1 "When the families of Holocaust survivors lodge a protest over the 'baptism for the dead' practice of Mormons, they are feeding the fires of anti-semitism." What an idiot.

2 To me it's like a bunch of children arguing over their imaginary friends. It'd be funny if it weren't for the fact that these are supposedly rational adults. My imaginary friend can kick your imaginary friend's ass, buddy!

3 Sorry. A couple thousand years of forced conversions makes some Jews a little sensitive on the subject. Tell me Rusty, if this was an Islamic practice, would you really feel the same way? In addition, even if they don't intend it, implicit in the "afterlife baptism" is a condemnation of the way the deceased's life was lived. Y'know what - this issue does make my blood boil. Maybe it shouldn't. If I wear my rationalist hat there's "no harm done." But I don't want them praying for my parents. That was my job, and I did it, and I get to decide, and G-d gets to decide whether those prayers meant anything or had any effect here or in the afterlife. It offends me that a stranger would come along, pat me on the head, and say, "That was nice. But we'll help your parents actually get into heaven now."

4 Eric, you are just being silly. All religions, including Islam, condemn other relilgions. So what? Condemning me to hell is nothing. I don't care. How is proxy baptism 'forced conversion' exactly?

5 This is about as helpful to Jews as that Liberal "rabbi" who recently complained that lowering the U.S. flag at half mast for the Pope was offensive, and unconstitutional. He was practically begging for catholics to get offended. Imagine a Jewish "rabbi" trying to hurt the cause of his own people. Only a Liberal could be so clueless. Leave it to Liberals to stir that pot. And then if it reflects badly on jews, the "rabbi" gets his self-justifying axe to grind about "anti-semitism." Leave it to Liberals. They do everything in their power to drive a wedge between the races and peoples of faith in this country in order to self-justify themselves. They need racial/religious friction at all costs. It's mother's milk to Liberals. It's their reason to live, like COCAINE. Without it they sink into lethargy and meaninglessness. Not to mention "Liberal" and "rabbi" are nearly as oxymoronic as "conservative" "hippie". You jews should take such self-described "rabbis" and cane them for using that respected religious title for the purpose of furthering their secular Liberal politics. They're phonies. They aren't real rabbis. Liberal Jews hardly even believe in the God, let alone the God of their forefathers.

6 >>>"To me it's like a bunch of children arguing over their imaginary friends. It'd be funny if it weren't for the fact that these are supposedly rational adults." That would be logical if you think mormonism is a false religion. The irony here is that the less pious the Jew, the more "offended" he is. Pious Jews are secure enough in their faith not to even give this the time of day. That's why this is so ridiculous. This is Liberal Jews doing what Liberals do best, stirring up the pot.

7 I just posted over there congratulating Jay Tea on becoming the Jerry Springer of Wizbang. I hope he doesn't think that was a compliment...

8 CaYa, Considering the competition over there, that's really saying something!

9 I use the Mormons more than they'll ever use me. For the better part of a year, I lived in their genealogy library here in Los Angeles doing my family tree using their microfilm. Some weird cult could invent anything and say it was converting my ancestors AND my descendants. If I don't believe in what they say, it costs me nothing to ignore their nonsense. Hey Rusty, some new cult spit on a picture of a Springfield Armory 1911 and burned Polaroids of you and me and says that ritual now makes us believing members of the Gun Control Kook Cult. Yeah, right. Wish to take issue with one thing, though. It pains me to think that what Liberal Jews do translates into antisemitism. The argument for that is a lot weaker than the 19 centuries of Christianity in Europe equating to the Holocaust. Those seeds of canonized clergy-based antisemitism seem, blessedly, not to have found welcoming soil here in the USA, and that alone is a strong reason to oppose any attempt to make us more like Europe. A difficulty is the semantic difference in the words Jew and Jewish. One can be a non-Jewish Jew, like Noam Chomsky or Cardinal Ratzinger. Being a Jew is also a nationality. An American can grow up to be an un-American American. The difficulty is that Christianity says one can't be a non-Christian Christian... yet Christians cannot come up with a guidebook to allow us non-Christians to quantitatively determine who is and who isn't. Given that 1 out of 3 Jews was murdered within the lifetimes of people still living while the US denied refuge, a bit of extra empathy may be in order until a few pogrom-free generations have passed. That our State Department has benefitted from a the Saudi-funded retirement plan for decades ensures that I'll keep my guard up. As for religious ritual... that's between us and our Maker and we'll hopefully find out the truth when our time comes to meet Him. I judge people by what they do to others "made in His image" here on earth. I'd sooner have my kids stay with Jerry Falwell for a weekend than Noam Chomsky. But I'd sooner have them with Joe Lieberman than Pat Buchanan.

10 Mormons are baptizing dead people? That's just fucking stupid, that's what it is.

11 No, they are baptizing in behalf of dead people. And Catholics pray for dead people, and so do Hindus and Buddhists, and some Shintoists pray TO dead people. People do a lot of things.........

12 Uh, oh. Here comes the guy who gets to say "I know because I was one of them". Well, I was. For nineteen years (on and off for the last few of those years to be fair). I currently drink way too much beer to be Mormo-Kosher. Baptism for the dead has gone on for decades. It's not forced baptism. The doctorine goes something like this: you baptize someone by proxy. The dead one is then given the opportunity to hear, embrace, or reject that baptism. No one is forced to do or even hear anything. Hendrix? Baptised. Jerry Garcia? Baptised. Are either one a Mormon? Don't know. It's basically an extension of their missionary program. Mormons (often reffered to as the American Jews) aren't all that spooky. Check out our blog. Some who post there are devout.

13 Aaron, and I'd sooner have my kids stay with an orthodox jew for the weekend than with a Liberal christian. And I'm a christian.

14 That would be logical if you think mormonism is a false religion. Thank you. As it happens, I think all religions are false.

15 I'll be concerned when those Mormons start passing the plate and those dead converts start filling it! Till then . . . Oferchrissake!

16 Andy, then yours is the natural and logical position. I believe in christianity, and not other religions. Therefore, I couldn't give a crap what they believe. That's why alleged Jews complaining about mormons, and secularists complaining about christian beliefs about hell, etc., is so RIDICULOUS. These people are troublemakers, nothing more.

17 yeah rusty, people do a lot of things. if I saw someone fucking around my father's or a loved one's grave, I might kick some ass. Mormons, Muslims, Catholics, Jews, whoever, mind your own goddamn business, and leave dead poeple alone. whats next? "loving" dead people?

18 Mr. K is a perfect of how irrational people can be. Short of exhuming and vandalizing a corpse, there's nothing anybody can "do" to a dead person. IT'S ALL IN YOUR HEAD YOUR MORON.

19 Carlos - when you can learn to spell, and maybe write a sentence or even a phrase or two that is complete and makes some sense, then you may call me a moron. Until then, if you care to show up without my permission, even at the location where my dog is buried, and begin to dance, chant, drool, toss water, and spout incantations, you may find your last thought is wondering if the Mor(m)ons will be baptizing you. Mind your own goddamn business, keep your religious beliefs to yourself, and most of all, do not fuck around with my loved ones, dead or living.

20 What I find truly offensive is the fact that you've seen Annie Hall.

21 Baptizing the dead has no scripture basis, but then again, nor does Mormonism. I fail to see the link to anti-Semitism. It's just anti-logical.

22 It is my understanding that this is not forced conversion but a proxy ceremony that the recipients are free to accept or reject but must be done in the physical world (I guess there are no baptisms in the "spirit world".) I know its goofy (every religion is) but its being misrepresented. Aside from being a stupid thing to complain about. Is there no more pressing issue?

23 Proud to be a non religious racist. It's obvious that we will someday take over the world while the religious fight among themselves. I'm glad that America is my God and Yoda is his prophet. I know Yoda is there. I seen him in the movies. Never seen your guys.

24 Arguing over souls is silly. If people wish to project fantasies on my soul after I've moved on, that is their choice.

25 I just got threatened with violence over the internet. That's balls.

26 >>>"It's obvious that we will someday take over the world while the religious fight among themselves." rooster, Actually, I think atheism has had its heyday. Atheism is now in decline in Europe and is being replaced by paganism and spiritualism. Soon islam will be the single biggest religion in Europe.

27 Thats good news...right?

28 Hey Carlos, come and get you some, I opened a can just for you. http://roomforrant.blogspot.com/2005/04/for-carlos-jackass-notorious.html

29 >>>"A 17-year-old Morrisville youth was being held on $100,000 bail after police said he raided a tomb in a cemetery and removed a head from a corpse." Mr. K, was the corpse any relation of yours? I'm hoping he gets his head skullfucked.

30 That tomb raider must be put on trial and punished for his misbehavior.

31 what another part of the body, besides the head, gets skullfucked, Numb Nutz?

32 Mr. K, shit for brains, in your case, getting sodomized.

33 Jay Tea is no idiot. I think I know what post you are talking about but geez, Rusty, that's a mean title. Cindy

34 But I have to admit you're right - Wizbang has lost it's magic lately. Cindy

35 Numb Nutz: keep trying, you're getting better. However, judging from your choice of insults, your other alias, Omar bin Bonin-heem, is right on target... For more improvement, at least try and be somewhat clever.

36 I posted this @ yourish.com. I think the followers of Islam should start converting Mormons who have passed away and see if they "like" that. I mean its just helping them and all!

37 Carlos: Does this mean that Islamics are the last of the dumb shits in the world to reject religion? I understand where you get your beliefs from. Europe is in trouble for allowing the lowest of humanity to immigrate to their countries. However, I'm sure you are wrong. The anti muslim movement in Europe is just now beginning to take shape. In any case, if Europe allows itself to be dominated by muslims it will remove itself as a viable competitor to America. We will wake up before Europe merely because our abilities haven't been diluted as much as Europe. Look at the muslim countries of the world and the conclusion must be that Islam makes you one backward assed world. The entire muslim dominated world cannot compete with one modern western nation. They self disolved due to their backward, hatful religion. The only other reason has to be racial inferiority. In any case we win.

38 Actually, The entire muslim dominated world cannot compete with one modern western union composed of 50 separate states and the minor islands those have conquered. So its really 50 countries against 20? Muslim dominated countries. The antimuslim movement? Yeah yeah, neo-fascists marched in Germany on Hitlers birthday, but otherwise I have not heard of many large scale operations other than Britain threatening its people with a possibility of terrorism being targeted against them. You woke up before Europe because you got attacked, no other reason to it. And ever considered Muslim countries being underdeveloped because they are pretty much 90% desert with no possibility of having a healthy civilization.

39 The point of the whole matter is not whether or not it is effective. The point is not whether or not the ritual is considered an offer which the dead person can reject (with "thanks"?). The point is that the offer in and of itself is an insult to both the living and the dead. Since G-d created the world in such a way that we have free will, we will not have our dead relatives posting on these fora and giving their viewpoints. However, even if we can ignore the ignorant, the fact that the organization broke their promise to stop doing this also speaks about them. Jews believe that everyone has a chance to get into heaven. Mormon's believe that all Jews are burning in hell untill they (the Mormons) put out the fire by "baptising" them posthumously. Which side again are tribalists? Just because they think (incorrectly) that they are doing a good deed does not mean that it is so. Actually, what they are trying to do is pull the kedoshim (holy ones - means martyrs in English) out of their eternal reward and get them punished for idolatry. Of course it is ineffective. But that does not mean that the attempt is not insulting. I regard it as an insult to the memory of the dead. It is like someone shooting a gun loaded with blanks at a school bus full of children thinking that the gun is loaded with live ammunition. From the viewpoint of the Jew who is being targeted, it is someone claiming that he is now converted to idol worship and therefore subject to the punishment for it. Obviously, it is not the fact that it is unsuccessful that matters, it is the attempt that is insulting, degrading, and not to be borne. The names were targeted because they are Jews who were murdered during the war. Many of them have descendants who found out about this matter an reacted. Otherwise, the Mormons would have gotten away with this. Of course, they also do this to others. But, these are my relatives and they were killed because they were Jews. That makes this attempt even worse. If it does not bother you, then let them target your family. Stay away from mine. Normally, as an Orthodox Jew, I would stay out of this matter. But the fact is that it should be stopped.

40 Omar ben Bonin heem. LOL. Spilled by drink on that one. Great. A FINN: I now understand why other bloggers refer to you as needing some growing up time. If you believe America was ever 50 separate countries you need to go back for some of that Finnish education you tout. It din't work the first time. Sabba Hillel: Something I have never understood is why so many hate the Jews. Help me out here. I understand why some hate blacks. I really understand why most hate muslims. I've never understood why all the Jewish hatred. Did you guys do something I don't know about? I mean why was the Germans so pissed at you? Why are the muslems screaming for your death? Has it just become a popular thing? Like liberals in Academia or Starbucks coffee? Calling people who disagree with moonbats Nazis or KKK. Maybe the killing of Jesus, one of your own? Why? Can any of you Jewish dudes lend a little info here. Something is missing and I don't understand.

41 Baptism for the Dead I am an actively participating Mormon, a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. I have been enjoying the back and forth comment sections regarding all the brouhaha on baptisms for the dead. I will do my best not to stir up hostilities while at the same time answer some of the misunderstandings that have been attributed to this ordinance. I read one of the comments that alluded to the Bible and that there was no reference within that particular Canon of Scripture to back up the ordinance of Baptism for the dead. In 1st Corinthians 15:29 there is specific reference, “Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead if the dead rise not…”. This is also a strong acknowledgment of the resurrection and its purpose in the great plan of salvation for all of mankind, to include every soul from Adam until the last to come before the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. As for the resentment that some members of the Jewish faith have expressed I will offer up a very personal experience. I had the forms filled out so that the ordinance of baptism for the dead along with the ordinance called the endowment for my grandparents on my father’s side could be accomplished at the temple. My wife stood in as proxy and did the baptism for my grandmother and I stood in as proxy for my grandfather. The opportunity for them to either accept or reject these proxy ordinances remains their choice. Nothing has been forced upon them. I will explain that both of these people in life were Christian Scientists; but that their lineage was predominantly Jewish from all that I have been able to ascertain. That would mean that I also have the same ancestry. My Uncle told me that he was of the opinion that I should have gotten his permission to “baptize his parents into the Mormon Faith”, as if I had purposely gone around him. I tried to explain that at no time had there been an attempt to go against his wishes, not knowing my Uncle’s feelings toward such things to begin with. I would have gone ahead with my actions regardless since, as I have explained, there is nothing binding upon those who have passed to the other side, there is nothing worthy of offense and so none should be taken. My Uncle has since stated to me that he had “lost his faith” a long time ago, having been an active member of the Christian Science church at one time. I could not understand his rational for agonizing about ordinances done on behalf of his parents (my grandparents) who clearly were not Jewish; more so, his lack of rational since he was near the point of needing to take something to lower his blood pressure as he exploded his views to me about violating our Jewish ancestors. One of the comments included a wonderful rational explanation: If the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints IS the one true church that has the authority to act in His name then to have those saving ordinances performed is not only an honor; but is also a necessary action required of each and every soul prior to returning to Father in Heaven’s presence. If, on the other hand the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is not the authorized agent, then those ordinances would have no binding effect; understanding to begin with, there is nothing binding about these ordinances without their having been accepted by those for whom the ordinances were performed. Here is the example that I attempted to use as a way of explaining how a proxy baptism works, or for that matter the ordinance of the endowment, and then the sealing of a husband to a wife for time and for all eternity as a foundation of an eternal family unit. If any of this information is new to your mind I invite you to contact me or any other “active” member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. I call it: A free trip home I left a ticket for you at the desk and all you have to do is show up and tell them your name for that ticket to be valid. The ticket is good for a trip home to see your father who has not seen you in quite some time. If for any reason you do not wish to use the ticket you need not do anything. There is no obligation to you in any way. If you think you may be interested; but you are reluctant to act on such a “too good to be true” offer, please contact me and I will explain how this was done. This is not a scam. If I left you such a ticket, how could you be insulted or believe that I had forced anything upon you? You might feel pressured at best, honored or lucky that someone had thought enough of you to have gone out of their way to do something nice for you. Under the possibility that you didn’t like your father then you might not think it such a great gift. All the same, one never knows how a change of heart based on living through a life time of pain or grief might soften hard feelings between a father and a child. When offence is not intended, none should ever be taken. I again offer an invitation to any who wish to know more about my faith. T. F. Stern tfstern@houston.rr.com

42 Wow! This guy is a true believer in his faith. Thinking about it, if all mormons do is sprinkle water on the graves of the dead. What's the problem? Friggin muslims cut the heads off the living and beat women for not covering themselves.

43 I suggest we send the mormons to convert the muslims

44 Greyrooster: Stern's explanation has been debunked by biblical scholars--even protestants--since his cult was invented in the 1800's. The phrase found in 1st Corinthians 15:29 of being, 'baptized for the dead' is a much misunderstood and misinterpreted passage. Some groups believe that this passage means that they can baptize their members as proxies on behalf of those that have died unsaved. The Mormon sect in particular teaches that those who are dead can still be Saved if someone who is living is baptized for them. This is a teaching which is debunked with even a cursory study of scripture, for it is evident that no one but Christ has the authority to be a proxy regarding Salvation. These type teachings have nothing to do with Biblical truth, but because of them there is much confusion among Christians about just what this passage actually means. This can only be cleared up by the careful and diligent study of the Word of God, in it's proper context. 1st Corinthians 15:29 "Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?" The Greek word 'for' is [huper]. It is a primary preposition and in this context means, 'for the sake of,' or 'for the benefit of' the dead. This is because baptism is the cleansing of the dead by the Spirit of Christ, wherein they are also raised up in His resurrection. Water baptism signifies this Spiritual baptism or cleansing 'for the sake of' the dead. The context of this verse is one of Christ's payment for our sins by His death, and how by His resurrection thereafter, we are also made alive from the dead. That is the Baptism or cleansing for the dead. The efficacy of His death and resurrection. All shown by the context starting in the very first verses where it is explained as the very gospel message itself. 1st Corinthians 15:1-3 "Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;" Christ was dead for us, and this is the gospel which Paul Preached, and is what He is telling us in verses 1-3. Water Baptism is a 'signification' of the cleansing by the Spirit (Baptism) for the rising of the dead. What we see here is an illustration that Christians were dead in trespasses and sins, and were baptized by Christ's being made alive by the Spirit. It in no way means that someone can have water poured upon them on behalf of some other person who has died. It speaks of our own baptism in the death and resurrection of Christ, and is illustrating how the dead benefit from that. i.e., baptized for the dead. All of these things must be understood in context. When Paul asked the rhetorical question of, 'why people were baptized for the dead if the dead are not resurrected,' he was asking that in deference to some people at Corinth who doubted the validity of the resurrection of the dead (verse 12). Just as the sadducees had (Matthew 22:23) some did not believe in the resurrection of the dead, and Paul was speaking of just what this heretical belief would mean, if it were indeed true. His speaking of Baptism for the dead was in support of the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead. 1st Corinthians 15:4 "And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:" Because Christ was dead, and we were baptized in His death, we receive the benefit of that death and resurrection. The point of this chapter is the process of the resurrection, not the baptizing living people for dead ones. And in verses 5-11, God goes on to establish His argument for this resurrection with proofs and witnesses of Christ's own rise from the dead. His point being, if Christ rose from the dead, and Christians know it, how can it be said there is no resurrection? How indeed! 1st Corinthians 15:12 "Now if Christ be preached that he rose from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead?" But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen:" If the dead do not rise at all, why then are we baptized in the belief that we were dead in sin, and have risen? If we're not ever going to rise from the dead, why are we baptized that we will be part of the resurrection to life? In other words, this doctrine of no resurrection makes Christ a liar. John 5:29 "And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation." John 11:25 "Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live:" Christ taught of the resurrection, and Paul is saying that if that is true that there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christianity makes no sense! The point here being, on the contrary, we are baptized for the resurrection of the dead, because we do know Christ was judged for us, suffered death, and rose from that death that there would be a resurrection unto life. 1st Corinthians 15:14 "And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain." Again, Paul, under inspiration of God, is setting forth the truth of ChristÂ’s resurrection, and by extension our resurrection in Him that the second death have no power over us. It is the hope of the Gospel, and an illustration that apart from this resurrection, we are lost and our faith is in vain or of no real value. This verse 14 portrays the hopelessness of the believer in Christ 'if' He was not resurrected for the dead and in the process baptized us with fire. If there is no baptism or cleansing for the dead, that would mean: 1st Corinthians 15:15-16 "Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not. For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised:" If there is no resurrection for us, then there was no resurrection of Christ, and the gospel message is without substance. If there is no baptism or cleansing for the dead by Christ's death, then Christians are all a bunch of false witnesses, because this truth is the foundation of the Gospel message we preach. We say, God forbid! There was a baptism for, and a Resurrection of the dead. And it is a fundamental principle of true Christianity, and the heart of the gospel. The very Rock of Christianity is the unbreakable promise to Christians of life beyond death because of Christ. If we were to take this away, then we would take away the very purpose of baptism of the dead, by the Spirit of Christ. 1st Corinthians 15:17-19 "And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins. Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished. If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable." Again, clear indication of the efficacy of resurrection in taking away our sin. And if Christ was not raised from the dead, then we are still in sin and there is no resurrection to life, and we are found to be foolish, because there is no life after death. All hope is then lost and our faith is worthless. On the other hand, if Christ has died and taken away our sin, and been resurrected the firstfruits of the dead, then our faith is not in vain, and we have been baptized or cleansed for the dead, in Christ. Then does the gospel truth Paul preached stand! By being in Christ when He died and was resurrected, we are baptized (Spiritually cleansed), and also resurrected as He was. Romans 6:3-4 "Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life." This is what baptism for the dead illustrates. Our death in Christ's death. Just as the verse above says, we are Baptized into Christ's death and made alive. Resurrected in Him. And verses 20-28 goes on to say how the truth is that because by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead, and now is Christ risen from the dead, and speaks of Christ reigning until all things shall be subdued unto him, and the Son also himself be subject unto Him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all. It is in this context that the next verse reads: 1st Corinthians 15:29 "Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?" If all this is not true about the resurrection from the dead, and the judgment, and the end of all things, then why are Christians baptized for the dead, when the dead (according to this philosophy) do not rise at all? It would make no sense. But the truth is, we were buried with Him in baptism. i.e., our baptism is for [huper] (for the sake of, or for the benefit of) the dead, that the dead rise because of that Baptism of the Spirit. Once we read this verse in the proper context of the whole chapter, the truth becomes self evident. We are baptized for the sake of the dead, because we were dead in trespass and sin, and needed a resurrection, which baptism gives us. We were dead, and have been raised with Christ in baptism. The baptism is for us, the dead, that in our death with Christ, we are resurrected by that baptism. Colossians 2:12 "Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead." We who are buried with Christ in Baptism, declare by that act of God that we believe that He died and was buried for us, and rose again. And we in His baptism. Water baptism merely 'signifies' that One true baptism (ephesians 4:5). Matthew 3:11 "I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:" As Christ went through the fires of Hell suffering death laden with our sins, we died with Him, that likewise we should also be raised up with Him. In other words, we are dead with Him, and we are buried with Him in this Spiritual baptism, wherein we are risen. That is the baptism or cleansing for the dead. That is the context of 1st Corinthians chapter 15. And that is the understanding of this passage and our hope for the resurrection to Life. We are identified with Christ and have his righteousness imputed to us by being baptized in the Spirit of God. For the sake of the dead, we are made alive in the Spirit. Conclusion The problem with interpreting the scriptures is not in the alleged obscure or ambiguous language. God has not inspired confusion, the real problem is in man not this passage. It is man who takes the passages in question out of total context, and then teaches confused and mis-informed doctrines. And he does this because 'he wants to.' Scripture considered honestly, carefully, and in context not only with itself, but with the whole of the Bible, usually presents it's own solutions. And they must be consistent and in agreement with the whole of the Bible. When we ask the fundamental questions, we get the Biblical answers. For example, what is the topic of the Chapter? What is God declaring in His reference to Baptism for the dead? Does the context show us that God is teaching about Baptism of living people for dead people? Does Baptizing a living person save them? If not, then how much less would it Save one who is already dead? When these questions are answered honestly, it becomes self evident that this passage has nothing to do with the unbiblical practice of Christians being baptized for people who have died, but with baptism as it is the efficacy of the death and resurrection in Christ. When Paul used the language of being 'baptized for the dead,' he was arguing for the resurrection from the dead by baptism. The context itself shows us that this is the truth, and we must so interpret the passage if we would understand it accurately. The context of the passage is the resurrection, and this interpretation is not only consistent with that context, but speaks specifically to it. On the other hand, if we (like some others) were to conclude that God was teaching that we may be baptized for, or as proxies on behalf the dead persons, then have a twofold problem. We not only have a doctrine which is nowhere else spoken of in all of scripture, but we force God to introduce an entirely new subject into this context 'with only this one sentence,' and then never speaks of it again anywhere. We have a doctrine which is contradictory to the rest of the Bible. The Holy Bible declares very unambiguously that it is impossible for one to be Saved without faith in Jesus Christ as Savior. No one after death can be saved by the action of someone who is alive. The teaching that men can be Saved merely by an act of another man participating in water baptism, is not only unbiblical (John 14:6), it is anti-biblical. It is unreasonable to draw such conclusions about this text, based on the scripture alone (Sola Scriptura), therefore this doctrine is obviously born from the mind of men, and not of God. This passage is simply another illustration of the well established doctrine of baptism of the Spirit, and all that this entails. In baptism, the Christian is risen from the dead. For this is the purpose, and the hope of the resurrection (Rom. 6:3-6) which the sacrament of water baptism signifies. We are baptized for the sake of the dead, that in that baptism, the dead are made alive. That's why Paul said, else if the dead don't rise (resurrection), why be baptized for the dead? Since our baptism is for the resurrection of the dead. Then our baptism means nothing if the dead do not really rise. This is the Glorious truth that Christ did not die in vain, He died that we could die in him, and be risen with Him, that death would have no more power over us. This is the benefit of baptism for the dead. The old body must be put to death, buried, and resurrected to new life. This is the Biblical definition of being 'baptized for the dead.' This passage I believe is Paul illustrating to the Church just why we are baptized into Christ. And that reason is that we receive life everlasting through His death and resurrection. As I've said before, Christ founded a Church when He was on earth. It would have a visible head. Who is the visible head of the Mormon church? Mormonism, along with its MANY doctrinal problems, just comes 1800-plus years too late.