Deuteronomy 21:1-9 explains a vicarious ordinance in the case of a murder where the murderer is unknown and therefore not available for punishment. A heifer, which had not been yoked or worked, had its neck struck off or broken in a valley by the elders of the nearest city, and the priests (sons of Levi) were witnesses. The elders washed their hands over the beheaded heifer, and proclaimed that they are not the murderers, and they did not see who did the murder. They prayed that the Lord “be merciful,” or in the Hebrew “let atonement be made for” the people of Israel so that the murder will not be charged to them, but will be forgiven them. By the proxy killing of the heifer, by the washing of their hands, and by their prayer the people of the city were saved from the punishment of God.
Baptism for the dead is mentioned in 1 Corinthians 15: 29. “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?”
2007-08-20 08:48:49 · 7 answers · asked by Doctor 7 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Here is the text from Deuteronomy 21:1-9
1 IF one be found slain in the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee to possess it, lying in the field, and it be not known who hath slain him:
2 Then thy elders and thy judges shall come forth, and they shall measure unto the cities which are round about him that is slain:
3 And it shall be, that the city which is next unto the slain man, even the elders of that city shall take an heifer, which hath not been wrought with, and which hath not drawn in the yoke;
4 And the elders of that city shall bring down the heifer unto a rough valley, which is neither eared nor sown, and shall strike off the heifer’s neck there in the valley:
5 And the priests the sons of Levi shall come near; for them the LORD thy God hath chosen to minister unto him, and to bless in the name of the LORD; and by their word shall every controversy and every stroke be tried:
2007-08-21 05:46:42 · update #1
6 And all the elders of that city, that are next unto the slain man, shall wash their hands over the heifer athat is beheaded in the valley:
7 And they shall answer and say, Our hands have not shed this blood, neither have our eyes seen it.
8 Be merciful [Heb: Let atonement be made for], O LORD, unto thy people Israel, whom thou hast redeemed, and lay not innocent blood unto thy people of Israel’s charge. And the blood shall be forgiven them.
9 So shalt thou put away the guilt of innocent blood from among you, when thou shalt do that which is right in the sight of the LORD.
2007-08-21 05:48:42 · update #2
The Mosaic ordinance of Deut 21:1-9 is different from the baptism for the dead ordinance, but there are interesting parallels. In your answer consider the following questions:
What purpose does water serve in the two ordinances? What does the water symbolize?
Why must someone holding the priesthood be present in both ordinances?
Why do they wash their hands OVER the heifer?
What is the significance of performing the Mosaic ordinance in “a rough valley, which is neither eared nor sown”? What is a wadi? How does this situation compare to a below-ground baptismal font over cattle?
How is the beheading of the heifer a vicarious sacrifice?
How does the vicarious sacrifice of the heifer allow the Lord to give the blessings of the atonement to the people of the city?
In what ways does forgiveness of sins through the sacrifice of the heifer symbolize the redemption from sin through the sacrifice of the Messiah?
2007-08-21 05:51:01 · update #3
How does baptism symbolize dying (see Romans 6:4, “Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death…”), and washing away of sins (see Acts 22:16, “…arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.)?
How did killing the heifer and washing the hands over the heifer enable a washing away of sins? In what ways is this similar to baptism?
Why do they call on the name of the Lord in both ordinances?
You can’t baptize a dead person, and you can’t execute a murderer who is unknown to you. How was a proxy used in the Bible for these situations?
What similarities and parallels do you see?
2007-08-21 05:52:59 · update #4
Not connected at all. This ritual was not necessary for the salvation. Baptism is a required ordinance.
It may add a little to understanding the proxy nature of Christ's atonement.
2007-08-20 08:54:13 · answer #1 · answered by Isolde 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
I don't think I understand your question. What's the link between the two paragraphs? My understanding of the unusual law you've described in the first paragraph is as follows: The elders, following the ritual killing of the calf, proclaim their innocence. The Talmud asks 'who would even suspect the elders thenselves of such guilt?' The answer is that the elders are responsible for providing the right kind of leadership in their town such that if a stranger ever came looking for assistance, he/she would receive it, and would therefore not be found alone - at the mercy of predators.
I hope this helps your understanding.
2007-08-20 08:58:52 · answer #2 · answered by manway613 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Baptism for the dead is not a Jewish law. It's not God's law. It's a pagan ritual. The atoning sacrifice of the Messiah is the way to God, not Mormon baptism. I think you understand Dueteronomy and how God kept His people pure.
2007-08-20 18:02:43 · answer #3 · answered by kirstycristy 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Baptism for the lifeless is spoke of in the bible.... i'm specific there is a few animosity in direction of Mormons for it because of the fact they think of if a individual is baptized while they are lifeless, they are "immediately" a Mormon, which isn't genuine....they are in the event that they opt to be. it incredibly is not a assure or regardless of...we are taught and have faith each individual no count what has the perfect to settle for or reject the gospel. How could desire to the Lord be a merely God if in hassle-free terms specific human beings had to probability to artwork their some time past to him and others did not????? additionally - in hassle-free terms persons whom their kinfolk have grew to become of their names are accomplished, not in hassle-free terms random human beings (of the Jews).
2016-10-16 06:17:01 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There are no parallels here.
Baptism for the dead is an argument about the futility of trusting in Jesus' resurrection if He did not raise from the dead. It is not an arguement to do it.
2007-08-26 00:58:38 · answer #5 · answered by Buzz s 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Completely unrelated. All the elders of the closest city were doing was publicly statiung that neither them nor anyone in their city were guilty of the murder and they were spared from punishment from the act. nothing to do with babtism or the disgusting practice of posthumously converting people who believed in another religion and were adherents to another faith- many of them dying as martyrs for their faith- like the Holocaust martyrs the Mormons insult with this practice!
2007-08-20 09:03:20 · answer #6 · answered by allonyoav 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋
I'm LDS and I've never really heard much said about the ritual you describe from Deuteronomy. I don't think there's much connection.
2007-08-20 08:56:24 · answer #7 · answered by Open Heart Searchery 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋