Why are baptisms for the dead performed in the temple?

[Guest HEthePrimate]

When a person gets her own endowment, she goes to the temple. Subsequently, she also goes to the temple to perform endowment ceremonies on behalf of the dead.

When a person gets baptized, she goes either to a regular church meetinghouse, a natural body of water, or a swimming pool. However, baptisms for the dead are only performed in the temple.

Why is this so?

[thejason]

Temples were established for the performing of ordinances on behalf of those who could perform them for themselves. We are baptized for ourselves outside the temple, but are baptized for others in the temple, as that's what they are for.

A person does not need to be endowed to perform baptisms for the dead in the temple. They only need to be a member and be deamed worthy by their bishop.

[BenRaines]

All ordinances performed for those not living are performed in the temple.

Ben Raines

[Guest HEthePrimate]

Yes, but why? If a person can be baptized for himself outside of the temple, why not also do baptisms for the dead outside the temple? The ceremony is essentially the same, and everybody knows we perform baptisms for the dead, so it's not as though we'd be revealing any big secret. Surely, a baptism for a dead person is not any holier than baptizing a living person.

Thanks for your answers.

DH

[BenRaines]

Baptism for living can be done by a Priest in the Aaronic Priesthood. Baptisms for the Dead can only be performed by Mel. Priesthood holder in the temple.

Ben Raines

[MarginOfError]

The temple was reserved as the place to perform ordinances for those who have passed on. That's the only reason. Before the Nauvoo Temple was completed the Lord did allow baptisms for the dead to be performed outside the temple, but only until the temple was completed.

I think that the more appropriate question you should be asking is if a living person can be baptized outside the temple, why can't he or she receive the Endowment or Sealing outside the temple. But again, the answer comes down to, "because we were told to."

Allow me to hijack the thread for a minute: I once was asked why we perform baptism by immersion. I simply said, "Because God said so." Someone else decided I should be corrected and explained all the symbolism of baptism by immersion. When they were finished, I pointed out that there was a difference between the reason and the choice of mode. The reason we are baptized by immersion is because Christ said we should do it this way. The motivation for the choice of immersion was driven by the symbolism. But if Christ had designated that baptism by goose feathers in a pie plate, it would still hold the same covenants and purpose. It's Christ's atonement, so we get to play by his rules.

[truthwalker]

In the spiritual world there are doors, windows, floors and a roof. Exactly on the same scale as our buildings because spiritual matter is incorporated with physical matter. That is why we need special temples were only chosen and worthy ones can enter. at the same moment we open a door and enter, spirits from the spirit world enters with us. If we dont open the door here, they can not enter because spiritual matter can not effect physical matter.

[Guest HEthePrimate]

In the spiritual world there are doors, windows, floors and a roof. Exactly on the same scale as our buildings because spiritual matter is incorporated with physical matter. That is why we need special temples were only chosen and worthy ones can enter. at the same moment we open a door and enter, spirits from the spirit world enters with us. If we dont open the door here, they can not enter because spiritual matter can not effect physical matter.

We can baptize a living person in the ocean. That is a sacred ordinance, but the beach is not a special place where only chosen and worthy people can go. Why is it different for a dead person? Couldn't we just as well perform that ordinance at the beach?

Spiritual matter is not always incorporated with physical matter. If it were, our individual spirits would cease to exist when our bodies die.

[truthwalker]

I believe spiritual matter is incorporated in all physical matter. Its the electricity in everything. I cant prove it, but i think so. also earth is a giant spirit. i dont understand why our spirit bodies would cease to exist if our physical body died when the coexist. Physical matter is programmed to die after some years. All cells have a built in program to die after they have been copied for a while. but spiritual matter born from God is different. Eternal. but our resurrected bodies also consist of flesh and bone. But this time our brain immunesystem have a different programming. They are programmed to repair themselves forever, if they even are damaged, i dont know. I just know that the body will exist forever, english forever. Not hebrew forever because that would be a limited time.

[BenRaines]

i agree that all things have a spirit. I believe when the scriptures say all things were created spiritually before temporally or physically. As I understand it even the rocks have a spirit. Never thought that spirits die myself. I think it is the blood in our bodies that make us mortal.

Ben Raines

[truthwalker]

Hey.. i weighed 75 kilogram and made 175 kilogram in benchpress. Whats your score BenRaines. I can see that you workout, thats why i am asking.

[Superbaldguy]

If the Lord would have authorized proxy baptisms outside the temple, this would have taken away the sacredness of the ordinance. He is very specific about why such holy structures were created in the first place and all the great sacrifices that have been made in this dispensation are a testimony of the work.

[pam]

Hey.. i weighed 75 kilogram and made 175 kilogram in benchpress. Whats your score BenRaines. I can see that you workout, thats why i am asking.

[Guest HEthePrimate]

I believe spiritual matter is incorporated in all physical matter. Its the electricity in everything. I cant prove it, but i think so. also earth is a giant spirit. i dont understand why our spirit bodies would cease to exist if our physical body died when the coexist. Physical matter is programmed to die after some years. All cells have a built in program to die after they have been copied for a while. but spiritual matter born from God is different. Eternal. but our resurrected bodies also consist of flesh and bone. But this time our brain immunesystem have a different programming. They are programmed to repair themselves forever, if they even are damaged, i dont know. I just know that the body will exist forever, english forever. Not hebrew forever because that would be a limited time.

Basically I agree with you. I only meant that spirit and physical matter can exist separately. When we die, our spirit body leaves the tabernacle of clay and continues to live separately until they are reunited in the resurrection.

[Guest HEthePrimate]

If the Lord would have authorized proxy baptisms outside the temple, this would have taken away the sacredness of the ordinance.

Does this mean that baptizing a living person outside the temple is therefore not sacred?

[Superbaldguy]

I suppose it would be no less sacred but the Lord has yet to authorize it; all such ordinances are to be done in temples, qualifications are so important. It's great that 12-year olds can participate.

[thejason]

The Lord has told us to perform baptisms for the dead only in the temple, so that's what we do. We don't need to know the purpose of a commandment to obey it. We only need faith that the Lord has a plan.

[Mahonri1]

Baptisms for the dead can be performed anywhere priesthood holders can find enough water. When the Kirtland Temple was built NO baptism for the dead took place. NO endowments were done. Nothing of modern temple ceremonies was even brought up. It was a glorified cultural hall and nothing like the current temples. Most of the current practice was instituted in Utah which is why the LDS Church lost the case for ownership of the Temple Lot in Independence, Missouri to the 'Temple Lot Mormons' They could not show ownership and the 'ceremonies' were not what Joseph Smith had given or taught at the time.

A lot of questions about building a Temple and then using it for dances and parties instead of Temple work.

The ceremonies only came about after Joseph Smith became a Mason. None of this stuff was done before then in the Kirtland Temple. None was even hinted at. Just like the name of the church, the first stuff and the later are not the same. One thing and then another gives a lot of leeway to those who are of the anti-mormon persuasion. You just can't explain truth when it changes so much. It is as if God reveals something and then changes his mind. Kind of like Polygamy in the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smiths public statements on it and his private practices. What is truth? "What I say it is today and it may change tomorrow", is a good definition.

[bjw]

Baptisms for the dead can be performed anywhere priesthood holders can find enough water. When the Kirtland Temple was built NO baptism for the dead took place. NO endowments were done. Nothing of modern temple ceremonies was even brought up. It was a glorified cultural hall and nothing like the current temples. Most of the current practice was instituted in Utah which is why the LDS Church lost the case for ownership of the Temple Lot in Independence, Missouri to the 'Temple Lot Mormons' They could not show ownership and the 'ceremonies' were not what Joseph Smith had given or taught at the time.

A lot of questions about building a Temple and then using it for dances and parties instead of Temple work.

The ceremonies only came about after Joseph Smith became a Mason. None of this stuff was done before then in the Kirtland Temple. None was even hinted at. Just like the name of the church, the first stuff and the later are not the same. One thing and then another gives a lot of leeway to those who are of the anti-mormon persuasion. You just can't explain truth when it changes so much. It is as if God reveals something and then changes his mind. Kind of like Polygamy in the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smiths public statements on it and his private practices. What is truth? "What I say it is today and it may change tomorrow", is a good definition.

If you read the book "Endowed from on High" that FAIR sells it says that Joseph Smith took the matter up with the Lord regarding the meaning of the masonic ceremony, and the Lord taught JS that there were remnants of the original temple ritual in the masonic ceremony. Much of the early endowment comes from other mystery traditions as well as masonry, since much of these traditions contain remnants here and there of the original ceremony. The ceremony was originally practiced in the upper-rooms of the store in Nauvoo until a structure could be built that could appropriately house the rituals.

What you say about the temple-lot and Kirtland temple cases may be true, but the purpose of latter-day temples changed as a result of these new revelations. Had the church been able to stay in one place for long the complete ceremonies may have been revealed, but the church had to leave before the new revelations. So, the Kirtland temple and temple-lot had their purpose according to what had been revealed at the time. Some temples today still have assembly chapels and have stake chapel sessions from time-to-time, and the Salt Lake Temple also acts as a meeting place for the authorities of the church.

Back to the subject of baptism for the dead...

I think that part of the reason we can only do them in the temple is that it is sometimes a sacred experience, where we can even feel the presence of the person we are doing the baptism for, and what we are doing is affecting the progression of someone that is on the other side of the veil. Thus, the Lord has chosen to keep the things that affect the other side of the veil in His house. One missionary told me that he believes that the veil runs thinner inside the temple than it does on the outside, so that could be a reason.

[HiJolly]

Baptisms for the dead can be performed anywhere priesthood holders can find enough water. When the Kirtland Temple was built NO baptism for the dead took place. NO endowments were done. Nothing of modern temple ceremonies was even brought up. It was a glorified cultural hall and nothing like the current temples. Most of the current practice was instituted in Utah which is why the LDS Church lost the case for ownership of the Temple Lot in Independence, Missouri to the 'Temple Lot Mormons' They could not show ownership and the 'ceremonies' were not what Joseph Smith had given or taught at the time.

Not true. Washings and annointings were performed in the Kirtland Temple. And if we read in the D&C concerning the Lord's promise of the bestowal of the priesthood keys of the mysteries of heaven, these were made in the Kirtland era. Events prevented the further exposition of these keys, as the Saints left Kirtland before more could be done.

The ceremonies only came about after Joseph Smith became a Mason. None of this stuff was done before then in the Kirtland Temple. None was even hinted at.

Already addressed - he's/she's just wrong on this.

Just like the name of the church, the first stuff and the later are not the same. One thing and then another gives a lot of leeway to those who are of the anti-mormon persuasion. You just can't explain truth when it changes so much.

Sure you can.

HiJolly

Edited August 21, 2008 by HiJolly