Posted on 04/21/2004 4:32:43 AM PDT by ksen
"There are sins that men commit for which they cannot receive forgiveness in this world, or in that which is to come, and if they had their eyes open to see their true condition, they would be perfectly willing to have their blood spilt upon the ground, that the smoke thereof might ascend to heaven as an offering for their sins; and the smoking incense would atone for their sins, whereas, if such is not the case, they will stick to them and remain upon them in the spirit world. "I know, when you hear my brethren telling about cutting people off from the earth, that you consider it is strong doctrine; but it is to save them, not to destroy them....
"And further more, I know that there are transgressors, who, if they knew themselves, and the only condition upon which they can obtain forgiveness, would beg of their brethren to shed their blood, that the smoke thereof might ascend to God as an offering to appease the wrath that is kindled against them, and that the law might have its course. I will say further; I have had men come to me and offer their lives to atone for their sins.
"It is true that the blood of the Son of God was shed for sins through the fall and those committed by men, yet men can commit sins which it can never remit.... There are sins that can be atoned for by an offering upon an altar, as in ancient days; and there are sins that the blood of a lamb, or a calf, or of turtle dove, cannot remit, but they must be atoned for by the blood of the man." (Sermon by Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 4, pages 53-54); also published in the Mormon Church's Deseret News, 1856, page 235)
SD
No, it speaks of "the sin against the Holy Spirit" which will not be remitted. Big difference.
Good point.
I'm not sure what Brigham Young is getting at here. Perhaps we should wait for a response that puts this into context before blasting it.
SD
Yep. My error.
SD
:-)
Couple of points:
In the LDS way of things, "atonement" has to do with forgiveness and "entrance into heaven" - but it would do well to remember that in the LDS way of things there are actually three levels of heaven, and moving up from one level to the next is achieved via obedience in lifestyle or to some ordinance or practice. One does not make it into the Celestial Heaven on Jesus' blood alone. When we discuss "blood atonement" and the LDS church, we are not discussing forgiveness and "going to heaven" in the same context and system that Protestants (and presumably Catholics) do.
Second, the above speech is not an isolated case. There are numerous other sermon examples which could be cited, and several controversial historic examples (the Mountain Meadows Massacre being the most obvious) that could be raised for - or against - the argument that "blood atonement" was taught to, or practiced by, the nineteenth century LDS membership and heirarchy.
Third, the work quoted at the top of the thread, the "Journal Of Discourses", is a multi-volume collection of speeches and sermons given by the various members of the LDS hierarchy that has been published, revised, and republished numerous times, over the course of a century and a half. None of it's contents, although published by the church-owned Deseret Book Company, have not been canonized by the LDS heirarchy, thus no LDS member is morally bound to keep or reject them. What the Journal does, however, is provide volumes of first-hand testimony of how the various LDS latter-day prophets applied the canonical works, in thought and practice, in their personal lives and how they interpreted and exhorted said works to the masses.
Finally, it should be noted that the term "doctrine" probably should be avoided when speaking of "blood atonement" here. "Doctrine" is a buzzword like "canonical" for the LDS, and it means the LDS heirarchy has formally adopted it into whatever they use as a creed or code. "Commonly held belief" would be a better phrase to use in the context of Brigham Young's sermon on "blood atonement".
Special underwear, among other things.
The silence is deafening.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.