|
  
|
A single reference to baptism for the
dead exists in the New Testament, 1
Corinthians 15:29. A modern religious organization has taken
this verse and created a doctrinal system that includes baptism by proxy.
Is this a valid doctrine? If so, the majority of religious
organizations must change their practices and begin baptism by proxy.
If not, this doctrine is of men and must be discarded by those who
practice it before their worship is anything other than vain (Matthew
15:9).
Let's consider what must be true before
baptism by proxy for the dead can be valid. First, the dead must
have unforgiven sin. Else why would one who is living be baptized
for them by proxy? Second, the unforgiven sin of the dead must be
capable of being forgiven. Again, if their sin cannot be forgiven,
baptism by proxy is a waste of time. Third, the dead must be capable
of fulfilling the requirements for baptism as outlined in the NT. As
we studied earlier, the NT has specific requirements one must fulfill
before baptism can be valid. The dead must also be capable of
fulfilling these requirements if baptism by proxy is a valid doctrine.
Let's look at each of these necessities
as we evaluate baptism by proxy. Are there those who die in an
unforgiven state? Most certainly so. Jesus tells us in John
8:24 that "ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe
not that I am He, ye shall die in your sins." Clearly there are
those who have died and will die in a sinful state.
Next, are the unforgiven sins of the
dead capable of being forgiven? Let's move back a few verses in John
8 as we consider this question. Notice what Jesus says in verse
21: "I go my way, and ye shall seek me, and shall die in
your sins: whither I go, ye cannot come." What did Jesus
say?!! "Whither I go, ye cannot come." Where was
Jesus going? Jesus tells us in John
14:12: He was going to His Father! Where is His Father?
He tells us in Matthew
7:21: in heaven! So, Jesus tells us in John 8:21 that
those who die in their sins cannot go to heaven with Him! We
use the word "cannot" frequently in the English language.
What does it mean? Merriam-Webster defines cannot
as "to be unable to do otherwise than." What does
"unable" mean? Within the definition for this word we find
the word "incapable."
Merriam-Webster tells us that one who is incapable lacks the capacity,
ability, or qualification for the purpose or end in view. So, Jesus
tells us that the one who dies in their sins is unable to enter into
heaven. Let's look at the Greek words used in John 8:21. The
verse is transliterated as "Where I go away you are not able to
come." The Greek word translated "able" is dunamai
and means, "to be able", or "to be capable."
However, this word is preceded by the absolute negative ou,
which means "no" or "not". Ou represents
an absolute denial, while another Greek word, mee,
expresses qualified negation. Consider Jesus' words in John
3:18. "He that believeth not is condemned already, because
he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God."
Here the word translated "not" is mee. So if one believes
(pisteuo) in the
name of the only begotten Son of God, one may escape condemnation.
The negative is qualified. However, Jesus does not use the qualified
negative in John 8:21. He uses the word expressing absolute denial.
So Jesus tells us that those who die in their sins will be absolutely
unable to go where He is. This verse tells us that those who die in
their sins have their eternal destiny already determined--they will be
absolutely unable to go to heaven (where He is)! Since the sinner
who dies unforgiven cannot enter heaven, the answer to question number 9
has already been discovered. We should not be baptized for the dead,
since the sinner who dies unforgiven cannot enter heaven. But let's
continue with our analysis of this doctrine (which we now know to be
false).
Can the dead fulfill the requirements
for baptism as outlined in the NT? When Paul tells us that faith
cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God (Romans
10:17), how is it that one hears? A few verses earlier Paul
tells us that one hears the word spoken by a preacher (Romans
10:14). Do preachers preach to living or dead individuals?
To living individuals. Is an unforgiven sinner who dies capable of
developing the faith necessary prior to baptism? No! We know
that eventually everyone will believe as they stand before God at the day
of judgment. Is this the belief one must have prior to baptism?
No! Consider again the definition of the word translated
"believe" in the gospels. Vine's
tells us pisteuo signifies reliance in, not mere credence.
Jesus clarifies the need for belief prior to death in Mark
16:16 when He tells us "he that believeth and is baptized shall
be saved." Baptism by proxy is not authorized in this verse,
and is actually shown to be a false doctrine. Consider carefully the
words of Jesus: he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved.
So the one who is to be saved must fulfill two requirements: believe
and be baptized. How can one who is dead fulfill the second
requirement? Jesus doesn't say, "he that believeth and is
baptized for shall be saved." He states clearly that the
one who is to receive salvation is the one who must be immersed!
We've spent a fair amount of time discussing baptism by proxy, but what
exactly does the word "proxy"
mean? As you might deduce, the word is not found in the New
Testament. How does Merriam-Webster define the word? "The
agency, function, or office of a deputy who acts as a substitute for
another." So a proxy is one who acts in the place of another.
But Jesus does not authorize this practice when He states that the one who
is to be saved is the one who must be immersed! Where does a proxy
fit into this equation? He/she doesn't! Baptism by proxy is a
man-made doctrine.
Jesus illustrates to us the fates of the
dead sent to torment and to the place of comfort in the account of the
rich man and Lazarus (Luke
16:19-31). As you recall, the rich man fared sumptuously during
his life, and Lazarus was a beggar. After their deaths we see the
rich man in torment and Lazarus in Abraham's bosom. We learn much
about the relationship between the place of torment and the place of
comfort in this account. We see clearly that one in the place of
comfort cannot pass to the place of torment, as the one in torment cannot
pass to the place of comfort. Jesus tells us that even should one
wish to pass from comfort to torment they cannot (verse
26)!! So, one desiring to pass from torment to the
place of comfort is absolutely unable to do so!! (See our
discussion of "cannot" above) Below
you will see the doctrine of the Mormon church as it relates to the fate
of the dead. Based on the verses we've studied, whom are you going
to believe, Jesus or Joseph Smith? Again consider what Jesus tells
us regarding all authority. He has it! What did Paul tell the
Galatian Christians (Galatians
1:6-9)? Since the doctrine preached by Joseph Smith is contrary
to that preached by Jesus, what can we say about Joseph Smith (and about
any man who preaches anything different than that we have revealed in the scriptures)?
The answer lies in Galatians
1:8,9.
What can we say about 1
Corinthians 15:29? In verse 15 of the same chapter Paul reveals
a problem the Corinthians Christians were having. Some among them
were saying there was no resurrection of the dead. Paul uses his
logical manner of thinking over the next several verses to refute this
teaching. Notice his progression of thought from verses
13-30. Paul begins with the resurrection of Christ (verse 13).
What is a major problem with the doctrine of no resurrection? Christ
was not resurrected! If Christ was not resurrected, then Paul's
preaching was in vain, their faith was vain, ministers of Jesus were false
witnesses since they testified that God raised Jesus from the dead, they
were still in sin, those who died in Christ have perished, and they are
the most miserable of men since they have no hope in Christ after this
life. If Jesus wasn't raised from the dead, there was no need for
the church since there was no hope for forgiveness of sins. As we
can see, the teaching that the dead will not be resurrected is not
compatible with the teaching of Paul and the other ministers of Jesus.
Belief in this teaching reveals a basic contradiction in those who are
members of the church--Jesus' resurrection was the source of the hope one
has in the church. If He wasn't raised, it is pointless to continue
with the worthless exercises of worship since one has no hope anyway.
One might as well enjoy the pleasures of the flesh rather than suffer for
a worthless cause. Paul states that his fighting beasts in Ephesus
was of no advantage if the dead are not raised. "Let us eat and
drink; for tomorrow we die." (1
Corinthians 15:32)
As one can see, some among the
Corinthians were teaching one thing (no resurrection) that was not
compatible with other beliefs they practiced. As part of his
refutation Paul shows them the contradiction present within another
practice of theirs. They were teaching one thing, but practicing
another. If the dead are not raised, why are some baptized for the
dead? (verse
29) If the dead are not raised, it is pointless to be baptized
for the dead. Notice the language Paul uses in verse 29.
Throughout the verse he uses the 3rd person plural pronoun (they)
when referring to those who baptize for the dead. At no time
did he include himself as part of this group! Paul was not
making a doctrinal statement to which we must adhere in order to be
pleasing to God. He was simply showing them the contradiction
between their teaching and their practice!
Pasted below is a page from a Mormon web
site. As you can see, they use the verse we've been studying as justification
for their elaborate practices of genealogy and baptism by proxy.
by
H. David Burton
(http://www.lightplanet.com/mormons/basic/temples/Baptism_EOM.htm)
Baptism
for the dead is the proxy performance of the ordinance of baptism for one
deceased. Joseph Smith taught, "If we can baptize a man in the name
of the Father [and] of the Son and of the Holy Ghost for the remission of
sins it is just as much our privilege to act as an agent and be baptized
for the remission of sins for and in behalf of our dead kindred who have
not heard the gospel or fulness of it" (Kenney, p. 165).
The
first public affirmation of the ordinance of baptism for the dead in the
Church was Joseph Smith's funeral sermon for Seymour Brunson in Nauvoo in
August 1840. Addressing a widow who had lost a son who had not been
baptized, he called the principle "glad tidings of great joy,"
in contrast to the prevailing tradition that all unbaptized are damned.
The first baptisms for the dead in modern times were done in the
Mississippi River near Nauvoo.
Revelations
clarifying the doctrine and practice have been given from time to time:
1.
This was a New Testament practice (1 Cor. 15:29; cf. D&C 128; see
Baptism for the Dead: Ancient Sources).
2.
The ministry of Christ in the spirit world was for the benefit of those
who had died without hearing the gospel or the fulness of it (1 Pet. 4:6;
see Salvation for the Dead).
3.
Such baptisms are to be performed in temple fonts dedicated to the purpose
(TPJS, p. 308; cf. D&C 124:29-35). In November 1841 the font in the
unfinished Nauvoo Temple was so dedicated.
4.
The language of the baptismal prayer is the same as for the living, with
the addition of "for and in behalf of" the deceased.
5.
Witnesses are to be present for proxy baptisms and a record is to be kept
in Church archives (D&C 128:3, 8).
6.
Women are to be baptized for women and men for men.
7.
Not only baptism but confirmation and the higher temple ordinances may
also be performed by proxy (TPJS, pp. 362-63).
8.
The law of agency is inviolate in this world and the world to come. Thus,
those served by proxy have the right to accept or reject the ordinances.
In
the early years of the Church, proxy baptisms were performed only for
direct blood ancestors, usually no more than four generations back. Today,
Latter-day Saints are baptized not only for their own forebears but also
for other persons, unrelated to them, identified through the name
extraction program. The practice reflects the yearning of children for
their parents and of parents for their children, and charitable feelings
for others as well, that they receive the fulness of the blessings of the
gospel of Jesus Christ. In LDS perspective, whatever else one may do to
mourn, give honorable burial to, cherish, or memorialize the dead, this
divinely authorized ordinance of baptism is a demonstration of love and
has eternal implications.
(See
Basic Beliefs; Teachings About Temples; Early Christian Temple Rites home
page)
Bibliography
Kenney,
Scott G., ed. Wilford Woodruff's Journal, Vol. 2. Midvale, Utah, 1983.
Widtsoe,
John A. "Fundamentals of Temple Doctrine." Utah Genealogical and
Historical Magazine 13 (July 1922):129-35.
Encyclopedia
of Mormonism, Vol. 1, Baptism for the Dead Copyright © 1992 by Macmillan
Publishing Company
The Mormons admit who taught
this doctrine: Joseph Smith. Nothing about Jesus teaching this
doctrine is mentioned. Only two verses from the New Testament are
referenced in the above discourse. We've dealt in detail with 1
Corinthians 15:29. Does 1
Peter 4:6 say what they claim it does? Please link to the verse and
consider what it says. Next, look at Ephesians
2:1-8. Paul was preaching to living individuals (the Ephesian Christians).
But, he tells them that at one time they were dead in trespasses and sins (verse
1). He stresses this point again in verse 5 where he says they were
dead in sins, but quickened with Christ. Now reconsider 1 Peter
4:6. Peter states that the gospel was preached (again consider how the
preacher preaches to living individuals, not dead ones) to them that are
dead, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live
according to God in the spirit. Consider Paul's words in Galatians
2:20: "I am crucified with Christ, nevertheless I live; yet
not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the
flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave Himself
for me." What was the purpose of the cross? Was it a burden
people carried around with them during their lives, which they endured
because of their faith in God (a common misrepresentation when people say
they just "have to bear this cross" they've been given)?
No! It was a form of torture and capital punishment. When a man
was placed on a cross he was expected to die! But Paul tells us he is
crucified with Christ, but yet he lives? What part of Paul died with
Christ? His inner self (his own will). Now Christ lives in place
of Paul's inner self and desires. So Paul can accurately say that he
has died, but yet he lives. However, it is Christ living within him
(Paul is no longer following the desires of his inner self as he once
did). Peter is saying the same thing in his first epistle. The
gospel was preached to living individuals who were dead in sin, so that they
might die to self and live thereafter according to God. They will be
judged according to the works they performed, as will all men (Revelation
20:13). So, the only two verses mentioned in the Mormon treatise
pasted above do not support the doctrine they preach. Notice how many
references to human works are mentioned (I counted seven that I could look up
if I had the documents referenced). In the bibliography two references
to human works are listed. The Bible is not included within the
bibliography! Again consider the source of this doctrine, is it of man
or of God? I believe we all know the answer.
This concludes our study on
baptism for now. As I encounter different questions regarding baptism
I'll address them and add them to this page. Please visit often and
look for an "updated" flag after the link to
"baptism." If one is present you will know that I have added
more material to this study. Thank you for your attention to this vital
topic.
|
