This obsession with death and the afterlife is unwholesame, unhealthy, and unbelievable.
I began to poke around a little on the Internet, and here’s a perfect example of how this god-fervor is ridiculous.
I began to poke around a little on the Internet, and here’s a perfect example of how this god-fervor is ridiculous.
Witness (hat tip to Stardust for the link):
“Mormon Baptism Practices
"Baptism and salvation for the dead are based on the conviction that persons who died without a chance to hear or accept the gospel cannot possibly be condemned by a just and merciful God. The gospel must be preached to them after death; they find authority for this practice in 1 Peter 4:6: "For this cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit." Baptism is considered as essential for the dead as it is for the living, even though the rites will not finally save them; there must be faith and repentance. The ceremony is performed with a living person standing proxy for the dead."
Handbook of Denominations, p.167”
Also:
“Paul mentioned this ordinance in passing as part of his argument for the reality of the resurrection: "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?"1 Commentators have long recognized that the plain meaning of the passage is that living people were being baptized for dead friends or relatives, but they usually try to get out of it by placing some other, more dubious interpretation on this verse. Thus Henry Halley:
This seems to mean vicarious baptism, that is, baptism for a dead friend. But there is no other Bible reference to such a practice, and no evidence that it existed in the Apostolic Church. Perhaps a better translation would be "baptized in hope of the resurrection.2
But Paul's statement itself is evidence that baptism for the dead existed in the Apostolic Church! The NIV Study Bible admits that, "The present tense suggests that at Corinth people were currently being baptized for the dead."3 And if "baptized for the dead" really means "baptized in hope of the resurrection", it is an idiom translators have no knowledge of, or they would have used it to sidestep the obvious meaning of the passage.“
Obviously, some folks have a problem differentiating this ‘allegorical vs. literal’ folderol. My understanding is that Paul was blasting away at the Corinthians for their apparent freelance interpretations?
And one more, for good measure, from the ‘horse’s mouth’, no less:
“And again I give unto you a word in relation to the Baptism for your dead. Verily thus saith the Lord unto you concerning your dead when any of you are baptised for your dead let there be a recorder, and let him be eyewitness of your baptisms; let him hear with his ears that he may testify of a truth, saith the Lord; that in all your recordings it may be recorded in Heaven, that whatsoever you bind on earth may be bound in heaven; whatsoever you loose on earth may be loosed in heaven; for I am about to restore many things to the Earth, pertaining to the Priesthood saith the Lord of Hosts. And again let all the Records be had in order, that they may be put in the archives of my Holy Temple to be held in remembrance from generation to generation saith the Lord of Hosts.”
The pursuit of immortality, it seems, takes so many morbid, tangential paths, all of them fraught with falsehood and folly.
Then again, what do you expect from people who wear ‘holy underwear’? I wonder if they come in silk (wink-wink, know what I mean, nudge-nudge?).
And here’s another nice little ditty: ever seen a black Mormon? You haven’t? What a shock! Here’s why:
For those of you without DSL/Broadband, the portion I'm referring to, is that the Morons (whoops! The Mormons, sorry!) believe that we are all Elohim (pre-birth and post-mortem), and that there was a big argument between Jesus and Lucifer at the Round Table (yeah, different fable, you get the gist), and Lucifer rebelled (aka the Fall). Those of the Eloheim who remained neutral were then cursed with dark skin.
I kid you not, dear readers.
Now, I assure you all, that I don't usually use South Park as a research source, but they tell it so well, that I may as well post this video:
For those of you who will not suffer fools gladly, this next video is a possible approach for the next time these lingerie-wearing corpse-baptising holy-rollers come a-knockin' on your door:
You give 'em hell, Granny! YEAH! (that video never ceases to make me laugh and cheer.)
Questions, comments, any good jokes?
Till the next post, then.
“Mormon Baptism Practices
"Baptism and salvation for the dead are based on the conviction that persons who died without a chance to hear or accept the gospel cannot possibly be condemned by a just and merciful God. The gospel must be preached to them after death; they find authority for this practice in 1 Peter 4:6: "For this cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit." Baptism is considered as essential for the dead as it is for the living, even though the rites will not finally save them; there must be faith and repentance. The ceremony is performed with a living person standing proxy for the dead."
Handbook of Denominations, p.167”
Also:
“Paul mentioned this ordinance in passing as part of his argument for the reality of the resurrection: "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?"1 Commentators have long recognized that the plain meaning of the passage is that living people were being baptized for dead friends or relatives, but they usually try to get out of it by placing some other, more dubious interpretation on this verse. Thus Henry Halley:
This seems to mean vicarious baptism, that is, baptism for a dead friend. But there is no other Bible reference to such a practice, and no evidence that it existed in the Apostolic Church. Perhaps a better translation would be "baptized in hope of the resurrection.2
But Paul's statement itself is evidence that baptism for the dead existed in the Apostolic Church! The NIV Study Bible admits that, "The present tense suggests that at Corinth people were currently being baptized for the dead."3 And if "baptized for the dead" really means "baptized in hope of the resurrection", it is an idiom translators have no knowledge of, or they would have used it to sidestep the obvious meaning of the passage.“
Obviously, some folks have a problem differentiating this ‘allegorical vs. literal’ folderol. My understanding is that Paul was blasting away at the Corinthians for their apparent freelance interpretations?
And one more, for good measure, from the ‘horse’s mouth’, no less:
“And again I give unto you a word in relation to the Baptism for your dead. Verily thus saith the Lord unto you concerning your dead when any of you are baptised for your dead let there be a recorder, and let him be eyewitness of your baptisms; let him hear with his ears that he may testify of a truth, saith the Lord; that in all your recordings it may be recorded in Heaven, that whatsoever you bind on earth may be bound in heaven; whatsoever you loose on earth may be loosed in heaven; for I am about to restore many things to the Earth, pertaining to the Priesthood saith the Lord of Hosts. And again let all the Records be had in order, that they may be put in the archives of my Holy Temple to be held in remembrance from generation to generation saith the Lord of Hosts.”
The pursuit of immortality, it seems, takes so many morbid, tangential paths, all of them fraught with falsehood and folly.
Then again, what do you expect from people who wear ‘holy underwear’? I wonder if they come in silk (wink-wink, know what I mean, nudge-nudge?).
And here’s another nice little ditty: ever seen a black Mormon? You haven’t? What a shock! Here’s why:
For those of you without DSL/Broadband, the portion I'm referring to, is that the Morons (whoops! The Mormons, sorry!) believe that we are all Elohim (pre-birth and post-mortem), and that there was a big argument between Jesus and Lucifer at the Round Table (yeah, different fable, you get the gist), and Lucifer rebelled (aka the Fall). Those of the Eloheim who remained neutral were then cursed with dark skin.
I kid you not, dear readers.
Now, I assure you all, that I don't usually use South Park as a research source, but they tell it so well, that I may as well post this video:
For those of you who will not suffer fools gladly, this next video is a possible approach for the next time these lingerie-wearing corpse-baptising holy-rollers come a-knockin' on your door:
You give 'em hell, Granny! YEAH! (that video never ceases to make me laugh and cheer.)
Questions, comments, any good jokes?
Till the next post, then.
8 comments:
Why would the Lord need you to have a recoder as witness? Doesn't he see, hear, know everything?
Ooops. Little slip there, Jesu?
KA, I appoint you as my proxy. If anyone tries to baptise me after I'm dead, you give 'em hell.
I'm going to try to download the videos at some point. Damn dial-up.
Have fun at work tomorrow!
Ka
As much as it pains me to say, the morons do have some valid claims about the Native americans.
http://www.andrewcollins.com/page/articles/romanbust.htm
but, that does not mean their bullshit story about the gods is anymore true than next. It only proves that some natives incountered and were exposed to the romans and chrisianity before columbus.
And I love the granny clip! LOL hard
Un-f*#king-believable. I had never looked into mormorons. I thought they were just another xian offshoot.
Smith known for his tall tales! - shades of Hubbard.
"so far up... you choke" LMAO
I especially liked dumb-dumb, dumb- dumb, dumb in the background.
Should I be concerned that I'm getting so much information from Stewart, Colbert and South Park?;)
Thanksamuch K
karen:
KA, I appoint you as my proxy. If anyone tries to baptise me after I'm dead, you give 'em hell.
I kin get as worked up a preacher on Sunday (but you knew that already). I'll even sic the ACLU on the wankjobs!
I'm going to try to download the videos at some point. Damn dial-up.
Yeah, sorry.
SNTC:
As much as it pains me to say, the morons do have some valid claims about the Native americans.
The problem w/that is, as I see it, is that the Mormons claim the Amerindians were a lost tribe of Israel, not Romans.
And I love the granny clip! LOL hard
Yeah, we need more grannies like that in this world.
remy:
Should I be concerned that I'm getting so much information from Stewart, Colbert and South Park?;)
Hey, I've learned some pretty valid things from comic books (oops! I mean graphic novels).
If you want absolute surety on any subject, you should check at least 3 other sources.
Religion is very worrying at the best of times, but to carry it on after you are pushign up the daises means you just cannot get away from the god botherers. (Or the cemetary attendant botherers as in this case)
Ka
like I said "but, that does not mean their bullshit story about the gods is anymore true than next. It only proves that some natives incountered and were exposed to the romans and chrisianity before columbus."
But it gets even worse. And believe me, it pains me and makes me cringe when I have to admit that there is a lot of validity in what the morons believe about the NAtive American.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/716088/posts
And again I say, just because there is validity in their beliefs about the Natives, does not give any validity about the celestial gods and goddesses and doesnt make them any less nutty.
What their beliefs remind me of is the early christianized pagan bliefs.
But, on a good note (for me anyway) is that it supports James DeMeo's theory of how pratiarchy spread to the new world before Columbus and why half of the Americans were still peaceful matriarchs and the other half, war driven patriachs, who arived a bit later to the Americas. And from a few sites I have googled up here and there it appears the DNA supports the theory as well. Dont hold me to that yet, as I am still looking into it. I think the hardest part about trying to find information about certain things is finding the right words to use that will give you the research and information your looking for.
lucyp:
Religion is very worrying at the best of times, but to carry it on after you are pushign up the daises means you just cannot get away from the god botherers.
At least when you're pushing up the daisies, you don't need to worry about 'em anymore. Small comfort.
But it gets even worse. And believe me, it pains me and makes me cringe when I have to admit that there is a lot of validity in what the morons believe about the NAtive American.
Well, I looked at the link, & then I looked up Cyrus Gordon.
Jury's still out on the Bat Creek stone (some say it's in Hebrew, some in Welsh).
Hmmm...I'll poke around a bit.
Ka said:"Hmmm...I'll poke around a bit."
Me too. I have been poking around for a couple of days now. It's hard to find the truth when our mainstream christianized history had already been written.
The thing about religion is that it always uses some truths to lure the simple minded in to the rest of it's lies and silly fairy tales.
That is why dont think it is impossible that there is some truths to the morons(mormons) beliefs.
Post a Comment