Granville Oral Roberts (January 24, 1918 – December 15, 2009) was an American Pentecostal televangelist and a Christian charismatic. He was also the founder of Oral Roberts Evangelistic Association and Oral Roberts University.
Surely we should not be surprised that an anxious mormon from Utah would begin to stake a claim on his body before it was even in the ground. They did the same with Michael Jackson earlier this year. But no matter how quickly they were to claim ‘dibs’ on Oral Roberts for the right to baptize him a year from now, they couldn’t possibly have imagined that they were already a year late.
That’s right. Someone else has not only entered a record in FamilySearch, they have already had someone baptized and endowed by proxy for him. How? By ignoring that pesky rule that they have to wait for a person to actually die before they are baptized by proxy. Check out the records below. Shameless.
Individual Ordinances
Baptism
Completed
19 May 2009
Mesa Arizona Temple
Confirmation
Completed
19 May 2009
Mesa Arizona Temple
Initiatory
Completed
19 May 2009
Mesa Arizona Temple
Endowment
Completed
29 August 2009
Mesa Arizona Temple
Sealing to Parents
Completed
13 October 2009
Mesa Arizona Temple
I just checked the www.newfamilysearch.com
website. Oral Roberts is listed on a family tree as born and deceased only. I’m a Family History Consultant. Absolutely no ordinances, as you claim, have been done. The system will not allow such to occur until after 1 year of his recorded death.
— Keven Handy · Dec 17, 11:06 PM · #
As a Family History Consultant, you should take more care to investigate more than the first record that is displayed.
I didn’t make this stuff up. It’s there in the database.
— Nom de Cypher · Dec 17, 11:13 PM · #
What data base are you checking? Are you a member with a record number because the data base I’ve looked at says different.
— Keven Handy · Dec 18, 02:25 AM · #
Perhaps you can provide a link to your information or maybe your search criteria? I, too, am finding it difficult to verify your claim. Thank you.
— Ebed Doulos · Dec 18, 03:01 AM · #
The official church database indicates that no temple work has been done. I suggest that you give us your source, or correct your blog.
— cdowis · Dec 18, 07:49 AM · #
I really should not have to do this much additional work to prove my claims, but here it is.
Person Identifier is KLXP-9KH
https://new.familysearch.org/en/action/openpopup?dest=splitpopup&depth=1&bookid=p.KLXP-9KH&focus=p.KLXP-9KH&ro=true
Do any of you feel sheepish now for saying I’m full of it? No? Oh well.
— Nom de Cypher · Dec 18, 08:05 AM · #
You have the *wrong Oral Roberts. Look at the parents for this Oral Roberts, Edward amd Mary. The evangelist Oral Roberts parents are Reverend Ellis Melvin Roberts and Claudia Priscilla Irwin.
Check out your facts at wiki.
— cdowis · Dec 18, 08:20 AM · #
I would suppose that if you are making attacks on the motivations and intent of the LDS Church and its members, you would be expected to provide full, complete, and irrefutable proof.But…that’s just me.
From my search of the record and the reference you provided, it seems that you are mixing up two different ‘Oral Roberts.’
The ‘Oral Roberts’ you claim as the famous evangelist that has been baptized by the LDS Church has a different birthdate and parents than the actual Evanglist ‘Oral Roberts’ that is also on record.
The listing that you seem to have missed also correctly identifies Oral Roberts birthdate, place of birth, death date…and I believe the correct location of this death.
Here is a link to a Wiki on Oral Roberts that will verify these basic facts: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oral_Roberts
The Family Search file does NOT show that any LDS ordinances for the Oral Roberts that is most likely the famous Evangelist.
I respectfully suggest that you have misidentified an ‘Oral Roberts’(KLXP-9KH) in the Family Search file as being the ‘Oral Roberts’ (2HMS-FLF) the famous Evangelist.
I suggest that you recheck the records and if you are mistaken offer an appropriate correction.
For your reference, here are the two different ‘Oral Roberts’ files:
Oral Roberts (Evangelist): https://new.familysearch.org/en/action/hourglassiconicview?bookid=p.2HMS-FLF&focus=p.2HMS-FLF&svfs=1
Oral Roberts (Not the Evangelist): https://new.familysearch.org/en/action/openpopup?dest=splitpopup&depth=1&bookid=p.KLXP-9KH&focus=p.KLXP-9KH&ro=true
I hope that clarifies this issue.
— GKB · Dec 18, 09:05 AM · #
While we are in correction mode:
“Saved After Death, whether willing or not.”
This is incorrect.
We perform ordinances such as baptism for those who did not have the opportunity in mortality. They have the option to accept or reject this ordinance.
They are not “Mormons”, and they have free choice to accept or reject.
Please correct your blog.
— cdowis · Dec 18, 09:07 AM · #
I think you may have miscopied/pasted your information. Everytime I copy/paste or hand type the information you provided, it comes up with “Unknown Name”. Would you please be so kind as to verify your information?
— Ebed Doulos · Dec 18, 11:38 AM · #
Ebed, the record comes up Unknown Name because it has been modified today. At about 10:00 MST. Plenty of people above you in the comments saw the record I refer to.
As to the confusion over two Oral Roberts, I contend that this is a valid record with lazy research. I suppose you could interpret the evidence to mean that there were TWO men born in Oklahoma in 1917 & 1918 named Oral Roberts, with very similarly named parents, but Occam’s Razor would indicate that they are probably the same person. Further, it seems unlikely that the records would be hidden just today if the church didn’t believe they were the same person.
— Nom de Cypher · Dec 18, 04:51 PM · #
How is it you claim through FamilySearch.org you claim to see the ordinances, but actually you can see only if ordinances are cleared. No specific dates no locations, etc…
The only place you can see all detailed information is on NewFamilySearch.org
Anyone with a member record number can register and look and see on the proper site that none of your claims have been substansiated. There were no duplicates as the new site does not allow, and also as stated before does not allow ordinances submitted until 1 year after death. You also must be the person submitting the name must also be linked by family tree to proceed. This has been implemented for over 2 years now. It also asks you to submit verifiable records of resources. It is autoamated and stops redundnacy and false contributuions.
— Keven Handy · Dec 18, 05:44 PM · #
Now that we have demonstrated that you have the wrong person, are you going to correct your blog?
— cdowis · Dec 18, 09:51 PM · #
Nom de Cypher is free to speculate that the two distinctly different files are actually for the same Oral Roberts…but that there is some sort of clerical error.
However, that sounds like a rationalization to justify his original error. It is clear that given the mistaken birthdate and parents, and other missing information…Nom didn’t do a very good job of fact checking the listing he cited.
As for the record being taken out of public circulation…I’d guess the reason is to avoid the EXACT sort of false accusations Nom made in his post.
If his mistake had not been caught and countered with documentation, this misrepresentation could have been amplified. I think that to prevent further confusion and false accusations, the record was removed from public view.
— GKB · Dec 18, 10:42 PM · #
Keven,
I think you are misrepresenting how New FamilySearch works. I’m sure that the Family History Library wishes it worked the way you describe, but I think we have all seen enough mistakes to indicate that it doesn’t work that way yet.
cdowis,
No, I’m not changing anything. You can characterize me as a liar or a fool, but I believe the facts say what I claim. Additionally, now that the FHL has hidden the records, my blog is the only place this mistake is documented. For better or for worse. Regarding the tagline that you find offensive, I would suggest that perhaps this is the same sort of offense that Jews feel when we baptize holocaust victims.
GKB,
I agree that the records are open to interpretation and clearly many people have chosen to interpret my claims as a mistake. Obviously I think I got it right. Eventually, I’ll find another mistake like this, and when that happens, I’ll make much better backup copies.
— Nom de Cypher · Dec 19, 01:16 AM · #
I don’t have access to the member portion of FamilySearch. I suppose I could if I poked my husband for his membership number.
Has anyone been able to locate the SSDI entry for this second Oral Roberts? All I can find is an “Orel Roberts” born 6 June 1917 in Kentucky, died August 1984 in Virginia.
If that’s him, then it looks like there are in fact two Orel/Oral Roberts and it was Orel who had work done for him posthumously. If not, maybe somebody did attempt to do work for the evangelist.
I know zip about genealogy research, so please forgive me if my ignorance is showing.
— Ms. Jack Meyers · Dec 19, 03:04 PM · #
Excuse me! I don’t know how New Family Search works? Brother your barking up the wrong tree. It is apparent that you know absolutely nothing about the system. You are in self-denial of facts.
— Keven Handy · Dec 20, 05:39 AM · #
I challenge anyone who wishes to go to the local ward Family History Center and have any Family History Consultant allow you access to the files. You need to make an appointment at some wards. SLC is open to the public. It will show exactly what I claim. I’m a Family History Consultant for 5 years. Try adding your family there if they are deceased less than a year and watch the system deny submitting ordinances. Also watch for other required information pop-up boxes come up not letting you proceed without filling the necessary information.
You will then find out the truth!
— Keven Handy · Dec 20, 05:55 AM · #
Keven,
I apologize for suggesting that you don’t know how NewFamilySearch works. I will revise my statement to say that, in my experience, it has not been entirely successful in preventing the mistakes that we keep finding. In fact, if it worked EXACTLY as you suggest in every case, I would have very little to write about.
— Nom de Cypher · Dec 20, 10:18 AM · #
Well WBF your talking about all those Asians,Latin Americans, Native Americans and Polynesians who held the Preisthood are racists? Are you talking about the tribe of Ham? How is it that origins of Fijians, New Guineans, Aborigines of Australia all whose haplogorup genes are origns from Africa have had the Priesthood. Are you talking about LDS who are racists that are white married to outside thier race. You are barking at the wrong person to call racist.
ʻOe keu ā haole koloniala hūpō. Kou palena ʻole ka ʻike ʻike pono palena!
— Keven Handy · Dec 20, 09:46 PM · #
So, from what I find there are two different “Oral/Orel Roberts” from around that time frame.
The famous Oral Roberts is in the newfamilysearch system, however he has been made private. Nobody can see his ordinance dates (kinda like they have done with Hitler and other famous/infamous people).
Anyone saying his work has or has not been done cannot prove it.
Nom, I do believe the ordinance info you have is for the different Oral Roberts. I’ve done genealogy and worked with online records long enough to feel confident saying that.
There is a SSDI submission for the Oral Roberts born 6 Jun 1917 and died 1984. His parents are listed as Edward M. and Mak Roberts on the 1920 cesus.
They both show up on the 1920 US Census with the parents names listed on familysearch (well, slightly variated). There are a handful of other “Oral’s” as well.
Who knew?!
— just me · Dec 22, 01:07 AM · #
If we are going to talk about race.
“..Shall I tell you the law of God in regard to the African race? If the white man who belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the law of God, is death on the spot. This will always be so.” – JoD: vol.10 p. 110: (March 8, 1863)
— papucho · Dec 22, 10:04 AM · #
I am a seed mixer so according to this quote I guess I should already been dead. Maybe we shouldn’t be talking about barking up the wrong tree. I do not want to hear any comments about race from someone defending a organization that would disrespect my wife and the lovely relationship that I have with her. The fact that you might not be from the so called “chosen seed” or if you might just speak a Polynesian language does not automatically make you exempt from any type of racism. Just to be fair I am not calling you a racist however you are defending a organization that obviously has a racist background and you do not get a free pass no matter what ethnic background you come from.
— Seed Mixer · Dec 22, 10:26 AM · #
I find it interesting that when anything about Mormons come up, somewhere along the way, somebody is going to start throwing in red herrings and creating little rabbit trails that lead to things not related to the original topic in the slightest, except it has something in someway that has to do with Mormons or Mormonism.
Why don’t we start talking about the extremely hidden Mormon agenda in Steven R. Covey’s book “Seven Habits of Highly Successful People” or maybe even the vileness of Harry Reid and his sneakiness in the ObamaCare and how he, Hatch, and Romney are gearing up for a coup d‘état of the US government by a secret combination of Mormon elders/Danites.
Why are we even talking about Blacks and the Priesthood in a topic about Oral Roberts? I thought Oral Roberts was white.
BTW, in my genealogy research, I have found a couple of Oliver Cowdery’s, all born about the same time and I have even found several Michael Jacksons.
Nom de Cypher has learnt that it’s easier and even more fun to seek forgiveness instead of permission. Let’s just throw out facts because even understanding what the facts are or even if they are facts.
— Lynn · Dec 29, 09:59 AM · #
No WBF you brought up the racists comment in post #22 which you are insinuating the racists nature of the church regarding the tribe of Ham. You know and don’t deny it!
— Keven Handy · Dec 30, 01:20 AM · #
Keven,
I know that the LDS church has so many racist ideologies of white supremacy that it’s hard for you to keep track. Comment #22 was obviously referring to the racist Book of Mormon. Smith and, much more prominently, Young added more racist beliefs subsequently.
— WestBerkeleyFlats · Dec 31, 08:37 AM · #
WBF:
Maybe you need to run out to the LDS members in D.R. of Congo, or Kenya, or Jamaica, and tell them all that!
FYI, I had a black Elder’s Quorum President in the Ward I attended, in So. California. He also has a white wife. They joined the Church together. Hmmm.
— Mike H, · Jan 3, 03:36 AM · #
I think Nom’s energy would be better spent on subjects like this:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/01/01/BA8V1AV589.DTL
If you believe him, save that date! If not, take him to taks.
— Mike H. · Jan 3, 03:41 AM · #
“taks”? Oops, typo for “task”.
Pres. Gordon B. Hinckley spoke to the NAACP about 10 years ago. Why would the NAACP invite “the enemy” if the LDS are so racist?
I won’t touch Prop. 8 at all, others have done a better job of it. I have mixed feeling on it.
On the other hand, I was pretty shock at seeing this: Why did the white woman (TX Rep. Betty Brown) here say what she did:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v9hdVUzMeDw
Me not very bright? It depends on who you talk to. I admit to having slight autism & sleep apnea, but how do you measure bright? Some out there feel I’m the scourge of the earth, but I know many of those I’ve worked with on energy safety & related environmental issues feel I’m the best thing since sliced bread.
— Mike H. · Jan 4, 04:54 AM · #
Oh God, I’m actually starting to feel sorry for the LDS’ers. They’re such a pitiful bunch.
— WestBerkeleyFlats · Jan 4, 10:30 AM · #
Why must there always be those whose only joy in life seems to be to try and villify
anyone who differs in opinion or belief from
themselves. Only one supreme truth exists: GOD LIVES.
We as members of The Church of Jesus Christ
of Latter-day Saints will answer to Him, through His Son, Jesus Christ. To all those
who choose a different path..so be it. God
has given you,through mortality the gift of
agancy. Jesus Christ has provided the means
whereby you may repent and be saved. He asks only that you believe in God the Eternal Father and in His Son,Jesus Christ, and live
and obey HIS laws & commandments. God will force no man, woman or child to Heaven. It is your choice.
The days of that mortal probation are numbered only to God. He asks, “Will you be an enemy or a Friend?” God knows and loves
you.
— me · May 10, 01:22 PM · #