Vain Genealogies! or Perfect ? which is it.... LDS Mormon christian.?

[witnessofJesus9362]

Paul warns the early church about vain geneaologies. anti mormons use this verse to debunk Mormons and the lds practice of baptizing for the dead. in proxy.but someone! both Jewish or possibly early christian! did the baptisms for their dead because of the hopes of the resurrection. did jesus ever practice proxy baptism!? did he teach it? or does this practice have historical meaning even before jesus was born? Geneaology is connected to baptism for the dead, because this is how the dead are proven to exist so that someone can be a proxy in their place. so in this sense are geneaolgies in vain? or is the vanity of geneaolgy more correctly interpreted that All such are vain. there are several MORE things to say on this subject toask for answer those with authority.

[MrsDaveF-DuckKiaSister1]

obviously they did do baptisms for the dead in Jesus' time. There is a verse in Cotrinthians that talks about it.Check out this article, It talks about ancient egyptian records they are finding that talk about baptisms for the dead.http://mormontimes.com/DB_index.php?id=988

[Kerry9123]

Jesus did not practice the baptism for the dead himself, but he taught it. And he participated in an important aspect of it.Read 1 Peter 3: 18-22and 1 Peter 4:6Why is the gospel preached to the dead, if not to give them a chance to accept the gospel. And, if they accept the gospel, they need to complete baptism as Jesus said in John 3:5 is necessary. So, Christ and others preach to the dead, and we on earth perform proxy work for them. Its all part of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

[OldTimerToo7195]

Long explanation, certainly.Paul's warning was to those who spouted off their genealogies to prove their heritage. Interestingly enough, it was used in the early modern era (from about 1500 forward) to prove royal lineage. In certain countries, that lineage is still important.Paul's preaching about the resurrection was to early members of the church, who may have been former Jews, so it was to the early Christians and in support of the Resurrection. Evidently it was an early teaching of the church.Since it is for bringing those who died without knowledge into "the faith" it is doubtful that it was started before the Resurrection. But we really don't know, since the Bible contains only a small part of the Savior's three-year ministry and his was to the living. Later, as recorded in the epistles, he did go to the spirit world where he began the ministry to those who died with knowledge of him.Ironically, the practice of baptizing infants with adults standing in as "god parents" is a form of proxy baptism, with the parents accepting the "sacrament" of baptism for the infant.Genealogy, among Mormons, is used to identify their dead, not to "prove" lineage (though undoubtedly, some brag about this or that). It isn't/shouldn't be used for the same purpose that drew Paul's condemnation.Hope this helps.

[RonnieBT]

Paul talked about vain genealogies, because the Jews at that time thought they were better than other Jews because of their genealogy. He warned them not about genealogy, but "Vain" or "proud" genealogies.Genealogies were very important in the old testament. If you lost your genalogy and could not prove your heritage, you were kicked out of the priesthood.Even after the 12 apostels died the Christian church continued to do baptisms for the dead for at least 100 years. The Catholic church at first did this as a hold over for a 100 or more years. If genealogies were not important, why did 2 of the 4 gospel writers include Mary's and Joseph's genealogies. Would they do that if they were vain and useless?

[hibby763405]

It refers to me thinking I'm better than someone else because of my genealogy. Similar to the idea of royal blood.

[fenneljay]

I think most people believe God will love and welcome them after death without any ceremonies preformed by strangers.

[cc_of_0z1076]

Bit of a pointless activity when the Bible so clearly states that that the Dead know nothing."...the dead do not know anything, nor do they have any more a reward; for their memory is forgotten. (vs 6). Also their love, and their hatred, and their envy, is now perished; nor do they any longer have a part forever in all that is done under the sun." Ecc 9:5,6Jesus is a personal saviour, he does not do job lots. If a person has made their choice and died, what right does anybody have to take that choice away from them in death?

[Isolde]

It would be vanity to use genealogy to prove yourself superior to another because of ancestry. Look at this in context with the whole verse, it is also wrong to ask foolish questions (like about garments) and striving about the law (grace vs works).The ordinances for the dead require the Melchizedek priesthood. This was not given to Moses. It was restored to the earth by Jesus Christ. The apostles were given the keys for it. When there were no longer apostles, there was no longer authority. What Jesus taught the apostles in private is only hinted at in scripture.John 5: 25 25 Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live.