some specially sanctified left-handed pinking shears, I'm gonna save the human race.

Originally posted by Darth Jello
um, it's disrespectful and in the case of jews, against the wishes of the deceased. How would you like it if jews started coming in and ritually circumcizing everyone on their deathbeds just so they would supposedly have a free pass to heaven? Besides, isn't baptism only genuine if the person is willfully baptized?
.

Okay...that's a silly comparison. One is a symbolic act by proxy, and another is a physical act.

How can you say it is against the wishes of all deceased Jews?

I know a Jewish convert who is very active in her family history for temple ordinances. Is that disrespectful?

The people can choose to accept it or deny it.

uh yeah it is. It's disrespectful to the dead and other family members who have no say in the matter.

See, this is another thing puzzles me about other faiths. Why do they insist on proscelitizing and converting everyone else instead of just leaving people alone?

Originally posted by Darth Jello
um, it's disrespectful and in the case of jews, against the wishes of the deceased. How would you like it if jews started coming in and ritually circumcizing everyone on their deathbeds just so they would supposedly have a free pass to heaven? Besides, isn't baptism only genuine if the person is willfully baptized?
Yes, that was my impression also. For a baptism to be meaningful, it has to be the decision of the person baptised. They have to be involved in the decision.

And they are involved in the acceptance or rejection of it.

If it is rejected, it is meaningless. If it is accepted, then they are grateful.

As far as proselyting goes, people have been preaching for thousands of years. There certainly are people glad to hear the message. I feel responsible for sharing my knowledge with others.

Originally posted by Darth Jello
uh yeah it is. It's disrespectful to the dead and other family members who have no say in the matter.

See, this is another thing puzzles me about other faiths. Why do they insist on proscelitizing and converting everyone else instead of just leaving people alone?


Those we baptize for have say in the matter. They can accept it or reject it. If they want it, we're doing them a favor. If they don't, they don't have to accept it and it's meaningless.

Conversion is again, a choice. No one has to accept it. They choose to do so. I feel my faith is something worth sharing with others. It has brought so much happiness to my life. If others don't want to hear about it, then I won't tell them.