Today we’re going to talk about the controversy of baptism and how it went from mandatory in New Testament Christianity to optional in modern Christianity. For Latter-day Saints it is so mandatory that we even do baptisms on behalf of our ancestors who have died without it. Mainstream Christianity throw dust in the air, stop their ears and cries, “that’s not Biblical!” Even though it is practiced in the New Testament. Welcome to Anxiously Engaged!
Let’s start off with the verse without any context as it is mentioned in the Bible. “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?” 1Cor 15:29 Now Krister Stendahl, the former Lutheran bishop of Stockholm Sweden and professor at Harvard Divinity school has this to say about that verse. “This verse is part of Paul’s argumentation against those who denied a future resurrection. He refers to a practice of vicarious baptism, a practice for which we have no other evidence in the Pauline or other New Testament or early Christian writings. Interpreters have puzzled over the fact that Paul seems to accept this practice. At least he does not see fit to condemn it as heretical… [T]he text seems to speak plainly enough about a practice within the Church of vicarious baptism for the dead. This is the view of most contemporary critical exegetes… -Krister Stendahl
An “exegete” is a person who interprets text, especially scripture.
Here is what professor of theology Dan Doriani has to say, “Confessing I’m no closer to certainty than anyone, I think it wise to take the passage at face value: it seems that certain Corinthians were baptized on behalf of people—possibly family members or friends who’d died.”
“The phrase ‘baptism for the dead’ is so obscure and perplexing, the meaning so uncertain, and the variety of interpretations so numerous that it seems wise to say it seems impossible to know what the phrase means.
But, “Whatever baptism for the dead means, the practice of the Mormons cannot be correct…” Prof Dan Doriani
Well professor, as long as you’re sure of something, that’s all that matters.
We’re going to back up to 1505, Martin Luther was a Roman Catholic monk and during an assignment in Rome he became utterly vexed with what he thought was the deplorable condition of the church. Luther could not abide the flagrant moral disregard of many of the priesthood leaders and teachers. He felt that they didn’t take their high and holy responsibilities seriously and that they openly contradicted and denigrated church doctrines.
Eventually Luther was sent to Germany to teach at the University of Wittenberg but continued to struggle with the aspects of the church he felt was in opposition to what was recorded in the Bible. One practice in particular famously started Luther down a path that would eventually change the face of Christianity forever. Luther despised the practice of purchasing “indulgences.” By paying a fee, it was taught that various sins would be forgiven and for enough money your sinful slate could be wiped absolutely clean by authority of the Pope. It was after an encounter with a church Friar who was selling these fancy indulgences that Martin Luther published his famous 95 theses and nailed them right on the church door.
In publishing his theses, Luther essentially lambasted the church and what he felt was its emphasis on one’s works, good deeds and ceremonies, with a particularly outspoken distain for the teaching that cash can be used to forgive sins and get you into heaven. As you can probably guess, the Pope and the emperor went completely thermal nuclear.
Essentially Martin Luther developed his ideas in opposition to what he saw as prevalent in his day, the teachings that the rituals, rights and money can save you. His “Sola Fida” or “Only Faith” doctrine, in a nutshell, was influenced by a focus on Paul’s writings on faith and the grace of God, concluding that: “salvation comes through faith, not good works-not through prayer, fasting, vigils, pilgrimages, relics, giving to the poor, the sacraments, or any action that a person can take. We can’t ever be good enough through our actions to merit salvation, we can only have faith.”
Thus you have the birth of the Protestant reformation that was pushed forward over the next couple of centuries by men like William Farel, John Calvin, Theodore Beza, John Knox and others whom we celebrate with monuments like this, The International Monument to the Reformation in Geneva Switzerland, the center of Calvinism in the 1500’s. By protesting the Catholic church’s iron hold on religion, politics and society, reform caused Christianity to break up into thousands of independent interpretations of Christianity.
You see, Martin Luther published the Bible for the first time in German for everyone to read in a language that they could understand, because normally it was only the priests who would read Bible verses to you at church, but only in Latin. You were at the mercy of the priest to tell you what the Bible taught and Luther thought that if everyone could read the Bible for themselves, the Catholic church would be forced to self correct.
Luther didn’t anticipate the international bloody catastrophe that would follow in the wake. But sure enough, this fight for the freedom to read and interpret the Bible for yourself ultimately led to “the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience,” and changed the Catholic monopoly over kingdoms, politics and society as well as the world of Christianity for ever.
Now back to baptism. Because of this new religious freedom, we have endless Biblical interpretations manifested in what will become thousands of conflicting church bodies, that differ on the modes and necessity of baptism. Yet we still have only one Holy Bible which everyone can read, that now ironically teaches, “…walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called… with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love; Endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. One Lord, one faith, one baptism…” (Ephesians 4:1-5)
I’m here at the cathedral of St. Jean, which was built in the 12th century. But right behind me you see the archeological remains of a cathedral called St. Croix, which was built in the 4th century.
As you can see over here, we have the archeological remains of St. Etienne, the first baptistry in Lyon built in the 4th century. And as you can clearly see, this font was built for immersion.
As we from the 4th century ruins nextdoor to the functioning cathedral of St. Jean we have the modern font here, clearly not made for immersion. This exquisitely carved stone and bronze font has written around it in Latin, “Except a man be born of water and of the spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.”
And here in Geneva Switzerland, SAINT PIerre’s Cathedral on the hill dating back to 1535, has a fascinating archeological find under its foundation.
The first archeological dig was made in the 1850’s but it wasn’t until 1976 that they discovered the extent and historical value of what was under this cathedral, and in 1986 it was finally opened as a museum to the public.
The focus of our attention is going to be on the baptistery. These fonts were built and expanded from the 4th to the 8th century and consists of an extensive system of ducts to supply fresh water to these fonts which were used for baptizing by immersion.
The mode of baptism outlined in the New Testament is immersion, and we are not supposed to forget the symbolism. “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. For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection…” Romans 6:4-5 The ordinance of baptism is being born again of the water and the ordinance of receiving the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands is being born again of the Spirit.
The Catholics believed that baptism is required to enter the kingdom of heaven, as stated in the Bible, but this is where the debate runs into some theological trouble for those who don’t get baptized. Somewhere between the death of the apostles and the creeds of Catholicism as we know it, a fear of babies dying without baptism prompted the practice of baptizing infants as soon as possible after birth to insure the necessary ordinance was completed in case the baby dies. But immersion posed an obvious problem for newborn babies, holding their breath. You don’t have to loose very many babies before something reasonable has to be done. But the early Saints were not burdened with the danger of baptizing infants, this had become a new problem as new non-biblical and non-revelatory creeds were adopted in councils of men.
Latter-day Saints shouldn’t be too surprised that this doctrine crept in at some point because we know it was not the only time or place in history that it had. In the Book of Mormon at the final winding down of the Nephite nation and as their faithfulness to the gospel was coming to its prophesied end, so was revelation and understanding, and the issue of infant baptism began to be practiced among them as well.
The prophet Mormon writes to his son, “…if I have learned the truth, there have been disputations among you concerning the baptism of your little children. And now, my son, I desire that ye should labor diligently, that this gross error should be removed from among you… For immediately after I had learned these things of you I inquired of the Lord concerning the matter… I know that it is solemn mockery before God, that ye should baptize little children… he that supposeth that little children need baptism is in the gall of bitterness and in the bonds of iniquity; for he hath neither faith, hope, nor charity… For awful is the wickedness to suppose that God saveth one child because of baptism, and the other must perish because he hath no baptism. Wo be unto them that shall pervert the ways of the Lord after this manner… Little children cannot repent… he that is under no condemnation, cannot repent; and unto such baptism availeth nothing— But it is mockery before God, denying the mercies of Christ…and putting trust in dead works.” Moroni 8:5-23
A similar idea grew in the minds of the religious leaders who failed to understand that repentance cleanses you from sins, not baptism. You need to go through the process of repentance and be clean from your sins before you get baptized. All the scriptures show that the people first had faith in Jesus Christ unto repentance. That means they had a change of heart and endeavored to follow the teachings of Christ, repenting of their sins and committing to keep His commandments. But following repentance was when they were baptized. For Latter-day Saints, it’s the same when partaking of the sacrament, which is a weekly renewal of your baptismal covenants. You repent first and then partake of the sacrament. But in ancient Christianity, somewhere along the line, another tradition began where one would put off baptism as long as possible thinking that if you were lucky you could get sprinkled on your deathbed and then you would be in the purest possible state leaving this world. Thinking that baptism can replace repentance and keeping the commandments, and that babies need baptism to be saved in heaven, is what the prophet Mormon called “putting trust in dead works.”
Martin Luther rightly believed that vain reliance on these outward acts couldn’t possibly lead to automatic salvation, but it seems that he swung the pendulum from one extreme to the other and taught that observing all these ordinances such as baptism were not necessary at all, and only faith was what would qualify a person to enter into the rest of the Lord.
But the Bible clearly teaches that baptism is essential to salvation. There are so many verses that there is no time to read them all, so suffice it to say that it is taught over and over “Repent, and be baptized, every one…” (Acts 2:38), “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved…” (Mark 16:16) Jesus answering Nicodemus said, “Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.” John 3: The ordinance of baptism and the ordinance of receiving the Holy Ghost is essential to the salvation Christ has in store for those who follow Him. And the ultimate commission to the apostles, “Go… and teach all nations, baptizing them…” (Matthew 28:19) Exercise faith to repentance and be baptized is the unfailing message of the New Testament.
Now I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but the Bible has plenty of scriptures that teach both of these principles. On the one hand, it teaches the necessity of keeping the commandments and doing the ordinances because John’s vision of judgment day informs us that, “they were judged every man according to their works.” Rev 12:13 But even after everything we are expected to DO, we are ultimately SAVED by the grace of God, not SAVED by our works. We rely upon the atonement of Christ, which is the grace of God, for our SALVATION. Because it’s true, though we are JUDGED by our works, there is no amount of good works that you can do to qualify for salvation without the atonement, which does something we cannot do for ourselves. Yet it is clearly taught that we must EXERCISE faith in Christ, which leads to the ACT of repentance and following the EXAMPLE of Jesus by BEING baptized. What The kingdom of Judah had done at the time of Christ, was to swing the pendulum to an extreme belief on outward expressions of the gospel. Today, the Gentiles have swung the Christian pendulum in the opposite extreme, claiming you don’t have to DO anything but believe. Latter-day Saints believe all of the Bible, we believe both of these principles as they are taught in the scriptures.
And is the authority to baptize and give the gift of the Holy Ghost absolutely necessary? Can’t anyone just assume that authority? In the case of Simon the sorcerer, or the ex-sorcerer as I call him, because he had repented, was baptized and was among the many believers of Samaria. But conversion involves more change for some than others, and it seems to be the case for poor Simon because after many were waiting for someone to come from Jerusalem who had the authority to lay hands on them and give the gift of the Holy Ghost, Simon also wanted to be able to have this priesthood authority. His solution was to offer cash to the apostles Peter and John, who, remember, received their priesthood authority from Jesus by the laying on of hands. Peter was incensed and boldly told Simon “Repent therefore of this thy wickedness… For I perceive that thou art in the gall of bitterness, and in the bond of iniquity.” Acts 8:22-23 Now I don’t know what ultimately came of Simon, but let’s assume that he repented of his erroneous thinking. Could he then simply assume this priesthood authority, or is it still something you must be given by the laying on of hands by someone who has the priesthood authority to give? Remember, they were baptized in Samaria, but waited for someone to come from Jerusalem to give the gift of the Holy Ghost.
Here’s another example of “Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples, He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost. And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John’s baptism. Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.” (Acts 19:1-4)
These people were desirous to join the Saints but it seems clear that there was either fraudulent or erroneous teachers who baptized them who were clearly not authorized. So is being baptized by someone without authority a big deal or not? “When [Paul] heard this, [those certain disciples] were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them…” (Acts 19:5-6) It wasn’t enough for these certain disciples to be baptized by just anyone, they had to be re-baptized by someone holding the priesthood authority. Remember this, Peter as the chief apostle was given authoritative priesthood keys that “… whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” (Matthew 16:19)
The Book of Mormon and latter-day revelation demonstrates that baptism was practiced from the beginning and in Israel long before John the Baptist came on the scene. In fact, what John was doing wasn’t actually denounced among the Jews. It seems there was knowledge of the old practice that had faded out of use along the way, but John was commissioned to restore the practice.
In the Book of Mormon the word baptism is obviously used during Old Testament times as we have it translated today, but baptism is a Greek word. I don’t know what the Hebrew word or expression would have been but it’s clear to us that the practice of baptism was written out of Jewish history over the centuries. As an example, when Isaiah says, “Wash you, and make you clean…“ How? By “…put[ting] away the evil of your doings from before mine eyes; cease to do evil…” Isaiah 1:16 I think it’s pretty obvious that he’s talking about the ordinance of baptism, because you can’t simply take a bath to accomplish what the Lord is asking.
So we have to pause here and make something clear. Catholics claim to have an unbroken line of priesthood authority from Peter whom they would consider the first Pope. And we’ll consider all early branches like Greek Orthodox, Russian Orthodox etcetera all under the orthodox Catholic umbrella for simplicity. So all of the Protestant branches grew out of the reformation period where people and nations threw off the centuries old yoke of Catholicism to form new Christian denominations, where priesthood authority can now be assumed by anyone feeling the calling.
Most Protestant denominations agree that early on in Christian history, the church established by Jesus Christ experienced a falling away from the true order of things to evolve into orthodox Catholicism steeped in centuries of unbiblical tradition, hence the protesting and attempt at reform that resulted in the break away and birth of thousands of different Christian denominations.
With the ability to finally read the Bible for themselves, mankind breaks away and attempts to reverse-engineer what Christ established. What do I mean by that? Reverse Engineering means,“:to disassemble and examine in detail (a product or device) to discover the concepts involved in the manufacture in order to copy it.” The rejection of Catholicism lead to attempts to reverse-engineer the church read about in the Bible, to create what best simulated the original church and her doctrines. That’s all I hear today in Protestant declarations, “We’re a Bible based church,” “Make sure you search out and join a Bible based church.” Do you know what I’ve never ever heard? “We’re a Christian church but we’re NOT based on the Bible.” I’ve never heard that. Thousands of Christian denominations claim the same book as the source of their church and doctrines.
Joseph Smith pointed out a flaw in the ideology of reformation, that I think is pretty reasonable. “Here is a principle of logic that most men have no more sense than to adopt. I will illustrate it by an old apple tree. Here jumps off a branch and says, I am the true tree, and you are corrupt. If the whole tree is corrupt, are not its branches corrupt? If the Catholic religion is a false religion, how can any true religion come out of it?”
“It is in the order of heavenly things that God should always send a new dispensation into the world when men have apostatized from the truth and lost the priesthood; but when men come out and build upon other men’s foundations, they do it on their own responsibility, without authority from God; and when the floods come and the winds blow, their foundations will be found to be sand, and their whole fabric will crumble to dust.”
But where Catholics claim an unbroken line of authority, Latter-day Saints believe an apostasy of priesthood authority occurred somewhere between the last of the apostles and the acceptance of the new creeds of the Nicaean council somewhere between 100 and 300 A.D.. We believe the church that Jesus established in his name, was founded upon the rock of revelation with prophets and apostles whose priesthood authority was broken, and that unauthorized people took up what remnants they could and through the centuries it became a church of man, unplugged from the needed guidance of revelation and priesthood authority.
So where do the Latter-day Saints fall in this scheme? We’re not Catholic, but we don’t considered ourselves Protestant either, the church didn’t break from Catholicism. We call the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints a restored church, it is not a reverse-engineered church.
We believe the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the “stone cut without hands” as spoken of by Daniel that will “consume all…kingdoms… And shall stand forever.” What does that phrase “cut without hands” mean? The reference to that great kingdom made without hands means that it will be established by God himself, not by the philosophies or councils of men or by their wisdom. And what is the claim of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints? That God himself came to a young boy who was then tutored by angels and Christ himself, who was given the keys and priesthood authority to bind on earth and in heaven. To become a true and living prophet, a servant in the hands of God like all the prophets of old, to establish the Lord’s kingdom, to restore the fulness of his gospel through a line of authoritative prophets to this day, to gather and prepare a people for the Messiah’s second coming and reign on earth as king. Is this a bold claim? YES IT IS, so pay close attention!
Back to the subject of baptism, we have a split in Christianity. Orthodox Catholicism teaches baptism is necessary, although that idea is openly contested in Catholicism today, while most Protestant denominations say that baptism is not necessary. Then along comes the young prophet Joseph Smith in 1829, beginning the translation of the Book of Mormon and reads a passage where the prophet Nephi sees in vision four hundred years into his future… the birth and ministry of the prophesied Messiah and “to fulfill all righteousness,”his baptism by John the Baptist.
After the vision, Nephi concludes, “And now, if the Lamb of God, he being holy, should have need to be baptized by water, to fulfil all righteousness, O then, how much more need have we, being unholy, to be baptized! And now, I would ask of you, wherein the Lamb of God did fulfil all righteousness in being baptized by water? Know ye not that he was holy? But notwithstanding he being holy, he showeth unto the children of men that, according to the flesh he humbleth himself before the Father, and witnesseth unto the Father that he would be obedient unto him in keeping his commandments. And again, it showeth unto the children of men the straitness of the path, and the narrowness of the gate, by which they should enter, he having set the example before them. And he said unto the children of men: Follow thou me. Wherefore, my beloved brethren, can we follow Jesus save we shall be willing to keep the commandments of the Father? And the Father said: Repent ye, repent ye, and be baptized in the name of my Beloved Son. 2 Nephi 31:5-11
After reading what the Book of Mormon taught about baptism, and remember, the translation is no where near being finished, Joseph Smith enquires of the Lord on this subject, and through some miraculous events, the ordinance of authoritative baptism, and the ordinance of giving the gift of the Holy Ghost is restored to the prophet Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdry. As the church grew and doctrines were restored, and handfuls of missionaries went to seek out the lost sheep and gather them in from the four corners of the world through faith, repentance and baptism, in time the question that is on the minds of so many is, IF baptism is truly a required ordinance that will be bound on earth and in heaven, what about those who never had a proper opportunity to be baptized in their lifetime? Remember, it’s not the first time the question was pondered, the medieval Christians struggled with it and changed the gospel of repentance and the ordinance of baptism by immersion to accommodate baptizing babies, having lost the authority and an understanding of the original doctrines of Christ.
Now for baptism of the dead. One of the most mysterious verses in the Bible occurs in a letter written to the Corinthians. Many of the New Testament Saints in Corinth were Jewish converts from the denomination of Sadducees, who did not believe in life after death or the resurrection of the dead. That unusual branch of Judaism went extinct when Rome crushed the Jewish rebellion in Jerusalem and destroyed the temple of Solomon in 70 A.D., which ended up being a real shock to all those Sadducees who died and all arrived in the afterlife together. Anyway, I’m going to read a letter from Paul who is correcting the Corinthian Saints on the doctrine of the resurrection. Pay attention to the context and listen for a pearl of great price nestled in the text.
“… 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… For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins – according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day – according to the scriptures: And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve: After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once… And last of all he was seen of me also…
Now if Christ be preached that he rose from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead?
… if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen: And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain… 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: And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain… If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable. But NOW IS Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept. For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
For [Christ] must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. 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 the dead rise not? let us eat and drink; for to morrow we die. But some man will say, How are the dead raised up? Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed… So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory. O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory? … thanks be to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore, my beloved brethren, be ye steadfast, unmoveable, always abounding in the work of the Lord…” (1 Corinthians 15)
Paul is using every bit of reasoning he can muster to convince these people that a major false doctrine from the traditions of the Sadducees has crept into their belief system. This is one of the great examples of why we always need living prophets with a constant flow of revelation. He brings up point after point to remind them that one of the major doctrines of the gospel of Christ, is our eventual resurrection! And one of his many points of argument to remind them that they obviously do believe in the resurrection, was the church’s practice of doing baptisms for the dead. “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?” It’s the only reference contained in the Bible and it’s only mentioned to support another principle. It’s been a mystery for centuries, until the restoration of the fulness of the gospel.
Joseph Smith elaborates the principle even more with another Bible verse: “ …in connection with this quotation I will give you a quotation from one of the prophets, who had his eye fixed on the restoration of the priesthood, the glories to be revealed in the last days, and in an especial manner this most glorious of all subjects belonging to the everlasting gospel, namely, the baptism for the dead; for Malachi says, “Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord: And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.” (Malachi 4:4-5)
… It is sufficient to know, in this case, that the earth will be smitten with a curse unless there is a welding link of some kind or other between the fathers and the children, upon some subject or other—and behold what is that subject? It is the baptism for the dead. For we without them cannot be made perfect; neither can they without us be made perfect. Neither can they nor we be made perfect without those who have died in the gospel also; for it is necessary in the ushering in of the dispensation of the fulness of times, which dispensation is now beginning to usher in, that a whole and complete and perfect union, and welding together of dispensations, and keys, and powers, and glories should take place, and be revealed from the days of Adam even to the present time… the dispensation of the fulness of times. (Doctrine & Covenants 128:17-18)
Paul’s letter to the Corinthians show that the church was practicing baptisms for dead ancestors. They had the fulness of the gospel and understood what it meant that their hearts must turn to their fathers. Malachi prophecies that Elijah would return before Christ, to once again aid in a restoration of priesthood and knowledge, and turn the hearts of the children to their fathers, for the last time before Christ returns.
The prophet Joseph Smith begins to receive revelations in the early 1840’s concerning ordinances for the anticipated Nauvoo temple. Baptism for those who have died without the opportunity began to be performed by the power and authority that was given Joseph Smith, “that whatsoever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven.” D&C 128:8 Normal baptisms are done in church fonts, swimming pools, lakes or rivers, depending on what’s available. But baptisms for the deceased are reserved for these absolutely exquisite temples. The temple fonts are very special and are patterned after the font spoken of in the Old Testament, supported on the backs of 12 oxen. The baptismal prayer is the same as for the living, but with the addition that you are being baptized “for and in behalf” of someone who is dead, then it continues as usual in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. You get baptized for 5 or 10 deceased ancestors at a time and it’s that simple. Witnesses confirm that it was completed and it’s recorded on the books, for “The dead stand before God and are judged out of the books according to their works.” What was bound on earth, is now bound in heaven.
Now we do not believe that all of our relatives will accept the gospel of Jesus Christ in this life or in the next life, but we do believe that there are myriads of good people who didn’t have the option or were deceived away from finding the truth, as well as those that might just simply surprise us, who will accept it, which principle was touched upon by Peter when he said, “For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit: By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison…” 1 Peter 3:18 “For for this cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead…” (1 Peter 4:6)
As the fullness of the doctrine began to be revealed, these Bible verses that have never been understood, are finally brought to light and expounded after centuries of shrouded mystery. Through revelation to God’s prophet, we can finally see how the Lord can be just and fair in declaring, “Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.”( John 3:5) Outward ordinances and inward faith are both required and possible for all who would accept the gospel of Jesus Christ.
For most Christians, the Bible is the supreme and final word, but for the Latter-day Saints this is not the case, Jesus the Christ is the supreme and final word. So if He reveals another ancient testament of Himself, like the Book of Mormon or a living prophet receives a revelation, you could say, that the Latter-day Saints shall not live by the Bible alone, “but by every word of God.” (Luke 4:4)
I get so frustrated by other Christians accusing us Latter-day Saints of not even believing in the Bible, that I want to share with you what Joseph Smith had to say when frustrated by this same question of “Do you believe the Bible?” Joseph Smith’s response was, “…we are the only people under heaven that does, for there are none of the religious sects of the day that do… all other sects profess to believe their interpretations of the Bible, and their creeds.” There are so many mysterious principles in the Bible that we now understand and embrace because Christ has revealed or expounded upon those ancient scriptural mysteries through revelations to living prophets, meaning we don’t have to revers-engineer Biblical doctrines through the philosophies or councils of men. God himself provides better scriptural commentary than all the wisdom and learning of all the priests and ministers of the world combined.
We know that many don’t believe there are living prophets of God and more scripture than just the Bible today. But have you noticed that the claims of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are very similar to the claims of the church in Jesus day. The majority of the mainstream religious society in New Testament times, philosophized and reasoned among their councils and through their traditional books of scriptures, that Jesus was NOT the Christ, that the apostles were NOT true prophets chosen by God and they certainly do NOT believe the New Testament are valid scriptures. We know that many do not believe, but just like those Saints of old, we are duty bound to do as Christ has asked, “Go… and teach all nations, baptizing them…Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded…” (Matthew 28:19-20).