Thursday, July 27, 2006

Blood Atonement

The FLDS under Warren Jeffs without doubt believe in the doctrine of blood atonement. As do a majority of other Mormon fundamentalist groups.
Brigham Young President of the LDS Church set this doctrine into effect some 200 years ago. It was his inspired opinion that there were sins committed by people of such severity that repentance through the atonement on the cross was not enough to free that individual from the sins that they committed. And that it was an act of sincere concern and love for their well being in the next life, if their blood was spilt ( killed with blood spilt) in order to pay the price for their sins. Some what perplexing how this would work in an imperfect world with leaders like WJ... This is a very, very dangerous doctrine. One can only imagine what might happen when trying to live this doctrine. Or maybe they already have been living it???

50 comments:

Anonymous said...

Example: Ervil LeBaron
: Lafferty Brothers

Check out the stories about these two groups at the Court Tv Crime Library


Back in the Brigham Young days wasn't one nicknamed the Avenging Angel?

fundy said...

A further not:

While I believe that there are indeed sins for which one cannot gain forgivness from the atonement on the cross the rest of this doctrine certainly is perplexing.

Brigham Young stated that there were many people who came to him knowing that their sins were of this nature and needed to pay the price for them.

Voluntarily asking for this to be done, would be the only way this doctrine would work.

However the abuses that could happen under this doctrine are extreme. I think the LeBarons were doing this some years back.

Brigham Youngs words: and I quote:

"This is loving our neighbor as ourselves; if he needs help, help him; and if he wants salvation and it is necessary to spill his blood on the earth in order that he may be saved, spill it.... if you have sinned a sin requiring the shedding of blood, except the sin unto death, would not be satisfied nor rest until your blood should be spilled, that you might gain that salvation you desire. That is the way to love mankind." (Sermon by President Brigham Young, delivered in the Mormon Tabernacle, February 8, 1857; printed in the Deseret News, February 18, 1857; also reprinted in the Journal of Discourses, Vol. 4, pages 219-220)

Utah Historical Quarterly, January, 1958::

"To whatever extent the preaching on blood atonement may have influenced action, it would have been in relation to Mormon disciplinary action among its own members. In point would be a verbally reported case of a Mr. Johnson in Cedar City who was found guilty of adultery with his stepdaughter by a bishop's court and sentenced to death for atonement of his sin. According to the report of reputable eyewitnesses, judgment was executed with consent of the offender who went to his unconsecrated grave in full confidence of salvation through the shedding of his blood. Such a case, however primitive, is understandable within the meaning of the doctrine and the emotional extremes of the [Mormon] Reformation." (Utah Historical Quarterly, January, 1958, page 62, note 39)

This may be the same case spoken of by John D. Lee, who was sealed to Brigham Young and was a member of Young's secret Council of Fifty:

"The most deadly sin among the people was adultery, and many men were killed in Utah for the crime.
"Rasmos Anderson was a Danish man who came to Utah... He had married a widow lady somewhat older than himself... At one of the meetings during the reformation Anderson and his step-daughter confessed that they had committed adultery... they were rebaptized and received into full membership. They were then placed under covenant that if they again committed adultery, Anderson should suffer death. Soon after this a charge was laid against Anderson before the Council, accusing him of adultery with his step-daughter. This Council was composed of Klingensmith and his two counselors; it was the Bishop's Council. Without giving Anderson any chance to defend himself or make a statement, the Council voted that Anderson must die for violating his covenants. Klingensmith went to Anderson and notified him that the orders were that he must die by having his throat cut, so that the running of his blood would atone for his sins. Anderson, being a firm believer in the doctrines and teachings of the Mormon Church, made no objections... His wife was ordered to prepare a suit of clean clothing, in which to have her husband buried... she being directed to tell those who should inquire after her husband that he had gone to California.
"Klingensmith, James Haslem, Daniel McFarland and John M. Higbee dug a grave in the field near Cedar City, and that night, about 12 o'clock, went to Anderson's house and ordered him to make ready to obey Council. Anderson got up... and without a word of remonstrance accompanied those that he believed were carrying out the will of the "Almighty God." They went to the place where the grave was prepared; Anderson knelt upon the side of the grave and prayed. Klingensmith and his company then cut Anderson's throat from ear to ear and held him so that his blood ran into the grave.

Its quite possible that men who commit abuses in the polygamous comunities pay even a bigger price than you have thought.

fundy said...

More from Brigham Young, sermon given on September 21, 1856:

"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)

On another occasion Brigham Young made this chilling statement regarding a person's obligation to spill the blood of those who committed serious sins:

"Now take a person in this congregation who has knowledge with regard to being saved... and suppose that he is overtaken in a gross fault, that he has committed a sin that he knows will deprive him of that exaltation which he desires, and that he cannot attain to it without the shedding his blood, and also knows that by having his blood shed he will atone for that sin and be saved and exalted with the Gods, is there a man or woman in this house but what would say, 'shed my blood that I may be saved and exalted with the Gods?'
"All mankind love themselves, and let these principles be known by an individual, and he would be glad to have his blood shed. That would be loving themselves, even unto an eternal exaltation. Will you love your brothers and sisters likewise, when they have committed a sin that cannot be atoned for without the shedding of their blood? Will you love that man or woman well enough to shed their blood? That is what Jesus Christ meant....
"I could refer you to plenty of instances where men have been righteously slain, in order to atone for their sins. I have seen scores and hundreds of people for whom there would have been a chance... if their lives had been taken and their blood spilled on the ground as a smoking incense to the Almighty, but who are now angels to the Devil... I have known a great many men who have left this Church for whom there is no chance whatever for exaltation, but if their blood had been spilled, it would have been better for them....

These are only two of many "blood atonement" sermons preached by Mormon leaders.

There , indeed, were a group of men who took orders from Brigham Young in the enforcement of law. A group of men who were basically a vigilance committee. This was quite common in the old west before modern courts and systems were set up. I would say the law was better served then than it is now. The law now seems to cater more to the criminal than it did back then. Justice seemed to be carried out in timely fasion back in the old west. Things never dragged on for years and years. Justice was carried out quickly....

fundy said...

The Old West, Myth and Reality

Holywood has this myth of the gunslinger like Clint Eastwood riding into town and taking it over. With all the towns people hiding under their beds from him.

A myth is a story that may or may not be true. Some myths might have started as true stories but as people told them to other people they changed things. Holywood in order to make a picture popular, has created this myth which is very untrue.

This idea of the old west is completly false. Trouble makers and other criminals were taken care of in quick fasion. By a vigilance commitee who knew how to get the job done and did.

fundy said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

My !@#$%^&*(), fundy, are you a supporter of such diabolical doctrine? Vigilantee's often hung people without trials. Is horse theft a capital crime? Maybe some would argue yes if it deprives a man of a livelihood. Vigilantee-ism is a forerunner to anarchy. I will take the modern system any day over some pious person deciding they have the right to flog my son because they think he might of maybe done some wrong.

fundy said...

The Mormons were at war with several states back east and the US government. There were innocent people on both sides of this conflict who were casualties and victims of this war.

fundy said...

Mountain Meadow Massacre

This operation was basically a continuation of the war between Mormons and Missourians. And trying to even the score with the those who had persecuted, driven and killed Mormon menbers in Missouri.. Too much collateral damage. They should have tried to seperate the Missourians from the rest of the wagon train. who they were after, a smaller group within the wagon train.

Albrock said...

I've been reading this blog for a while and, eventhough it gives lots of interesting information about the practice, I still don't know if yall do have a problem - or not - with polygamy. Frankly, I have a live and let live philosophy, but I do understand that if child abuse is going on, then the gov´t should step in. Bottom line is, do yall believe that what the folks in Centennial Park are doing is wrong, immoral and should remain illegal?

giz2gaz said...

Gee, Fundy, looks like you're starting to talk to yourself.

Anonymous said...

http://www.custercountynews.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=16685245&BRD=2217&PAG=461&dept_id=461867&rfi=6

desert darling said...

I defenately like the live and let live policy. If and when crimes are bing committed, they should be turned over the the law of the land to be taken care of, no vigilanti activity. Each person a right to a fair trial.

I don't think that there should be the fear that has been prevelant among the polygamous peoples, that turning in a crime opens themselves also to scrutiny and possibly prosecution for their lifestyles.

Anonymous said...

John D Lee's words that you quote are as credible as Thomas B Marshe's were late 1838. HE WAS AN APOSTATE! (There was no secret council of fifty)
That last quote from Brigham Young has no reference, where is it?

fundy said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
fundy said...

I don't think anyone in Centennial Park is being prosecuted. I think you have to mess up pretty big, then the government will go after you... aka. for example Tom Green. Warren Jeffs. high profile dip sticks... there are crimes in the fundamental groups that are capital offenses. And are treated as such.....

7/31/2006 1:17 PM

fundy said...

(There was no secret council of fifty)

This is not really an exercise to prove or disprove the council of fifty. Its about Blood Atonement which Brigham Young and others preached on numerous occasions. There is no real dabate there because of numerous records of their sermons. And blood atonement was practiced. How much, is not
known. Or proabably ever will be. There are no doubt some Mormon groups who still may practice this today...


Your comments are not really directed to the focus of the thread. And are not necessarily useful.

Anonymous said...

Well, Fundy

Rulon Jeffs included a chapter on Blood Atonement in his Purity of Marriage book.


Why? Because Rulon believed in it.

Rulon rails about adultery, adultery and more adultery and murder. These sins demand blood atonement to save these poor souls.

Law enforcement should be concern, more than they are.

It is suicide in the disguise of atonement.

Anonymous said...

Fundy said
While I believe that there are indeed sins for which one cannot gain forgivness from the atonement on the cross the rest of this doctrine certainly is perplexing.

Only one sin Fundy.....turning down the Holy Spirit AKA Jesus-GOD.

Anonymous said...

Saying someone is an apostate so their words can't be trusted is like saying a wife that gets disgusted with her cheating husband is an apostate and can't be trusted (Note to fundy--Emma Smith). No social organization likes inner working exposed, and whenever anyone tries to do it, they are branded as apostate to keep the others in line. I believe John D. Lee and Thomas B. Marsh knew about the council of fifty. I believe that it's purpose was indeed to take over the government. I believe they did indeed take oaths.

ATAR_i said...

Yes, it would be physically impossible to be 'faithful FLDS' and have something negative to say about FLDS.

The moment you said something - you would be considered an apostate, and thus, have no credibility.

If you said nothing, but still thought it, you would be faithful, but no one would know the negative things you feel.

It's actually a marvelous way to allow people to compartmentalize things so that they can ignore them.

fundy said...

Rulon Jeffs included a chapter on Blood Atonement in his Purity of Marriage book.

Fundy: Yes and yes most Mormon groups do believe in it.

Only one sin Fundy.....turning down the Holy Spirit AKA Jesus-GOD.

Fundy says: No and no there can be no forgiveness for that AT ALL. In this life or the next.

Saying someone is an apostate so their words can't be trusted is like saying a wife that gets disgusted with her cheating husband is an apostate and can't be trusted (Note to fundy--Emma Smith). No social organization likes inner working exposed, and whenever anyone tries to do it, they are branded as apostate to keep the others in line. I believe John D. Lee and Thomas B. Marsh knew about the council of fifty. I believe that it's purpose was indeed to take over the government. I believe they did indeed take oaths.

Fundy says: These comments are not relevant to the topic of Blood Atonement.

he moment you said something - you would be considered an apostate,


Fundy says: This thread is about Blood Atonement not Apostates.


Emma Smith is considered by most Mormon Fundy groups as a traitor, one who violated her allegiance and betrayed her husband. And who will burn in hell for as long as there is a hell to burn in. I don't think I can make any plainer.

ATAR_i said...

Poor poor fundy, can't stand people changing the subject - awwww.

Of course Emma is a traitor - she left her cheatin husband (jo), if she had stayed with the cheatin husband, she would have been faithful.

Ewww I'm so scared when you say the words 'burn in hell'.

You sound like the church lady (by the way she only made people laugh, she didn't scare them).

muggsey said...

If the individuals sin is so great that blood atonement is required then you are completely discounting the purposeful, planned, and completed atonement for the sins of man by Jesus Christ on the Cross. He became SIN. SIN DIED. The souls of the Old Testament Saints arose from the dead and went into the presence of the LIVING GOD. Th price was paid, once fol all.

Blood atonement, as suggested in Mormon doctrine is nothing but premeditated murder, or assisted suicide, both of which are illegal and totally unnecessary for the atonement of sin. JESUS PAID IT ALL.

Uncle Ratt said...

Cartoon - A fence dividing Centennial Park and CC. OTS standing on the CC side, Fundy standing on the CP side. Street, a faraway, glazed look in his eye remarks to Fundy, "On April 6, Uncle Warren is going to take the most righteous among the people into the temple and they are going to ascend into heaven." Fundy, trying to contain himself from laughing remarks, "I sure hope you are righteous enough to join them. We're getting a little tired of your uncomprehensible comments."

fundy said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
feralfem said...

Anon 7/31/2006 10:06 PM said:
Rulon Jeffs included a chapter on Blood Atonement in his Purity of Marriage book.

Could/would you (or anyone) give the publication date of that book?

The information would help me with a theory/timeline I'm developing about Rulon/Warren.

Anonymous said...

Well Fundy, you, OTS and Warren are going to be so disappointed.

If Emma Smith believed Jesus was her only Savior, and she asked for forgiveness of her sins, she will see the only true heaven. Pretty simple.

Too simple for may.

God will look at Jesus (God) blood sacrifice and will not see Emma's sins. Pretty simple.

Anonymous said...

Only one sin Fundy.....turning down the Holy Spirit AKA Jesus-GOD.

I should clarify.

The sin of turning down the Holy Spirit AKA Jesus-God will put your soul in the burning pit reserved for Satan AKA Lucifer and his fallen angels.

God will forgive every sin under the sun, but denial of Jesus, His GIFT OF BLOOD SACRIFICE.

God forgives adulters and murderers, He just does not FORGIVE PUTTING DOWN His GIFT.

No temple, no prophet, no Bible, no preacher, no BOM, NO WORKS, no tithe and no baptism of living or dead will get a man or woman into heaven and make us a child of God.

I guess now we don't agree.

fundy said...

God will forgive every sin under the sun,

God forgives adulters and murderers

Fundy says: No, very much no, neither is it His to give. The nature of sin is such that payment is due for it. Some one HAS TO PAY A PRICE. And for some sins the Atonement on the cross will pay the price. That does not necessarily cover adultery or murder. Or some other broken covenants made with the Almighty.

There are some sins that can ONLY be paid by the sinners OWN BLOOD and DEATH.

YES now we don't agree.

Emma Smiths only hope for her sins would have been through shedding of her own blood to pay the price for her sins. The ONLY possible way she could have paid for her sins. Then and ONLY then would she have been ABLE to pay the price.

fundy said...

I am a fundamentalist Mormon without doubt.

ATAR_i said...

Yes, we definately don't agree.

And your theology doesn't agree with the Bible either.

I don't know if the 'dis above is worse than not believing at all - wow.

Anonymous said...

I would rather invite an atheist in my house than one who feels that Emma should be blood atoned for disagreeing with a cheating husband. I don't agree with FLDS shunning, but I certainly would never allow Fundy in my house unless he promises to not teach blood atonement or try to convert me to his view of things.

muggsey said...

With the 'balance' of his mind being so strange, I don't think I'd allow him into my house for any reason. The guy is 7/8 a bubble off level.

fundy said...

Well Emma Smiths problems go much further than disagreeing with her husband.

Covenants made with the Almighty are very serious matters. They ARE binding. And they cut both ways.
You either enter into the blessings they bring or if you break them, you suffer the consequences. And THERE ARE consequences.

Such covenants should NEVER be entered into lightly...or whithout full thought of what your doing.

fundy said...

Blood Atonement is probably the most dangerous doctrine that was ever revealed from the pulpit.

ATAR_i said...

I'm fairly certain jo made a covenant when he married emma to keep himself only unto her.


He broke his first.

onthestreet said...

fundy said (8/02/2006 10:03 PM):
I am a fundamentalist Mormon without doubt.

STREET's Reply: With plenty of doubt: Union with the Lord and His Prophet is the most fundamental of all fundamentals. Lose that union or redemption, and you lose it all, and have joined the world and the worldly in your confused and diverse state.

onthestreet said...

mukk-see said (8/03/2006 10:27 AM)
With the 'balance' of his mind being so strange, I don't think I'd allow him into my house for any reason. The guy is 7/8 a bubble off level.


STREET's Reply: Yes, and you are 7/8 a mile off rocker.

fundy said...

what did street say?????????

ATAR_i said...

I think he's unintentionally making us aware of his "confused and diverse state".

muggsey said...

Fundy

I strongly suspect that "Blood Atonement" as believed by FLDS, was preached from the pulpit only after it was revealed to the preacher. The revealee certainly was good buds with the revealer, Satan.

onthestreet said...

Christ's atonement from Satan???
That IS blood atonement, ya know.

onthestreet said...

That is to say, Christ's Atonement IS blood atonement, and that is NOT from Satan. If some men realize they've sinned unto death, and they call on the Lord to help them atone, or to make a sacrifice that will give them a higher place with the Lord, and they willingly and joyfully sacrifice themselves by authority from above, that is where this doctrine comes into play. It is also right there in the Bible of you Christians, if you believed the Lord and His Word. Harsh? Nothing is harsher than eternal damnation. So the Prophet and the saints work to help people everywhere to avoid that, if possible.

muggsey said...

Christ does not "HELP THEM ATONE"!
Christ 'IS' ATONEMENT.

BUT NOW THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD WITHOUT THE LAW IS MANIFESTED, BEING WITNESSED BY THE LAW AND THE PROPHETS; EVEN THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD WHICH IS BY FAITH OF JESUS CHRIST UNTO ALL AND UPON ALL THEM THAT BELIEVE: FOR THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE: FOR ALL HAVE SINNED, AND COME SHORT OF THE GLORY OF GOD; BEING JUSTIFIED FREELY BY HIS GRACE THROUGH THE REDEMPTION THAT IS IN CHRIST JESUS: WHOM GOD HATH SET FORTH TO BE A PROPITPIATION THROUGH FAITH IN HIS BOOOD, TO DECLARE HIS RIGHTEOUSNESS FOR THE REMISSION OF SINS THAT ARE PAST, THROUGH THE FORBEARANCE OF GOD; TO DECLARE, I SAY, AT THIS TIME RIGHTEOUSNESS: THAT HE MIGHT BE JUST, AND THE JUSTIFIER OF HIM WHICH BELIEVETH IN JESUS. WHERE IS BOASTING THEN? IT IS EXCLUDED. BY WHAT LAW? OF WORKS? NAY: BUT BY THE LAW OF FAITH. THEREFORE WE CONCLUDE THAT A MAN IS JUSTIFIED BY FAITH WITHOUT THE DEEDS OF THE LAW. IS HE THE GOD OF THE JEWS ONLY? IS HE NOT ALSO OF THE GENTILES? YES OF THE GENTILES ALSO: SEEING IT IS ONE GOD, WHICH SHALL JUSTIFY THE CIRCUMISION BY FAITH, AND UNCIRCUMCISION THROUGH FAITH. DO WE THEN MAKE VOID THE LAW THROUGH FAITH? GOD FORBID: YEA, WE ESTABLISH THE LAW. ROMANS 3:21-31 KJV

onthestreet said...

That’s it! You smacked the nail right on the head, you drywaller you. The Law of God is the pure law of the land, not a replacement law like you say, and like the various governments have fabricated out of whole cloth. The Law of God is the true fulfillment of all the laws which are constitutional to man, including plural marriage. What is atonement? AT-ONE-MENT. One man at a time upon the earth, living and administering One Law, not many as man does. Christ is only a glorious atonement and resurrection to those who abide in that law, “and few there be that find it”, says He. Did He not say, “I came NOT to destroy the law, but to fulfill it”? Therefore, righteousness is NOT manifest without His law. It is manifest without the law of man, as you suggest.

Well put, Les. We appreciate that.

muggsey said...

Mistake: Not one MAN at a time, but instead ONE LORD for ALL time as redemption for ALL those who believe and trust in HIS HOLY NAME.

muggsey said...

If I desired to follow a man, surely I could find one of greater wisdom and compassion than Warren Jeffs. I only see confusion and chaos coming from his leadership. Beside that, where is your leader when you need leadership and guidance? He's off hiding or being hidden, on the run to avoid being aprehended.

On one hand you praise Joseph Smith for having surrendered himself to authorities in Illinois and praise Jeffs for being on the run. Where is continuity?

onthestreet said...

The Lord hides up, as he "left the temple, and hid himself", and yet says to give unto Caesar. Where is the continuity? They are both correct, and one law.

muggsey said...

I think street deserves a new by-line: out-of-context!

Anonymous said...

who cares? where is god's one true represenitive now? in prison. Your mind is a powerful thing that can justify anything you do.