Mormon Doctrine (1958

I’m holding in my hand my black hardcover copy of Mormon Doctrine by Bruce R. McConkie, one of Mormonism’s most influential books, an all-time Mormon bestseller, which went out of print this week.

A book written, I’m sure, with the best of intentions by a revered Mormon leader. And, still, a book that continued to circulate even after other high-ranking Mormon leaders recommended more than one thousand corrections to its content.

A book that called Roman Catholicism the “Church of the Devil.” And a book that elevated to doctrinal status non-doctrinal folklore about the origins of the LDS Church’s ban on conveying priesthood authority to members of African descent, claiming that blacks were the descendents of the accursed Cain.

A book that due to its authoritative presentation and doctrinal fundamentalism gave many Mormons reasons for grief.

Now lets talk about Joseph Smith and the men he murdered and castrated...for the crime of not being a mormon..

(Confessions of John D. Lee, 1877 edition, pages 282-283)

In the same book John D. Lee made this startling statement:

“I knew of many men being killed in Nauvoo... and I know of many a man who was quietly put out of the way by the orders of Joseph and his Apostles while the Church was there.” (Ibid., page 284) Lee also revealed another very cruel practice which took place both in Nauvoo, Illinois, and in early Utah:

“In Utah it has been the custom with the Priesthood to make eunuchs of such men as were obnoxious to the leaders. This was done for a double purpose: first, it gave a perfect revenge, and next, it left the poor victim a living example to others of the dangers of disobeying counsel and not living as ordered by the Priesthood.

“In Nauvoo it was the orders from Joseph Smith and his apostles to beat, wound and castrate all Gentiles that the police could take in the act of entering or leaving a Mormon household under circumstances that led to the belief that they had been there for immoral purposes.... In Utah it was the favorite revenge of old, worn-out members of the Priesthood, who wanted young women sealed to them, and found that the girl preferred some handsome young man. The old priests generally got the girls, and many a young man was unsexed for refusing to give up his sweetheart at the request of an old and failing, but still sensual apostle or member of the Priesthood. As an illustration... Warren Snow was Bishop of the Church at Manti, San Pete County, Utah. He had several wives, but there was a fair, buxom young woman in the town that Snow wanted for a wife.... She thanked him for the honor offered, but told him she was then engaged to a young man, a member of the Church, and consequently could not marry the old priest.... He told her it was the will of God that she should marry him, and she must do so; that the young man could be got rid of, sent on a mission or dealt with in some way... that, in fact, a promise made to the young man was not binding, when she was informed that it was contrary to the wishes of the authorities.

“The girl continued obstinate.... the authorities called on the young man and directed him to give up the young woman. This he steadfastly refused to do.... He remained true to his intended, and said he would die before he would surrender his intended wife to the embraces of another.... The young man was ordered to go on a mission to some distant locality... But the mission was refused...

“It was then determined that the rebellious young man must be forced by harsh treatment to respect the advice and orders of the Priesthood. His fate was left to Bishop Snow for his decision. He decided that the young man should be castrated; Snow saying, ‘When that is done, he will not be liable to want the girl badly, and she will listen to reason when she knows that her lover is no longer a man.’

“It was then decided to call a meeting of the people who lived true to counsel, which was held in the school-house in Manti... The young man was there, and was again requested, ordered and threatened, to get him to surrender the young woman to Snow, but true to his plighted troth, he refused to consent to give up the girl. The lights were then put out. An attack was made on the young man. He was severely beaten, and then tied with his back down on a bench, when Bishop Snow took a bowie-knife, and performed the operation in a most brutal manner, and then took the portion severed from his victim and hung it up in the school-house on a nail, so that it could be seen by all who visited the house afterwards.

“The party then left the young man weltering in his blood, and in a lifeless condition. During the night he succeeded in releasing himself from his confinement, and dragged himself to some hay-stacks, where he lay until the next day, when he was discovered by his friends. The young man regained his health, but has been an idiot or quite lunatic ever since....

“After this outrage old Bishop Snow took occasion to get up a meeting... When all had assembled, the old man talked to the people about their duty to the Church, and their duty to obey counsel, and the dangers of refusal, and then publicly called attention to the mangled parts of the young man, that had been severed from his person, and stated that the deed had been done to teach the people that the counsel of the Priesthood must be obeyed. To make a long story short, I will say, the young woman was soon after forced into being sealed to Bishop Snow.

“Brigham Young... did nothing against Snow. He left him in charge as Bishop at Manti, and ordered the matter to be hushed up.” (Ibid., pages 284-286)

Mormons today would be appalled if such a dastardly deed was committed and would demand that the persons responsible be severely punished. Brigham Young, however, approved of many violent acts perpetrated by those he put in authority. Interestingly, D. Michael Quinn found documented evidence showing that President Young supported Bishop Warren S. Snow’s cruel mistreatment of the young man:

“In the midsummer of 1857 Brigham Young also expressed approval for an LDS bishop who had castrated a man. In May 1857 Bishop Warren S. Snow’s counselor wrote that twenty-four-year-old Thomas Lewis ‘has now gone crazy’ after being castrated by Bishop Snow for an undisclosed sex crime. When informed of Snow’s action, Young said: ‘I feel to sustain him...’ In July Brigham Young wrote a reassuring letter to the bishop about this castration: ‘Just let the matter drop, and say no more about it,’ the LDS president advised, ‘and it will soon die away among the people.’ “ (The Mormon Hierarchy: Extensions of Power, Vol. 2, pages 250-251)

Next up: The Mountain Meadows Massacre, THe Circleville Massacre, The Bear River massacre

Me: You may say, "Wait a minute. My Mormon leaders have told us 'eternal life' = eternal progression and celestial heaven and becoming heirs. But you're telling me eternal life is now? How can that be?"
Your response: This look like a straw man argument to me. Or perhaps a false dichotomy.

Logo, I’m going to try to cut to the chase in this, ‘cause if I know your history of past responses, you tend to shy away from long drawn-out exchanges. (Perhaps for time constraint reasons).

I’m trying to steer clear of a point-by-point, tit-for-tat exchange. Yes, this is a long post, but most of it Lds sources...excerpts...and it all centers on just one area.

I’m usually glad to do that kind of a dialogue; but I’m not out for “winning the argument” here. And I think talk show host Dennis Prager is right on when he says that when people disagree, we should seek clarification foremost, and worry much less about persuasion.

And whenever possible, I try to integrate God’s Word – and let God speak for Himself – and do the “persuading.” In the case of this post, I cite plenty of Mormon sources to clearly show you, "No, I have not referenced any 'false dichotomy' -- and 'No, I have not built any 'straw men.'"

Now it might be a bit strange for me to say ”when people disagree” when you spent this post on the surface agreeing a lot with me. But the very heart of your response – which I pinpointed right at the top of this response – one built around the heart of my comment – doesn’t “sit right.”

Now I’m not saying you personally don’t believe what you just said. Perhaps you do. Perhaps because you may read & embrace more of the Bible than other Mormons, you’ve come to see things a bit distinctly. But I have to ask you how you can seriously maintain as what you believe here represents Mormon teaching?

You took issue with my statement that Mormons believe that ”'eternal life' = eternal progression and celestial heaven and becoming heirs. But you're telling me eternal life is now? How can that be?" -- that this is somehow a ”straw man” or a “false dichotomy.”

In light of the following statements of doctrine by numerous Lds authorities, how dare can you say that what I said is either a ”straw man” or a ”false dichotomy”???

What the following statements show:
(1) To Mormons, eternal life = exaltation
(2) Exaltation = becoming a god
(3) This occurs only in the celestial degree of the Kingdom...which is a post-death occurrence [this therefore militates vs. my KEY POINT that an eternal life relationship isn't contingent upon a jumpstart of death]
(4) Only this category of people get to live in God's presence forever...all others are shut out from an eternal life relationship with Heavenly Father
(5) By becoming so-called gods, Mormons will have "all knowledge...all wisdom...all power...becoming creators like God."
(6) The only way to be exalted is to keep all the commandments, all the Mormon endowments, Mormon covenants, and Mormon temple rituals, and it's only available to Mormon married couples. This is all merit-based stuff -- and one of the quotes below even uses that term of "merit". The gospel is reduced to a series of laws to obey. It's not so much about what Jesus has done; but about what you have to do.
(7) All of the above is clearly distinguished between what supposedly happens to non-Mormons, which is described as immortality with a resurrected body -- but NOT living in the presence of Heavenly Father forever...THAT is no "salvation" at all to Christians...to be away from His presence is either an earth-like eternity or even hell-like.

”Eternal life is a term which always means ‘exaltation,’ when used in the Scriptures (John 3:15; Romans 6:23; 1 John 1:2; 2 Nephi 2:28; D&C 5:22; 18:8; 131:5; 138:51; Moses 1:39).” (David R. Ridges, Mormon Beliefs and Doctrines Made Easier, p. 88) [Note: With NONE of these passages does it share that “eternal life” – biblically defined – is “exaltation” – Mormon-defined! D&C 5:22 & 18:8 talk about keeping all the commandments – but which Mormons do that? The Bible & the Book of Mormon don’t even mention the Mormon version of “exaltation” – that man becomes a god!]

Sub-title: “WHAT IS EXALTATION? Exaltation is eternal life, the kind of life that God lives.” (Gospel Principles, put out by Lds church, older 1970s version, p. 289)

”Exaltation is a synonym for eternal life. Exaltation comes only to those who inherit the highest degree within the celestial kingdom…it consists in the continuation of the family unit throughout eternity; it is the type of life that is lived by our Heavenly Father.” (Daniel H. Ludlow, A Companion to Your Study of the Doctrines and Covenants, 2:85)

“Eternal life is living with Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ in the celestial kingdom. This blessing—which is also called exaltation—comes only to those who keep the commandments and make the necessary covenants.” (Preparing for Exaltation Teacher’s Manual, 1998, p. 4)

“Exaltation is eternal life, the kind of life God lives. He lives in great glory. He is perfect. He possesses all knowledge, and all wisdom. He is the Father of spirit children. He is a creator. We can become like our Heavenly Father. This is exaltation.” (Gospel Principles, 1997, p. 302)

“Eternal life…In fact…means exaltation. He who receives the greatest portion of eternal life becomes a God.” (Milton R. Hunter, an LDS Seventy, The Gospel Through the Ages, p. 11)

”Exaltation means godhood, creatorship. ‘As man now is, God once was; as God now is, man may be” (The Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, p. 53)

“Exaltation is the greatest of all the gifts and attainments possible. It is available only in the highest degree of the Celestial Kingdom and is reserved for members of the Church of the Firstborn. This exalted status, called eternal life, is available to be received by a man and a wife. It means not only living in God’s presence, but receiving power to do as God does, including the power to bear children after the resurrection.” (Encylopedia of Mormonism, 2:479)

“…resurrection alone does not qualify us for eternal life in the presence of God…we need His grace to purify and perfect us ‘after all we can do’ (2 Nephi 25:23).” (Truth to the Faith: A Gospel Reference, Intellectual Reserve, 2004, p. 77)

Each of us has been sent to earth by our Heavenly Father to merit eternal life” (Lds apostle Robert D. Hales, “Personal Revelation: The Teachings and Examples of the Prophets,” Ensign (Conference Edition), Nov. 1985, p. 20)

”Immortality is to live forever as a resurrected being. Through the Atonement of Jesus Christ, everyone will receive this gift. Eternal life, or exaltation, is to inherit a place in the highest degree of the celestial kingdom, where we will live in God’s presence and continue as families.” (Truth to the Faith: A Gospel Reference, Intellectual Reserve, 2004, p. 52)

“…immortality is to live forever in the resurrected state, and by the grace of God all men will gain this unending continuance of life. But ONLY THOSE who obey the fullness of the gospel law will inherit eternal life. (D&C 29:43-44)…it is the kind, status, type, and quality of life that God himself enjoys. Thus those who gain eternal life receive exaltation; they are sons of God, joint-heirs with Christ…they overcome all things, have all power, and receive the fullness of the Father. They are gods.” (McConkie, MORMON DOCTRINE, p. 237, 1979 ed.)
[NOTE: Of course, McConkie cites D&C 29:43-44…but these verses say no such thing…v. 43 actually says that ”immortality unto eternal life” is given to ”as many as would BELIEVE”…’shifty’ McConkie…trying to pull a rabbit when no hat exists]

“’Eternal life’ is a higher state than immortality alone and means to live forever in a resurrected condition in the presence of God, and to become like God…Eternal life is exaltation into the type and quality of life that God lives. Receiving eternal life is conditional, predicated upon obedience to the fullness of gospel law and ordinances (D&C 29:43-44; 130:20-21). It requires voluntary obedience to all of the ordinances and principles of the gospel…continuing through…the covenants of the Endowment and marriage in the temple…” (Encyclopedia of Mormonism, 2:677-678)

“The…gift of eternal life…is conditional. In order to qualify, one must deny oneself of ungodliness and honor the ordinance and covenants of the temple.” (Lds apostle Russell M. Nelson, “Divine Love,” Ensign, Feb. 2003, p. 24)

So, to wrap this up…Logo, if you believe more biblically than what is stated above by Lds authorities…well, mind you, I'm not asking you to give that up. But if that’s the case – a big “if” – then your posturing doesn't match Lds doctrine.

Gee it is your History not a myth or embellishment like many try to do to the LDS by taking things out of context.

Yep the gig is up no more secrets as you guys like to claim you are an open book... ha ha ha what hypocrits!

- - - - - - -

Resty, honey, I will take this slow and easy for you...

I will GLADLY discuss Church History with you until the Second Coming (it IS, after all, my area of specialization).

However, you make a mistake by claiming we are ‘hypocrits’ and apparently assume Christians either whitewash or ignore church history. That is not the case at all, there is no need.

Christians recognize (or they should) that ‘church history’ is a history of RELIGION (rites, rituals, debates, people, denominations). But, as Christians, our faith is NOT in our denominations. It is in Christ alone and HIS work on the Cross.

Any Christian church historian (such as myself) knows that ‘church history stinks’ (to quote Shawn McCraney). BIG DEAL. It really does not matter. Because church history has ABSOLUTELY NO BEARING AT ALL on our faith. Nor should it. Our faith is in Christ alone.

The Mormons do not have that luxury, however. Why? Because of the foundational claims of Mormonism, meaning that ALL churches were ‘corrupt’ and ‘apostate’ and that Christ founded a denomination that Joseph Smith ‘restored’. That claim binds LDS church history to it’s doctrine. If there are lies and problems in LDS history, or the LDS LIE about their church history, then it, in a VERY TANGIBLE WAY, makes Smith’s claim of restoring the ‘true’ church suspect.

You see, the LDS cannot divorce themselves from their church history because they EQUATE Christ with the LDS church. The LDS denomination claims to be the ONLY TRUE WAY of getting to Heaven (the Celestial Kingdom and exaltation), therefore, the claims of Joseph Smith rise or fall upon the history of the organization he claims was restored.

So, LDS history is fair game while most Christians (all should) do NOT equate their salvation based upon the history of their denomination for their denomination does NOT, cannot, save them. Only the Blood of Christ can.

I never denied it. As I posted a few weeks ago:

What they are refering to is often called “once saved always saved”. The idea behind that is once you are born again, spiritually reborn, any sin you commit is forgiven by the Blood of Christ, by grace. You do not have to ‘work it off’ or you do not ‘lose your salvation’.

Even if you ‘backslide’ (say fornication for example), it doesn’t mean you lose your salvation, but it also does not mean you are walking with the Lord (showing proper love and respect for Him and His sacrifice) and it does not mean that you do not need to repent from your sin. Grace does not give you a license to sin. To say that it does, spits on Christ.

There is some debate about those who completely turn their back on God and Christ and deny Him after truly being born again. While this is rare, it does happen. More often, however, true believers may remain backslidden for a long period of time and still not lose their salvation. Some were never really Born Again to begin with, God knows who they are. But just because you sin doesn’t automatically mean that you were never born again. We ALL WILL SIN CONSTANTLY, it is human nature.

However, IMO - and there is some scriptural evidence for it - we can blaspehme the Holy Ghost and possibly lose our salvation. But this is VERY VERY VERY hard to do to the point most Christians do not worry about it, I have no fear of it. Christ has changed my heart, my soul, washed me clean in ways I cannot express and I could no more deny Him than I could deny the Sun in the sky.

But for the vast, vast majority of Christians, we see that we are secure in Christ, that no outside forces or sin can separate us from Christ or His love. Nothing we really do, will make Him no longer love us, or make us no longer His children. Once adopted always adopted.

God knows how and when we are going to sin long before we were ever born. And Christ died for us anyway, knowing and paying for our sins on the Cross.

True born again Christians have a deep love and gratitude for the Sacrifice for all our sins and do not wish to grieve him. We know when we sin we grieve him. We are not ‘earning’ contributing or anything else to our salvation, “it is finished”, salvation is here and it is free.

What we are doing is growing in our love and walk with Christ, WE don’t do anything, He does it all. “Once saved, always saved” is a great security for believers because we know we WILL sin (whether we want to or not - we will) but we will not be condemned or lose our salvation for sinning against God. When God looks at us He sees the righteousness of Christ, not our sins OR ‘good works’. He only sees if we are covered in the Blood of Christ shed on the Cross.

God invites us to His mansion, rent free, debt free and gives us riches beyond belief and heals us. All we have to do is trust Him. Would you spit on your host? Would you trash his stuff? No, you would be grateful and thankful even though it will not change your situation or position or get you anything more. God will not ‘kick you out’.

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.