This broadcaster has 662 podcast archives available on-demand.
Keep up-to-date with this broadcaster on social media and their website.
November 12, 2020 8:53 pm
.1 Mormonism examines the teachings of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints from a perspective viewpoint when Mormonism is sponsored by Mormonism research ministry since 1979 Mormonism research ministry has been dedicated to equipping the body of Christ with answers regarding the Christian faith in a manner that expresses gentleness and respect.
And now, your host for today's viewpoint on Mormonism have modern Mormon leaders refuted what Brigham Young and others taught about the doctrine of blood atonement welcome to this edition of viewpoint on Mormonism on your host, Bill McKeever, founder and director Mormonism research ministry and with me today is Eric Johnson. My colleague at MRM this week we've been talking about the Mormon Reformation that is mentioned in chapter 17 of the book Saints.
No unhallowed hand. No unhallowed hand is volume 2 of four volumes two of which have not been released as of this date that talk about the history of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. This book tends to cover the dates 1846 to 1893 and it was published in the year 2020. We been looking at the doctrine of blood atonement since it is mentioned in this book we been looking at page 245. We specifically talks about how Brigham Young and others had drawn on Old Testament Scriptures to teach that certain grievous sins could be forgiven only through the shedding of the sinners blood in yesterday show we read some of the statements that Brigham Young as well as Jedediah M. Grant, who was mentioned specifically in this book as being one of those who kind of pushed this idea of what they call a moral Reformation and we don't get any impression from those citations that we gave that Brigham Young really did not intend for people to be put to death for their sins. As this book says on page 246. The question that I asked at the beginning of the show is what have modern Mormon leaders said about this.
Will Joseph Fielding Smith who was the 10th president of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints talks about the doctrine of blood atonement in volume 1 of his book doctrines of salvation. On page 133. He tends to offer a reputation to some of the ugly things that he thinks people have said about this doctrine and the only reason why he doesn't agree with them is because he is saying that those things that the church was being accused of believing really weren't taught in the first place. On page 133 he says this under the heading, true doctrine of blood atonement.
Just a word or two. Now on the subject of blood atonement.
What is that doctrine unadulterated, if you please. Laying aside the pernicious insinuations and lying charges that have so often been made. It is simply this, through the atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the gospel, salvation is twofold general that which comes to all men, irrespective of the belief in this life in Christ, an individual that which man merits through his own acts through life and by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the gospel naturally as a New Testament Christian, I would find problems with his explanation of salvation being twofold, general, an individual and of course within the context of Mormonism. General salvation is the resurrection from the dead, that which comes to all men, irrespective of the belief in this life in Christ and Smith goes on to say, there's also an individual salvation that which man merits through his own acts through life and by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the gospel. That, of course, in the context of Mormonism would be what is known as exultation or becoming a God in the next life, but on page 134, right after the paragraph that I just read Joseph Fielding Smith goes on to say this but man may commit certain grievous sins, according to his light and knowledge that will place him beyond the reach of the atoning blood of Christ, if then he would be saved.
He must make sacrifice of his own life to atone.
So far, as in his power lies for that sin for the blood of Christ alone, under certain circumstances will not avail. No Eric. Doesn't that sound very similar to what Jedediah M.
Grant and Brigham Young were teaching in the 19th century as it sounds very close to what they were saying. And so when he's trying to refute these ugly rumors that have been said about what Brigham Young and others taught on this subject. He seems to be confirming that what they're saying is true, especially the last part where he says for the blood of Christ alone, under certain circumstances will not avail.
Now we know what some of the circumstances are with them young. We read some of those yesterday when it comes to adultery or stealing or marrying somebody with black skin so the question then becomes if there is no forgiveness of sins, under certain circumstances and how do you get the atonement. It seems that what they're doing their equating capital punishment with atonement for sin or sins. Remember capital punishment really has nothing to do with atonement is punishment for what an individual is done in this life and there's really no specific mention that somehow this is going to atone for your sins. In other words, we would think that that individual who dies by capital punishment automatically gets into the celestial kingdom that would make no sense at all. Even within the context of urbanism, but I will agree. It sure sounds confusing will in the book Saints.
It makes the statement, and we've been dealing with this for the past couple of shows that bringing another set even drawn on Old Testament Scriptures to teach that certain grievous sins could be forgiven only through the shedding of the sinners blood. My complaint was that does not tell you what those verses are in the Old Testament that Brigham Young might have been using. Even though it has an endnote number 15 in note number 15 does not give you the answer. But guess what folks, Joseph Fielding Smith does on page 135 of volume 1 in doctrines of salvation. This is what Joseph Fielding Smith said regarding ancient men slain, to atone for sins, he asked this question.
Do you want a few references of where men were righteously slain, to atone for their sins. What about the death of knee horror now. Being poor is mentioned in Elma 115 which of course is in the book of Mormon.
I was almost hoping that the book of Mormon didn't specifically say that knee horror, atone for his sins by his punishment by death, but it doesn't do that. That would've been a clear example showing that the book of Mormon definitely contradicts what the Bible has to say. But basically the story of knee horror is not all that unusual, 115 says and it came to pass that they took him and his name was knee horror and they carried him up on the top of the home anti-and there he was, cause, or rather did acknowledge between the heavens and the earth that what he had taught to the people was contrary to the word of God, and there he suffered an ignominious death.
He suffered an ignominious death he confesses his sins before he's executed. But did you read anywhere in that passage, and that's the verse that he gives is a footnote here Elma 115 you read anywhere were knee horror, atone for his sins. As a result of that death penalty that he received no you have to read something into the passage which is interesting because Mormons are pretty notorious for Ice Age eating biblical passages. Here we have a case of mice of Jesus being done to a book of Mormon passage. It doesn't say what Joseph Fielding Smith is implying. Joseph Fielding Smith goes on after that example to say that Mariah and his followers? In the footnote is second Nephi 427 and 28 and it says, and there were many thousands who did yield themselves at prisoners onto the neophytes and the remainder of them were slain, and their leader is that Mariah was taken and hanged upon a tree gay even though the top thereof until he was dead and when they had hanged him until he was dead, they did fell the tree to the earth and did cry with a loud voice, saying, may the Lord preserve his people in righteousness and holiness of heart. Now it's interesting bill because he was hanged. He wasn't even having his bloodshed even in Utah. We had capital punishment. We haven't had a case in many years.
What's interesting about that statement.
Though Eric is that seems to go against what Joseph Smith taught.
Remember we cited this also from the history of the church, volume 5, page 296 Joseph Smith that I was opposed to hanging even if a man kill another.
I will shoot him or cut off his head spill his blood on the ground and let the smoke thereof ascend up to God and if ever I ever have the privilege of making a law on that subject, I will have it so so here we have a case of an individual in the book of Mormon being hanged.
But again, what you read. I don't hear anything about them.
Atoning for their sins.
In that case, it's just that it's a case of capital punishment, but then he gives some examples from the Old Testament and remember that's what the book says on page 245.
The book Saints says that Brigham Young others drew from the Old Testament Scriptures. The idea that sins could be forgiven only through the shedding of sinners, blood Joseph Fielding Smith in his book in volume 1, page 135 doctrines of salvation mentions their ER and Onan and that's found in Genesis 38, seven and 10 it says, but Judah's firstborn was wicked and the Lord cites the Lord put him to death and then verse 10 says what he did was wicked and the Lord site so the Lord put him to death also. So we have an old and being put to death, but no mention of them. Atoning for the sins that they had committed then Smith goes on to mention may dab in the body who which are talked about in Leviticus chapter 10 verse two, so fire came out from the presence of the Lord and consumed them, and they died before the Lord, where you read anywhere that short passage and that's the reference that Smith gives on page 135 where you read in Leviticus 10 two that may dab by who atone for their sins. All we read here is that there death was a result of capital punishment and then one last reference that Joseph Fielding Smith gives on page 135 of volume 1 and the death of Aiken which is found according to his footnote. Joshua 724 and 25 and Joshua, together with all Israel took Aiken son of Sarah, the silver, the road the gold bar, his sons and daughters as cattle, donkeys, and sheep's tent and all that he had to the Valley of a court. Joshua said, why have you brought this trouble on us. The Lord will bring trouble on you today. Then all Israel stone him and after they had stoned the rest they burn them where is the reference of any type of atonement for Aiken sin.
We don't read anything like that in the Old Testament. So when this book implies that Brigham and others had drawn on Old Testament Scriptures to teach that certain grievous sins could be forgiven only through the shedding of the sinners blood. That statement cannot be true.
We've looked at some of the verses that were given by Joseph Fielding Smith.
Not one single reference that he gives supports what it says on page 245 of Saints. No unhallowed hand, thank you for listening. If you would like new information research ministry. We encourage you to visit our website www.mrm.org you can request our free newsletter research. We hope you join us again as we look at another viewpoint is