Straight Answers to Fox’s 21 Questions about the Mormon Church

Parchment and Pen ^ | Rob Bowman

[JAKraig]

I have read that deceased persons can be baptized by proxy in the Mormon Temple. And Mormons are encouraged to do genealogy research for their ancestors and get as many of them baptized by proxy as they can. I am asking if it is more a matter of expense (how much does it cost?) or lack of information on the deceased ancestor? Thus, the genealogy database kept in Salt Lake City.

____________________________________________________

There is no expense. Yes the building where the baptism is performed is expensive, and one of the requirements for entering the “Temple” is to be a “full tithe payer”, but there is no expense for having someone baptized. Any person can do family research and take it to a Mormon and ask them to have the people (already dead for a year) baptized. Mormons don’t believe that having a proxy baptism in and of itself does anything for the person being baptized. My understanding is that they teach that if a person accepts the Gospel in the next life after having no opportunity in the physical life then the requirement of being baptized has been done for them, they can accept it or reject it.

It is easy to laugh about this doctrine but as far as I know no other Christian church teaches that there is any way that a baby who dies at birth to go any place but straight to Hell.

I think if I were asking candidates questions I would ask if they believe that if someone never heard the Gospel of Christ are they doomed to hell? That ought to get a few interesting responses.

[nesnah]

“I know crap when I see it.”

Me too.

[Domandred]

and costly Temple ceremonies

Er what? Last time I went to the Temple it cost me gas in my car but that was it.

[colorcountry]

Obviously drunknsage, you never made it to the Temple where you learn your new secret name and that of your wife, the secret handshakes (tokens) that will get you trhough the veil and into the Celestial Kingdom, and the plan of salvation where you can become a god.

But, that really is a good thing, perhaps you weren’t as messed up as I was from it.

[JAKraig]

. . . . you learn your new secret name and that of your wife, the secret handshakes (tokens) that will get you trhough the veil and into the Celestial Kingdom. . . .

________________________________________________________

My understanding is that all that is symbolic, and sacred not secret. I’m pretty sure all that stuff is posted in a variety of places on the Internet.

I think most churches, religions for that matter have a history of symbols.

[i_dont_chat]

You said: Er what? Last time I went to the Temple it cost me gas in my car but that was it.

I guess you haven't been following.

If a Mormon so wishes, he can arrange for a formal ceremony in the Temple where his dead ancestor(s) can be baptized in proxy. I asked does anyone know how much this costs?

This belief that deceased persons can be baptized by proxy is the reason why the huge database of genealogy information is gathered and stored in Salt Lake City. Mormons are encouraged to see that their ancestors (although deceased) are baptized by proxy. And the genealogy data is helpful to them in identifying their ancestors, prior to their baptism by proxy.

Does that explain it? I wasn't saying that YOU had to pay to go to Temple. But what about this baptism by proxy? Do you know anything about that?

[Degaston]

>> What specifically does the Mormon Church say about
>>African-Americans and Native Americans
 
>> I'm with you...who wrote that question. Also the answer
>> doesn't really even fit with the question.
 
That question was specifically a present-day racism bait. Its well-known that the Mormon church in June 1978 stopped their prohibition against Blacks of African descent from holding the priesthood, participating in temple ordinances and serving as full-time missionaries. This change in policy is oftentimes used as a defense against charges from critics that Mormons are racist. For example, Brigham Young taught that the Law of the Lord on Interracial marriage was death on the spot. And since he also taught quite clearly that every sermon he preached was scripture this teaching of his was taken quite seriously by faithful church members to mean that interracial marriages were forever prohibited. In fact Mark E. Peterson of the Council of the Twelve specifically insisted in 1978 that it be understood that this prohibition was not being lifted. For the most part Mormonism has moved past that now and nobody in acknowledged authority ever talks or encourages racism in public or private.
 
The point of mentioning the Native Americans is because the church still professes the Book of Mormon to be true and this book is very racist. People being cursed by God with dark skin and loathsomeness for being wicked? People getting white skin and delightsomeness for repenting? If that's not racism then what is?

[broncobilly]

The garbage comes in with the selective quoting, exaggeration, mocking tone, distortions, taking out of context, etc. You don’t have to go to those books. Those books have come to these threads. It is what you see here on the anti-Mormon posts and more of the same

[Domandred]

I think most churches, religions for that matter have a history of symbols.

Christian Symbols

[Zakeet]

I think your posts on Mormonism are dispicable. But setting that aside, let me give you some hints on your last mocking post.

I wasn't trying to mock your faith. I merely asked a valid question. If I offended you somehow, I apologize.

Suppose someone prays and wants to receive inspiration or knowledge from God.

I get very nervous when somebody tells me I should pray to receive revelation. Isn't that what Muslims and JW's teach? Are they not every bit as convinced they are right as Mormons? And as a Mormon, don't you reject claims that their faith is true?

I say to the whole world, receive the truth, no matter who presents it to you. Take up the Bible, compare the religion of the Latter-day Saints with it, and see if it will stand the test … I am more afraid that this people have so much confidence in their leaders that they will not inquire for themselves of God whether they are led by Him … let every man and woman know themselves, whether their leaders are walking in the path the Lord dictates or not. This has been my exhortation continually. (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, 16:46, as cited by Harold B. Lee, Conference Report, October 1950, pp. 129-130).

We are not so much concerned whether your thoughts are orthodox or heterodox as we are that you shall have thoughts … while all members should respect, support, and heed the teaching of the Authorities of the Church, no one should accept a statement and base his testimony upon it, no matter who makes it, until he has, under mature examination found it to be true and worthwhile; then his logical deductions may be confirmed by the spirit of revelation to his spirit because real conversion must come from within." (President Hugh B. Brown, a member of the LDS First Presidency, Dialog, Summer 1984, p. 15).

As you can see above, your Church Leaders have said I am should to examine the evidence, and should do so before I pray for revelation. Do you agree with their teaching? If so, doesn't the question I asked HERE still stand?

[PAR35]

Now that is religious bigotry and I didn’t need to even click on the silly link.

Even the LDS acknowledge it as historical fact.

[org.whodat]

Denying history?

No, next week I plan on finding some Romans and kick their rears for making slaves out of my ancestors. "Sac Off"

[org.whodat]

Even the LDS acknowledge it as historical fact.

Could you point out where I said it wasn't.

[broncobilly]

scheme well-meaning people out of their money on his treasure-hunting exploits

---

I disagree with your premise.

However, on the point of who God chooses for his work, it often is beyond the understanding of those watching from the outside. Why did he chose the young man David or the child Samuel. Why did he choose a hated tax collector, Matthew. Why did he choose the hot headed “sons of thunder” John and James? Why on earth did he choose Saul, who was busy persecuting Christians? What God sees is not necessarily what the world sees.

[greyfoxx39]

One of your co-religionsts is having second thoughts about the whole Romney thing:

It troubles me that attacks like these will probably just get worse as the campaign heats up. It's not that I think our religion can't handle the scrutiny. I just don't think the slings and arrows of a bloodthirsty 21st century political campaign are the best way to tease out spiritual truth.

I'm tired of being a punch line and a punching bag. If the only way to get Mormonism out of the arena is to get Romney out of the race, then I'm counting the days. This is one Mormon who would rather have a little civility and tolerance than one of our own in the White House.

Ken Jennings ( Jennings won a record $2.52 million on "Jeopardy!")

Just curious...would YOU agree with Jennings? You may FM me if you care to answer.

[Degaston]

About the Book of Mormon (BoM) and Native Americans (NA) .... the BoM has been “sold” by Mormons since at least 1830 as being a record of the ancestors of the NA(s). One big problem for Mormon scientists in recent years is that scientists of many disciplines such as anthropology, archaelogy, linguistics and most recently genetics have found NO evidence of any of the ancient civilizations of millions of people that the Book of Mormon talks about. An even bigger problem for the church is that its now officially quite silent on this matter whereas in the past they were quite vocal in proclaiming what heavenly messengers like Moroni had to say on this subject.

[Domandred]

I asked does anyone know how much this costs?...I wasn't saying that YOU had to pay to go to Temple.

It cost the individual nothing. Yes building the temples themselves probably costs the church a considerable amount, but it also costs other churches a considerable amount to build their places of worship as well. I misread your statement though and thought you were asking how much each individual pays, which is zero.

But what about this baptism by proxy? Do you know anything about that?

You actually pretty much answered that question in your post. One of our temple ordinances is baptism for the dead in which those that have not been baptized for whatever reason can receive baptism. Baptism for the deceased is done by proxy.

The church also gathers geneological data not only for temple services but also so that members can learn about their ancesctors.

For example without that geneology I would not have learned about my families immigration to the US and their migration westward. I'm only second generation LDS so my family did not come west via the Mormon migrations but were homesteaders, pony express riders, confederate soldiers, yankee soldiers, fought for the British in the revolution (sorry for that btw :) ), etc etc. I *might* have been able to learn my family history without the LDS church but the church made it much easier.

Non-members are allowed to the LDS geneology library and use the churches geneology resources for their own family history research btw.

[Old Mountain man]

Well, grey, I have NEVER stated on this forum or anywhere else that I supported Governor Romney. Actually, my favorite was Hunter, second was Fred and Romney was a distinct third. I am a small l libertarian-conservative and Hunter fits the bill about as well as my personal hero, Ronald Reagan.

As for my faith, it can stand all the slings and arrows you and the rest of FR in conjunction with the Liberal Democrats care to send our way. Our faith is strong because we have Jesus Christ’s own Church.

[greyfoxx39]

So, I guess my question is, would you prefer Romney to stay in the race? What are you hearing from members of your ward? Do you see this is a grand missionary opportunity?

I no longer have any contact with members in my non-FR life, most of the members are now dead. Don't have anyone that would tell me what their feelings are on the subject.

[Theo]

Is the Mormon religion so laughable that discussing it somehow “smears” those who adhere to it?