Should I care if I am baptized by Mormons after I die?

Damocles

Damocles

Accedo!
Staff member
You all know my opinion, or you should. I don't give a rip if my Mormon friends all gather round and pour water all over a symbolic representation of my former meat shell after I am dead.

But should I? And why?

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...ong_for_mormons_to_baptize_daniel_pearl_.html

Family members of Daniel Pearl, the Wall Street Journal reporter who was kidnapped and beheaded by terrorists while on assignment in Pakistan in 2002, were disturbed to learn this week that he had been posthumously baptized by Mormons at a temple in Idaho. The news came just weeks after Mormon leaders apologized for a church member’s posthumous baptism of the parents of Simon Wiesenthal, the famous Holocaust survivor and Nazi hunter. According to the Utah-based researcher who uncovered the records, the list of prominent Jews whose souls have come in for the treatment may also include Anne Frank.

“Mormons think of baptisms for the dead as a service to others, almost like adding family members’ names to a guest list,” Slate’s Forrest Wickman recently explained. In response to outcry from Jewish groups, however, church leaders have removed the names of hundreds of thousands of Holocaust victims and others from its rolls. Still, they haven’t been able to stamp out the practice entirely. Are the families of those who’ve been baptized posthumously justified in taking offense? Should they be touched by the Mormon Church’s concern? A spontaneous argument broke out among Slate staffers this afternoon, and we’ve decided to publish the back and forth. Here’s a condensed version of the email exchange.

David Plotz: Can I just defend posthumous baptism? I really don't understand why this is wrong. If you believe Mormonism is nonsense, then what difference does it make? And if you don't believe it is nonsense, then it helps you get to heaven. Why do people take offense?

More at link...
 
anne-frank-mormon-29.gif
 
From the perspective of a person in a hyper-monotheistic religion like Judaism, if you're given honors by members of some other religion for some other God, failing to specifically rebuke them and request that the honors be rescinded could be a sign of lack of faith. Like your hedging your bets, thinking "What if these Mormon guys really are right?" That kind of bet-hedging isn't allowed, which is why the practice is particularly offensive to Jews. It's not like they're asking for a law to be passed forcing the Mormons to quit. If you look at things from their perspective, it's perfectly rational that they'd take reasonable action to convince those people stop.

For an atheist like me, of course, bet hedging really doesn't matter as much. However, I too would request that they not do so, because hedging my bets gives such superstitious nonsense too much credence. If the Mormons were right and I did wind up in hell for all eternity, I still think my position would've been totally rational, the best I could've possibly made given the evidence. My fate would be the result of injustice, not foolishness. We live in an uncertain world, we can always be wrong. But my position is to always try to make decisions I could be proud of having made even were I wrong. Worrying incessantly about the possibilities is a fruitless endeavor.
 
I don't think it will matter if you "hedge your bets"...

I don't believe your former meat sack and bones hold anything other than rotting meat after you die, let alone your name on a piece of paper. It's not like these Mormons have the remains to sprinkle or anything.

Plus, I think it is silly to "request" that they not follow their religion.
 
Damocles said:
I don't think it will matter if you "hedge your bets"...

I don't believe your former meat sack and bones hold anything other than rotting meat after you die, let alone your name on a piece of paper. It's not like these Mormons have the remains to sprinkle or anything.
Click to expand...

Well, really, the difference between monotheism and paganism in the west has precisely been "hedging your bets". Pagans would always adopt new Gods into their pantheon when they found them; why take the chances, after all? Monotheists, on the other hand, have a jealous God who wants all of the honor. As a Jew, it's obviously not OK to go to a pagan altar and make a sacrifice "just in case". This matter is kind of different, of course, because you're a passive recipient of the honor. But it's perfectly rational for a person who believes in such a thing to come to the conclusion that piety requires that they at least say "thanks, but no thanks".

I know you and I may think that a God who gets angry over such things to be a very irrational individual, but hey, that's our perspective.

Damocles said:
Plus, I think it is silly to "request" that they not follow their religion.
Click to expand...

Mormonism doesn't require Mormons to baptize Jews. If your religion demands that you not seek or accept honors from other religions, then, yes, it is a perfectly rational thing to do. Silly and trivial from our perspective, true.
 
General Sherman said:
Well, really, the difference between monotheism and paganism in the west has precisely been "hedging your bets". Pagans would always adopt new Gods into their pantheon when they found them; why take the chances, after all? Monotheists, on the other hand, have a jealous God who wants all of the honor. As a Jew, it's obviously not OK to go to a pagan altar and make a sacrifice "just in case". This matter is kind of different, of course, because you're a passive recipient of the honor. But it's perfectly rational for a person who believes in such a thing to come to the conclusion that piety requires that they at least say "thanks, but no thanks".

I know you and I may think that a God who gets angry over such things to be a very irrational individual, but hey, that's our perspective.



Mormonism doesn't require Mormons to baptize Jews. If your religion demands that you not seek or accept honors from other religions, then, yes, it is a perfectly rational thing to do. Silly and trivial from our perspective, true.
Click to expand...

The Jewish/Christian/etc. religions do not demand you get mad at some idiot who thinks they are baptizing dead people. Can you find one verse that says that they should?

And while it doesn't require these baptisms, it allows for them. I can't see it damaging anything.

Now, had they requested it, they would be "hedging their bets"... Say, if before I die I tell my wife to make sure they baptize my soul, I'm hedging a bet. But if I tell her to ignore any idiot who thinks they are converting me after death I am not "hedging" anything.

It's stupid to get angry at people introducing you to their imaginary friend after you die. You don't even have to pretend to care, you're dead.
 
Damocles said:
The Jewish/Christian/etc. religions do not demand you get mad at some idiot who thinks they are baptizing dead people. Can you find one verse that says that they should?

And while it doesn't require these baptisms, it allows for them. I can't see it damaging anything.

Now, had they requested it, they would be "hedging their bets"... Say, if before I die I tell my wife to make sure they baptize my soul, I'm hedging a bet. But if I tell her to ignore any idiot who thinks they are converting me after death I am not "hedging" anything.

It's stupid to get angry at people introducing you to their imaginary friend after you die. You don't even have to pretend to care, you're dead.
Click to expand...

I read this after my previous post which was based on your op title. I can only speak as A Catholic, not for all Catholics. I believe what I believe, what happens after makes little difference to me or my God, as I understand it.
 
Annie said:
I read this after my previous post which was based on your op title. I can only speak as A Catholic, not for all Catholics. I believe what I believe, what happens after makes little difference to me or my God, as I understand it.
Click to expand...

Exactly. You believe what you do. I don't think there is a council of Elohim who want me to join them and make my own planet full of people, who want people to baptize me in absentia after I am dead. That others do is no skin off my nose. My God won't change because of that and I would prefer my family deal with more important issues than what the Mormons are doing after I am gone.
 
Damocles said:
You all know my opinion, or you should. I don't give a rip if my Mormon friends all gather round and pour water all over a symbolic representation of my former meat shell after I am dead.

But should I? And why?

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...ong_for_mormons_to_baptize_daniel_pearl_.html

Family members of Daniel Pearl, the Wall Street Journal reporter who was kidnapped and beheaded by terrorists while on assignment in Pakistan in 2002, were disturbed to learn this week that he had been posthumously baptized by Mormons at a temple in Idaho. The news came just weeks after Mormon leaders apologized for a church member’s posthumous baptism of the parents of Simon Wiesenthal, the famous Holocaust survivor and Nazi hunter. According to the Utah-based researcher who uncovered the records, the list of prominent Jews whose souls have come in for the treatment may also include Anne Frank.

“Mormons think of baptisms for the dead as a service to others, almost like adding family members’ names to a guest list,” Slate’s Forrest Wickman recently explained. In response to outcry from Jewish groups, however, church leaders have removed the names of hundreds of thousands of Holocaust victims and others from its rolls. Still, they haven’t been able to stamp out the practice entirely. Are the families of those who’ve been baptized posthumously justified in taking offense? Should they be touched by the Mormon Church’s concern? A spontaneous argument broke out among Slate staffers this afternoon, and we’ve decided to publish the back and forth. Here’s a condensed version of the email exchange.

David Plotz: Can I just defend posthumous baptism? I really don't understand why this is wrong. If you believe Mormonism is nonsense, then what difference does it make? And if you don't believe it is nonsense, then it helps you get to heaven. Why do people take offense?

More at link...
Click to expand...
Personally I wouldn't give a rats ass. Thanks for the kind tought, would be my attitude. However, I can certainly understand why others would find this hugely offensive.
 
Damocles said:
Exactly. You believe what you do. I don't think there is a council of Elohim who want me to join them and make my own planet full of people, who want people to baptize me in absentia after I am dead. That others do is no skin off my nose. My God won't change because of that and I would prefer my family deal with more important issues than what the Mormons are doing after I am gone.
Click to expand...

I don't think that one view is more insane than the other.
 
Derp Derp said:
Personally I wouldn't give a rats ass. Thanks for the kind tought, would be my attitude. However, I can certainly understand why others would find this hugely offensive.
Click to expand...
Those given the misguided benefits of after death baptism would hardly care. Perhaps their surviving families would. Then again, I can't see why going nutty, as long as there wasn't a grave robbing or some such thing.
 
General Sherman said:
I don't think that one view is more insane than the other.
Click to expand...

I'll assume you are an atheist? If so, what happens after you leave life, wouldn't matter to you a bit, right? Now if someone throws 'holy water' on you and says that you are 'saved' while you are just going to the grocery, seems like an assault to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top