Is baptism necessary? What about the gift of the Holy Ghost?

[Cali Coug]

Ewth8tr's post on baptism got me thinking. We preach that baptism is necessary, and frequently cite John 3:5 as support. Christ said that all must be baptized, and even he was baptized to fulfill all righteousness.

And yet, we also preach that there are many who do not require baptism. Those who die before reaching age 8 and the mentally handicapped are exempt from baptismal requirements. It makes perfect sense to me that they would be exempt, given our understanding of the purpose of baptism and the nature of sin, but is it congruent with the example set by Christ and his teachings?

Furthermore, following baptism, we receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. Are those who are never baptized permitted to have the gift of the Holy Ghost without baptism? Are they ever confirmed members of the church? After this life, they presumably won't have that gift. Is that gift not required in the next life, or is there a mechanism for giving them that gift that doesn't require baptism?

Or, alternatively, are we to do baptisms for the dead for each of them who didn't need baptism here? If so, do we not baptize them here because they would have to be capable of accepting that baptism and the associated covenants, and they won't be able to make such an intelligent decision until after they die?

I don't think any of this has ever been revealed, but maybe someone has spoken on it in the past. Thoughts?

[Cali Coug]

No help on this from anyone? Dan? Solon? SIEQ?

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Ewth8tr's post on baptism got me thinking. We preach that baptism is necessary, and frequently cite John 3:5 as support. Christ said that all must be baptized, and even he was baptized to fulfill all righteousness.

And yet, we also preach that there are many who do not require baptism. Those who die before reaching age 8 and the mentally handicapped are exempt from baptismal requirements. It makes perfect sense to me that they would be exempt, given our understanding of the purpose of baptism and the nature of sin, but is it congruent with the example set by Christ and his teachings?

8 Listen to the words of Christ, your Redeemer, your Lord and your God. Behold, I came into the world not to call the righteous but sinners to repentance; the whole need no physician, but they that are sick; wherefore, little children are whole, for they are not capable of committing sin; wherefore the curse of Adam is taken from them in me, that it hath no power over them; and the law of circumcision is done away in me.
9 And after this manner did the Holy Ghost manifest the word of God unto me; wherefore, my beloved son, I know that it is solemn mockery before God, that ye should baptize little children.

Seems fairly clear that it is congruent with Christ's teachings, since it is Christ speaking.

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Furthermore, following baptism, we receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. Are those who are never baptized permitted to have the gift of the Holy Ghost without baptism? Are they ever confirmed members of the church? After this life, they presumably won't have that gift. Is that gift not required in the next life, or is there a mechanism for giving them that gift that doesn't require baptism?

I don't think there is any doctrine on whether or not the gift of the Holy Ghost is required (or even useful) in the afterlife. As an ordinance it is necessary, but who knows whether someone uses this gift after death.

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Or, alternatively, are we to do baptisms for the dead for each of them who didn't need baptism here? If so, do we not baptize them here because they would have to be capable of accepting that baptism and the associated covenants, and they won't be able to make such an intelligent decision until after they die?

We do not do proxy baptisms for children under 8. I don't know that there is anyway to reliably apply this to dead handicapped ancestors (whether they were actually mentally handicapped is in many cases unknowable), so likely there are some who have been baptized for the dead. I imagine it will all get sorted out later.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Tex

8 Listen to the words of Christ, your Redeemer, your Lord and your God. Behold, I came into the world not to call the righteous but sinners to repentance; the whole need no physician, but they that are sick; wherefore, little children are whole, for they are not capable of committing sin; wherefore the curse of Adam is taken from them in me, that it hath no power over them; and the law of circumcision is done away in me.
9 And after this manner did the Holy Ghost manifest the word of God unto me; wherefore, my beloved son, I know that it is solemn mockery before God, that ye should baptize little children.

Seems fairly clear that it is congruent with Christ's teachings, since it is Christ speaking.



I don't think there is any doctrine on whether or not the gift of the Holy Ghost is required (or even useful) in the afterlife. As an ordinance it is necessary, but who knows whether someone uses this gift after death.



We do not do proxy baptisms for children under 8. I don't know that there is anyway to reliably apply this to dead handicapped ancestors (whether they were actually mentally handicapped is in many cases unknowable), so likely there are some who have been baptized for the dead. I imagine it will all get sorted out later.

But how is it tied together with the statement that except a man be born of the water and the spirit, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God? Perhaps by "man" he means "natural man," or perhaps we cannot baptize children here because that would be offensive to God as they are without sin, but a baptism for the dead would be helpful later, or perhaps it is totally dispensed with altogether. I believe church doctrine strongly leans towards the dispensing with baptism altogether, but then there has never been any indication as to whether the gift of the Holy Ghost is given to those without baptism or whether it is necessary at all.

Baptism is a preparatory step towards receiving the Holy Ghost, but is it the only possible step that may be taken to receive it, or is the Holy Ghost entirely unnecessary after this life?

What of the covenants made at baptism that we are told we renew when partaking of the sacrament? Are those covenants not made if we don't ever get baptized? And what, specifically, are those covenants?

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

But how is it tied together with the statement that except a man be born of the water and the spirit, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God? Perhaps by "man" he means "natural man," or perhaps we cannot baptize children here because that would be offensive to God as they are without sin, but a baptism for the dead would be helpful later, or perhaps it is totally dispensed with altogether. I believe church doctrine strongly leans towards the dispensing with baptism altogether, but then there has never been any indication as to whether the gift of the Holy Ghost is given to those without baptism or whether it is necessary at all.

Baptism is a preparatory step towards receiving the Holy Ghost, but is it the only possible step that may be taken to receive it, or is the Holy Ghost entirely unnecessary after this life?

What of the covenants made at baptism that we are told we renew when partaking of the sacrament? Are those covenants not made if we don't ever get baptized? And what, specifically, are those covenants?

I'm shooting from the hip a little here, but ...

Baptism serves multiple purposes. It is vehicle of remission of sins. It is a covenant with God to follow him and keep his commandments. It is the gate to the celestial kingdom, a required ordinance of salvation.

It is in the spirit of that final purpose that baptism is administered by proxy to the dead. I'm not aware of any doctrine that says proxy baptism remits the one-time mortal sins of those who are dead, or remits sins committed in the afterlife (if such a thing is even possible). It seems to me the mortal remission of sins has purpose only in mortality.

Likewise, I'm not aware of doctrine that says the covenant made to keep the commandments and follow God applies to the dead the way it applies to the living. Again, we just don't know enough about the hereafter.

What we DO know is that the ordinance is required for salvation, and this is a requirement that applies to both the living and the dead. And that is why we perform it.

The Lord made a proviso for little children, and by extension it has been applied to mentally handicapped. Given that it's the Lord's kingdom, he can set whatever rules he wants for those to enter, no? Why is that such an issue?

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Tex

I'm shooting from the hip a little here, but ...

Baptism serves multiple purposes. It is vehicle of remission of sins. It is a covenant with God to follow him and keep his commandments. It is the gate to the celestial kingdom, a required ordinance of salvation.

It is in the spirit of that final purpose that baptism is administered by proxy to the dead. I'm not aware of any doctrine that says proxy baptism remits the one-time mortal sins of those who are dead, or remits sins committed in the afterlife (if such a thing is even possible). It seems to me the mortal remission of sins has purpose only in mortality.

Likewise, I'm not aware of doctrine that says the covenant made to keep the commandments and follow God applies to the dead the way it applies to the living. Again, we just don't know enough about the hereafter.

What we DO know is that the ordinance is required for salvation, and this is a requirement that applies to both the living and the dead. And that is why we perform it.

The Lord made a proviso for little children, and by extension it has been applied to mentally handicapped. Given that it's the Lord's kingdom, he can set whatever rules he wants for those to enter, no? Why is that such an issue?

It isn't an "issue," it is something I am curious about. Why are you trying to turn this into an argument?

The point about washing away sins with baptism is interesting when applied to the next life. I see no reason why it wouldn't wash away all mortal sins. It does here, it would if you were baptized on the last day of your life, so what would the difference be? I think it is yet another reason why almost everyone will wind up living in the Celestial Kingdom with God. Almost everyone who is baptized will be baptized by proxy. If they are then forgiven of their sins, they will be perfect and able to live with God (assuming marriage and other ordinances too).

Are there covenants made by those who are baptized by proxy? If so, it would seem logical to conclude that those covenants are of import after this life. If the Holy Ghost isn't relevant after this life, why would we confirm those who have been baptized for the dead? That seems to indicate a degree of relevance to me. So is there another mechanism whereby children or the handicapped can obtain the gift of the Holy Ghost?

[Spaz]

I don't think we know enough about the salvation of handicapped individuals to properly determine the answers to your questions.

My personal belief is that, since children and handicapped individuals are incapable of sin, they are therefore not susceptible to the fall of Adam, and therefore don't require the saving ordinances to be saved.


I don't think the truth in this issue is vital to my personal salvation, so I don't have a desire to put much more thought into the issue than that.

[All-American]

The act of dunking ourselves under water and having old people put their hands on our head has as much effect on our souls as eating a piece of bread and drinking a sip of water. That is, none at all, unless by so doing we promise to keep the commandments of God. Baptism is simply the means whereby we so promise. Confirmation and the bestowal of the gift of the Holy Ghost is God's acknowledgment of our promise and the affirmation that he will keep his end of the deal.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

It isn't an "issue," it is something I am curious about. Why are you trying to turn this into an argument?

I'm not. I'm just curious about your curiousity. It's plainly spelled out in scripture, so why would this be a question?

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

The point about washing away sins with baptism is interesting when applied to the next life. I see no reason why it wouldn't wash away all mortal sins. It does here, it would if you were baptized on the last day of your life, so what would the difference be? I think it is yet another reason why almost everyone will wind up living in the Celestial Kingdom with God. Almost everyone who is baptized will be baptized by proxy. If they are then forgiven of their sins, they will be perfect and able to live with God (assuming marriage and other ordinances too).

As All-American said, baptism is meaningless without an accompanying commitment. We are baptizing the ancestry of the earth, but the doctrine is that they are free to reject the ordinance. This is leaking into a different topic, but inheriting a Celestial glory goes far beyond being clean from sin. We are told that good people will be Terrestrial kingdom ... "the honorable men of the earth," in fact.

As to being clean from sin, I know of no doctrine that deals with the cleansing sin after one has died. This life, not the next, is the probationary state where one is judged based on one's deeds. How the remission of sins might apply to someone who is already dead is unclear.

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Are there covenants made by those who are baptized by proxy? If so, it would seem logical to conclude that those covenants are of import after this life. If the Holy Ghost isn't relevant after this life, why would we confirm those who have been baptized for the dead? That seems to indicate a degree of relevance to me. So is there another mechanism whereby children or the handicapped can obtain the gift of the Holy Ghost?

We know the ordinances are relevant because they are required. Whether the associated covenants and blessings that typically attend those ordinances in mortality might also apply in the afterlife is unclear. But I have heard no compelling argument based on doctrine as to why they would.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by All-American

The act of dunking ourselves under water and having old people put their hands on our head has as much effect on our souls as eating a piece of bread and drinking a sip of water. That is, none at all, unless by so doing we promise to keep the commandments of God. Baptism is simply the means whereby we so promise. Confirmation and the bestowal of the gift of the Holy Ghost is God's acknowledgment of our promise and the affirmation that he will keep his end of the deal.

Of course, but I don't think that is helpful in answering the questions, unless you are suggesting there is another means of conferring the Holy Ghost after this life or unless you believe there is no need for the Holy Ghost after this life.