Saints Alive Posted May 26, 2012 Posted May 26, 2012 post 11No where does that define stillborn vs not still born and it does not stipulate the "take a breath" rule as you suggested. So I ask again: CFR on the "take a breath" rule.
Saints Alive Posted May 26, 2012 Posted May 26, 2012 So would it be worse for a child to not be sealed or to offend God by doing an unnessisary ordinance?
Duncan Posted May 26, 2012 Posted May 26, 2012 (edited) well, looks like my baby "aunt" was sealed after all to her parents so what a relief! My parents didn't know but my older sister did somehow! we are a really close family Edited May 26, 2012 by Duncan
Calm Posted May 26, 2012 Posted May 26, 2012 (edited) No where does that define stillborn vs not still born and it does not stipulate the "take a breath" rule as you suggested. So I ask again: CFR on the "take a breath" rule.A child does not have to take a breath if those attending have a chance to test the heartbeat, but in the past the take a breath rule was often used as a 'rule of thumb' because it obviously demonstrated sign of life. A dying child might have a heartbeat too weak to feel by hand. It is much the same as using a fogged mirror as proof of life for adults. With advanced medical procedures one doesn't have to rely on such things.Neither I nor mfb meant that only those who took a breath would count as living births and not stillborn, the "take a breath" is just one measurement among many that are proof of live birth. It was a very common measurement when doctors did not always attend births in the past from my reading. Edited May 26, 2012 by calmoriah
mfbukowski Posted May 26, 2012 Posted May 26, 2012 No where does that define stillborn vs not still born and it does not stipulate the "take a breath" rule as you suggested. So I ask again: CFR on the "take a breath" rule.Read the post. If the baby was alive it can be sealed. If it was still born there is no need. That is what I have said all along.I won't answer this again.
mfbukowski Posted May 26, 2012 Posted May 26, 2012 So would it be worse for a child to not be sealed or to offend God by doing an unnessisary ordinance?Do you honestly think God would be offended because concerned parents wanted to seal their dead baby?HONESTLY?
Saints Alive Posted May 27, 2012 Posted May 27, 2012 Do you honestly think God would be offended because concerned parents wanted to seal their dead baby?HONESTLY?Then why not seal all children just to be safe?
CASteinman Posted May 27, 2012 Posted May 27, 2012 I don't really understand why this should be a topic of contention.
Calm Posted May 27, 2012 Posted May 27, 2012 Are questions simply being asked or are people arguing about something?I tend to look on questions as just questions unless there is something obviously contradictory and/or antagonistic about them.Saints, at the moment there has been no revelation given on the fate of stillborn children. I think the leadership is acutely aware of what may happen when people start to fill the gaps by their own wisdom rather than wait to be directed by instruction from the Lord on what he wants done. In some cases, it is a wise servant who acts on his own accord but that is for things that have been delegated to his or her stewardship.I don't see temple ordinances as falling into that category. I think it is wiser to wait for the Lord to say what he wants done for eternity than for man to step in and say "let's do it this way just in case".
KevinG Posted May 27, 2012 Posted May 27, 2012 So would it be worse for a child to not be sealed or to offend God by doing an unnessisary ordinance?I somehow doubt God would be offended by parents who loved their inborn child enough to want to be with them forever. We do unnecessary ordinances all the time in the Temple with inadvertent duplication of submissions. I'm sure the angels in heaven recording these ordinances give us credit for trying our best and then make the eternal records accurate. 1
KevinG Posted May 27, 2012 Posted May 27, 2012 I don't really understand why this should be a topic of contention.It shouldn't.
mfbukowski Posted May 27, 2012 Posted May 27, 2012 It shouldn't.It's not for me either. I shared what I know to be true and that is that- Calmoriah verified my point by looking it up in a manual.
Saints Alive Posted May 28, 2012 Posted May 28, 2012 Just asking questions, not sure why anyone would sense contention. It's all good in the hood.
Recommended Posts