In 1 Corinthians the Apostle Paul writes in order to warn the Saints against the sin of immortality, idolatry, "divisions"(11:18) and "heresies" (11:19) that were dividing the church at Corinth into schismatic groups, with a resulting loss of faith. In chapter fifteen he discussed the truth of the resurrection with these wayward Saints, and by way of illustration to prove the resurrection, he mentions that some people practice baptism 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?"-
1 Corinthians 15:29.

A careful reading of this epistle shows that the Apostle Paul writes to the Corinthian saints using the words "I," "we," "ye," "you" when referring to them and/or himself all the way through his message; but when he mentions baptism for the dead, he changes to "they." * "What shall they do?" "Why are they then baptized for the dead?" In the verses following, he returns to the use of "we" and "you." thus he seems to disassociate himself and the righteous saints from the methods used by those groups who at that time were practicing baptism for the dead.

The Apostle Paul did not urge his hearers to practice the principle, nor did he command it. He merely used the case as an illustration.

-----------
Since mormons consider the Book of Mormon to be the most correct book, and the D&C says the BoM contains the FULNESS of the gospel -... with Moroni, whom I have sent unto you to reveal the Book of Mormon, containing the fullness of my everlasting gospel. _ Revelation, September 1830 Doctrine and Covenants 27: 5, Utah edition. December 1830, Doctrine and Covenants 35:12, Utah edition. December 1830, Doctrine and Covenants 35:17, Utah edition.Thou shalt preach the fullness of my gospel which I have sent forth in these last days._ Revelation, January 1831 Doctrine and Covenants 39: 11, Utah edition.

The fulness of the Gospel including salvation for those without the law then, is given years before the teachings of Baptism for the dead began.

The Letter of Mormon to his son Moroni should answer all questions regarding practice of Infant Baptism AND Baptisms for those who did not receive it is this life:
Moroni 8:7-24 and also 2Nephi 9:25,26.

Not only is the practice offensive to nonmembers, but it also negates the Atonement as members usurp the Saviours Sacrifice in an effort to make themselves Saviours on Mount Zion.

...and God has taught us how to be saviors for them by being baptized for them in the flesh, that they may live according to God in the Spirit.-John Taylor, March 20,1870, Journal of Discourses, Volume 14, page 187, quoted by Ludlow in Latter-day Prophets Speak, page 112.

... mortals have to be saviors on Mount Zion, acting by proxy for the dead." - Joseph Fielding Smith, The Way to Perfection, page 325.

These men speak contrary to their own revelations:
Speaking further of the great day of the Lord when he comes, the revelation in 1831 states:

"And then shall the heathen nations be redeemed, and they that knew no law shall have part in the first resurrection; and it shall be tolerable for them."- Doctrine and Covenants 45:54.

"A man may act as proxy for his own relatives; the ordinances of the gospel which were laid out before the foundations of the world have thus been fulfilled by them, and we may be baptized for those whom we have much friendship for; but it must first be revealed to the man of God, lest we should run too far."

- History of the Church, Volume 6, page 366, Utah; and Millennial Star, Volume 23,1861, page 487.( This the Mormons affirm is a statement of Joseph Smith, Jr., on May 12, 1844, a little more than a month before he was killed.)

JoD3 you are so right. Everytime this comes up I think of that part of scripture and the word "THEY" is the important word. He was observing what THEY do and was not supporting or urging followers to participate in this practice. Can Mormons not READ???? Or better yet....can they not analyze and use critical thinking skills?

I guess I still can't--I don't know that I've ever paid attention to the fact that it says "they". Interesting. Damn. Now I'm going to have to study my scriptures.

Mormons have really become masters of taking isolated Bible verses, divorcing them from all context, and changing even the basic meaning of the verse to fit their needs. It really gets tiresome when you see how often it is done.

Regarding the ancient practice of baptism for the dead, it should be noted that we actually know a bit about what these other groups that Paul mentions did with it. In particular, there are two groups (post-dating Paul) that we know of that practiced this. The first are the Marcionites who are discussed by an Early Church Father named John Chrysostom. The other is a group called the Cerinthians, who get their start in the first century, and whose baptism of the dead is detailed by another church father named Epiphaneus.

Both of these church fathers discuss what these guy call baptism for the dead, and it turns out that the practice is still significantly different from the LDS version. First of all, Mormons use baptism for the dead on the unchristianized world in general. All people who die without baptism get to be baptized per the LDS view. This is not the case among the ancients. Both the Cerinthians and Marcionites practice baptism for the dead only on their dead catechumens (investigators). Back in the late first and second century, the process of converting to Christianity took potentially several years. In many cases, many Christians would not even choose to be baptized until close to their time of death (so that they could be clean at the time of their passing, usually). At any rate, because of this, lots of Christian initiates who certainly heard of Jesus and believed in him died without baptism. Only these groups were baptized. No group in early Christianity applied the practice to deceased ancestors or to the unsaved world in general.

Anywho, if anybody is interested in references on this I can dig them out. I have seen Mormon apologists refer to both the account of John Chrysostom and Epiphaneus to justify LDS baptism for the dead, but they invariably snip the quotes in just the right places to hide the very substantive differences between the LDS practice and ancient one.

I generally enthusiastically read posts by JoD3:360 and generally agree. But on this one I disagree.

Christians use the argument that Paul says "they" practice baptism for the dead, not "we". Therefore Paul does not approve of the practice, they claim.

But one has to read the entire context. Paul is arguing for the existence of life after death, and the resurrection, and he is using the fact that people are being baptized for the dead as proof that there IS life after death, because otherwise such baptisms would be useless.

One does not use as evidence of a claim something one thinks is bogus. And Paul does not think baptizing for the dead is pointless. It's the foundation of his argument!

And Paul DOES use "they" in other passages when referring to believers.

I am not defending Mormon baptisms for the dead. I am criticizing the faulty logic of those who try to argue that Paul was criticizing it (whatever the details of such baptisms were).

NIV: 29 Now if there is no resurrection, what will those do who are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized for them?

NRSV:29 Otherwise, what will those people do who receive baptism on behalf of the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized on their behalf?

Gods Word: 29 However, people are baptized because the dead [will come back to life]. What will they do? If the dead can't come back to life, why do people get baptized as if they can [come back to life]?

Lexham English bible:29 Otherwise, why do they do [it], those who are being baptized on behalf of the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why indeed are they being baptized on behalf of them?

Complete Jewish Bible: 29 Were it otherwise, what would the people accomplish who are immersed on behalf of the dead? If the dead are not actually raised, why are people immersed for them?

Geneva Study Bible: 29 Else what shall they do which are baptized o for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?

(15) The fifth argument taken of the end of baptism, that is, because those who are baptized, are baptized for dead: that is to say, that they may have a remedy against death, because baptism is a token of regeneration.
(o) They that are baptized to this end and purpose, that death may be put out in them, or to rise again from the dead, of which baptism is a seal.
<>15:30 16 And why stand we in jeopardy every hour?
(16) The sixth argument: unless there is a resurrection of the dead, why should the apostles so daily cast themselves into danger of so many deaths?
-------------

http://bible.cc/1_corinthians/15-29.htm

Here are some good commentaries at the bottom.

Were they baptizing their dead because they had not been baptized before they died? Or were they baptizing their dead because they had been baptized into the "wrong" christian church?

I think this is the point. Premature mortality was a fact of life back then.

Baptizing someone who died before they completed the process of conversion is a different matter to baptizing someone who was perfectly happy in their non-Christian religion, and would never have converted in life.

Despite the importance of proxy baptism in LDS practice, the Book of Mormon makes no mention of it. Even though the Book of Mormon is supposed to contain the "fulness of the gospel," it never mentions the doctrine of baptism for the dead, not even once! The word "baptism" appears twenty-five times in the Book of Mormon. The word "baptize" appears twenty-eight times. The word "baptized" appears eighty-five times, and the word "baptizing" appears six times, but the doctrine of baptism for the dead is not mentioned at all!

The excuse that the doctrine of baptism for the dead was removed from the Bible certainly would not prove true in the case of the Book of Mormon. The Catholics never had the Book of Mormon and therefore they could not be charged with removing it.

Actually, the Book of Mormon condemns the very ideas that led to the practice of baptism for the dead. It plainly indicates that there is no chance for a person to repent after death if he has known the gospel and has rejected it.

utlm.org

You're all missing the point; when Paul mentions "they" he's obviously talking about Mormons, who were practicing the true church way back then! The passages where Paul talks about
"they" have Family Home Evening and the recipe for funeral potatoes were later removed by evil apostate men...