Quoted: It's time to own up, Mr. John_Wayne777.  If you can't provide documented proof that Mountain Meadows was a Danite act, you're outed as a troll here (ironically, that would still have no bearing on the topic which is blood atonement).  I've tried to give you the benefit of the doubt, but you've continually made assertions for no other reason than to spread discord and ugly rumor. Prove me wrong J_W777.  Otherwise I'll consider you to be of the same class as Criley.

You may consider me whatever you wish to consider me. Your consideration, however, has no basis in reality.

There are several books about the Mountain Meadows Massacre including detailed biographies of J.D. Lee. I suggest reading some of them. You will also find out that the Mormon militia leadership had a lot of crossover from the Danites....You yourself said that Danite loyalty probably existed even after they were disbanded. Were you spreading discord and ugly rumor?

Unfortunately the events of Mountain Meadow are not "ugly rumor". They are history.

If you believe I am "trolling" then report me to the moderator of this forum.

Quoted: Quoted: So, contrary to J_W777's assertion, the Danites didn't even exist as a group after 1838.  I imagine that some individuals clung to Danite ideals on a personal level, but that hardly constitutes any kind of secret group. Now, considering that the Mountain Meadows Massacre happened in 1857, and the Danites were ended in 1838, it's a severe stretch of imagination to assume that the Massacre was a Danite-related event. So the Danites just up and vanished, eh? There was no carryover into Mormon militias? Everybody decided that they were wrong and just gave up? Hardly. Formal existence of the Danite group may have been "ended" by Smith, but Danite sentiment obviously still existed, as Mountain Meadows demonstrates. The attribution of the MMM events to the Danites by history is done for a reason.... Incidentally, John D. Lee's membership was re-instated by the LDS church in 1961.

actually JW,   history is up in the air on that.   There is no historical record of Danites (either real or a copycat group calling themselves Danites) operating in that time period in Utah.  John D Lee is viewed as a scapegoat.

Here is an article from a neutral source that provides documentation of its sources.  This quote is from that article

There are two main theories concerning the mass murder: 1  It was perpetrated by an isolated community of Mormons acting independently. Author Brooks writes that Mormon residents in the Cedar City area sent a rider to Brigham Young for advice. She reports that Young replied: "In regard to the emigration trains passing through our settlements, we must not interfere with them until they are first notified to keep away. You must not meddle with them. The Indians we expect will do as they please but you should try and preserve good feelings with them" Unfortunately, she reports that the massacre had already occurred by the time that the messenger returned. 2  It was ordered by the church's prophet and president, Brigham Young.  Author Will Bagley implicates Young directly in the massacre. Bagley's book "Blood of the Prophets: Brigham Young and the Massacre at Mountain Meadows " has generated considerable controversy since it was first published in 2002-OCT. He concludes that Brigham Young knew that the attack was imminent and, according to legend, sent the message "Brethren, do your duty." Bagley provides some circumstantial evidence in support of this assertion. 8,9  A 2005-MAY television program on the History Channel called "Investigating History" reported that: "...in 1999, a backhoe operator unearthed a mass grave, and forensic anthropologist Shannon Novak made astonishing discoveries--until the governor (one of the murderers' descendants) ordered the bones reburied. But it was too late, the ghosts had spoken and a new story emerged, implicating religious authorities in the mass murder."

Quoted: actually JW,   history is up in the air on that.   There is no historical record of Danites (either real or a copycat group calling themselves Danites) operating in that time period in Utah.  John D Lee is viewed as a scapegoat.

There are lots of views about JD Lee, ranging from him carrying out Young's orders in the slaughter, to him being the mastermind of it all, to everything in between.

Lee, however, didn't commit the act by himself. There was a group of men there with him who carried out the massacre that he alone was punished for. Many historians look to things like the Danite Manifesto and see a parallel in the actions taken and the ideas expressed and conclude that perhaps the two had something to do with one another. Not at all an unreasonable conclusion.

Quoted: Quoted: actually JW,   history is up in the air on that.   There is no historical record of Danites (either real or a copycat group calling themselves Danites) operating in that time period in Utah.  John D Lee is viewed as a scapegoat. There are lots of views about JD Lee, ranging from him carrying out Young's orders in the slaughter, to him being the mastermind of it all, to everything in between. Lee, however, didn't commit the act by himself. There was a group of men there with him who carried out the massacre that he alone was punished for. Many historians look to things like the Danite Manifesto and see a parallel in the actions taken and the ideas expressed and conclude that perhaps the two had something to do with one another. Not at all an unreasonable conclusion.

You can see a parallel in the actions of Hitler and Stalin, it doesn't mean they had the same motivations or were part of the same organization.

The view that it was an act of a Danite sect doesn't seem to have much evidence.   If your saying "well it could have been Danites", well then I'll have to say "sure, but it could also have been time travelling Nazi's who didn't like the Illini".   It seems to be more of a consipirac theory than a legitimate theory about a historical event.

Thats why I asked for evidence.   If there were Danites operating in Utah in that time, it would make a world of difference.  

The response to massacres is often hard to understand.   Try explaining to relatives of those murdered in Mai Lai the treatment we gave the criminals who committed those crimes.

Quoted: You can see a parallel in the actions of Hitler and Stalin, it doesn't mean they had the same motivations or were part of the same organization. The view that it was an act of a Danite sect doesn't seem to have much evidence.   If your saying "well it could have been Danites", well then I'll have to say "sure, but it could also have been time travelling Nazi's who didn't like the Illini".   It seems to be more of a consipirac theory than a legitimate theory about a historical event.

Time traveling Nazis didn't perpitrate the MMM.

Members of the Mormon militia did.

Thats why I asked for evidence.   If there were Danites operating in Utah in that time, it would make a world of difference.

There are several books on the topic that cover the background of the Mormon move to Utah, the prime players involved, etc. If you want to know more information, read the books out there on this topic.

Web links are pretty much useless on a topic like this.

The response to massacres is often hard to understand.   Try explaining to relatives of those murdered in Mai Lai the treatment we gave the criminals who committed those crimes.

No, the response to massacres isn't hard to understand. When one happens, folks try to bury it and forget it. When it won't die, they deny it. When evidence becomes uncontestable, they try to do damage control. Nobody wants to admit culpability for or any relation to such things.

Quoted: There are several books on the topic that cover the background of the Mormon move to Utah, the prime players involved, etc. If you want to know more information, read the books out there on this topic. Web links are pretty much useless on a topic like this.

I have read quite a few books on the subject.  Those that deal with the Danite theory discard it as being not worthy of consideration.   I can't cut and past the books I have, so I found a website that was neither pro or anti Mormon and linked to it.

Do you remember any titles or authors of books on the possible involvement of Danites?   I'd like to read them.    New info is always a good thing.  I don't think web links are useless, as long as they provide a list of sources used that you can fact check with, so if you have any weblinks it would be appreciated as well.

Just some information to the non-mormons:

The Temple Endowment Ceremony prior to April of 1990, had a "Blood Oath" the LDS people had to take during their ceremony if the secrets of the Aaronic Priesthood were ever revealed to non-mormons (called "gentiles" in the LDS church).

Placing your right thumb under the left side of their throat and making a motion from left to right symbolizing the slicing of their throat.

The LDS folks used to have to say in their temple ceremony: "I agree that my throat be cut from ear to ear and my tongue torn out by the roots from my mouth" (Letter from the First Presidency, Augusy 31, 1894, LDS Historical Department, CR 100, 14, #2, Volume 8:16-17) and then they would make the throat cutting jesture.

They cut that part out (no pun intended) altogether because of its violent nature and changed it to "suffer my life to be taken", but still made the throat sliting jesture.

That jesture and the 'threat of death' wording was stopped in 1990. (1990 Version of the Temple Ceremony, Appendix B, Page 122)

Blood Atonement was certainly taught up until 1990. How many that were actually carried out is unknown. This was not practiced by the rogue RLDS church only as previously mentioned. It was still symbolized as a threat to the LDS people in their temple ceremony up until 1990.

Quoted: Just some information to the non-mormons: The Temple Endowment Ceremony prior to April of 1990, had a "Blood Oath" the LDS people had to take during their ceremony if the secrets of the Aaronic Priesthood were ever revealed to non-mormons (called "gentiles" in the LDS church). Placing your right thumb under the left side of their throat and making a motion from left to right symbolizing the slicing of their throat. The LDS folks used to have to say in their temple ceremony: "I agree that my throat be cut from ear to ear and my tongue torn out by the roots from my mouth" (Letter from the First Presidency, Augusy 31, 1894, LDS Historical Department, CR 100, 14, #2, Volume 8:16-17) and then they would make the throat cutting jesture. They cut that part out (no pun intended) altogether because of its violent nature and changed it to "suffer my life to be taken", but still made the throat sliting jesture. That jesture and the 'threat of death' wording was stopped in 1990. (1990 Version of the Temple Ceremony, Appendix B, Page 122)

It's fascinating when you start studying the similarities between freemasonry and mormonism and the oaths/rituals/symbology they have in common.



(not that I want to discuss it.....)

Quoted: Quoted: Just some information to the non-mormons: The Temple Endowment Ceremony prior to April of 1990, had a "Blood Oath" the LDS people had to take during their ceremony if the secrets of the Aaronic Priesthood were ever revealed to non-mormons (called "gentiles" in the LDS church). Placing your right thumb under the left side of their throat and making a motion from left to right symbolizing the slicing of their throat. The LDS folks used to have to say in their temple ceremony: "I agree that my throat be cut from ear to ear and my tongue torn out by the roots from my mouth" (Letter from the First Presidency, Augusy 31, 1894, LDS Historical Department, CR 100, 14, #2, Volume 8:16-17) and then they would make the throat cutting jesture. They cut that part out (no pun intended) altogether because of its violent nature and changed it to "suffer my life to be taken", but still made the throat sliting jesture. That jesture and the 'threat of death' wording was stopped in 1990. (1990 Version of the Temple Ceremony, Appendix B, Page 122) It's fascinating when you start studying the similarities between freemasonry and mormonism and the oaths/rituals/symbology they have in common. (not that I want to discuss it.....)

Bro, if you only knew...

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Just some information to the non-mormons: The Temple Endowment Ceremony prior to April of 1990, had a "Blood Oath" the LDS people had to take during their ceremony if the secrets of the Aaronic Priesthood were ever revealed to non-mormons (called "gentiles" in the LDS church). Placing your right thumb under the left side of their throat and making a motion from left to right symbolizing the slicing of their throat. The LDS folks used to have to say in their temple ceremony: "I agree that my throat be cut from ear to ear and my tongue torn out by the roots from my mouth" (Letter from the First Presidency, Augusy 31, 1894, LDS Historical Department, CR 100, 14, #2, Volume 8:16-17) and then they would make the throat cutting jesture. They cut that part out (no pun intended) altogether because of its violent nature and changed it to "suffer my life to be taken", but still made the throat sliting jesture. That jesture and the 'threat of death' wording was stopped in 1990. (1990 Version of the Temple Ceremony, Appendix B, Page 122) It's fascinating when you start studying the similarities between freemasonry and mormonism and the oaths/rituals/symbology they have in common. (not that I want to discuss it.....) Bro, if you only knew...

Interesting.

Being familiar with the Temple ceremonies since 1994, I've never seen any reference to this stuff AZ_Redneck quotes.  I know the ceremony was changed sometime before that, but I honestly don't know the details of exactly what was changed.

As for Freemasonry, I've always considered it to be an fascinating organization.  However, I know nothing of it's ceremonies and extremely little about its symbols.

There you go.  Honest answer.

Quoted: Interesting. Being familiar with the Temple ceremonies since 1994, I've never seen any reference to this stuff AZ_Redneck quotes.  I know the ceremony was changed sometime before that, but I honestly don't know the details of exactly what was changed. As for Freemasonry, I've always considered it to be an fascinating organization.  However, I know nothing of it's ceremonies and extremely little about its symbols. There you go.  Honest answer.

I gave references. I figured I had better do that or it would look like I didn't know what I was talking about and be considered a troll... I am pleasantly suprised at your demeanor. Thank you for not doing the "YOU'RE AN ANTI!" and running away. I realize many do this, just like any religion, because they don't know their faith and what they believe. They don't study their own faith to make sure it's the right one.

Maybe there is hope for genuine open discussion..

Quoted: I have read quite a few books on the subject.  Those that deal with the Danite theory discard it as being not worthy of consideration.   I can't cut and past the books I have, so I found a website that was neither pro or anti Mormon and linked to it. Do you remember any titles or authors of books on the possible involvement of Danites?   I'd like to read them.    New info is always a good thing.  I don't think web links are useless, as long as they provide a list of sources used that you can fact check with, so if you have any weblinks it would be appreciated as well.

By saying that websites are useless, I meant that hard information is difficult to come by on many/most websites and that checking up on their citations (if they are given at all) is difficult.

As to book names, the titles I recall are books written by Bill Hickman (a confessed Danite) as well as a book that contained the full confession of JD Lee (I don't remember the name...I no longer have the book...someone "borrowed" it permanently...) as well as the book by Juanita Brooks. Amazon most likely has a wide assortment of books on the topic. There are also mentions of it in some of my old history text books from college, but those are all out of print now.

Quoted: Just some information to the non-mormons: The Temple Endowment Ceremony prior to April of 1990, had a "Blood Oath" the LDS people had to take during their ceremony if the secrets of the Aaronic Priesthood were ever revealed to non-mormons (called "gentiles" in the LDS church). Placing your right thumb under the left side of their throat and making a motion from left to right symbolizing the slicing of their throat. The LDS folks used to have to say in their temple ceremony: "I agree that my throat be cut from ear to ear and my tongue torn out by the roots from my mouth" (Letter from the First Presidency, Augusy 31, 1894, LDS Historical Department, CR 100, 14, #2, Volume 8:16-17) and then they would make the throat cutting jesture. They cut that part out (no pun intended) altogether because of its violent nature and changed it to "suffer my life to be taken", but still made the throat sliting jesture. That jesture and the 'threat of death' wording was stopped in 1990. (1990 Version of the Temple Ceremony, Appendix B, Page 122) Blood Atonement was certainly taught up until 1990. How many that were actually carried out is unknown. This was not practiced by the rogue RLDS church only as previously mentioned. It was still symbolized as a threat to the LDS people in their temple ceremony up until 1990.

Wow. That's downright creepy.

And I thought our membership rites were solemn!

Quoted: I don't see any real trolling going on (except for a few of criley's posts). Maybe some heated discsussion, but nothing more.  I think everyone is doing a great job at trying to keep on topic, and keeping things civil. There may be hope for you all. criley, I would ask that you leave the "man made religion" type responses out. I have seen that argument made against every religion/faith in here at one time or another. It doesn't add anything to the discussion, and it's only purpose is to get people upset.

You are 100% wrong and quit trying to state my purpose.  You cannot read my mind, and evidently your reading comprehension leaves something to be desired as well.

I was merely pointing out, by using the adjective, that religions ARE man-made.

Mormonism HAD the doctrine of blood atonement, as i QUOTED BRIGHAM YOUNG, and then when it was not such a popular idea any more later leaders tried to deny the doctrine as it was originally presented.

If stating that is trolling, then I guess I am a troll.

However, I believe you are the one in error.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I don't see any real trolling going on (except for a few of criley's posts). Maybe some heated discsussion, but nothing more.  I think everyone is doing a great job at trying to keep on topic, and keeping things civil. There may be hope for you all. criley, I would ask that you leave the "man made religion" type responses out. I have seen that argument made against every religion/faith in here at one time or another. It doesn't add anything to the discussion, and it's only purpose is to get people upset. You are 100% wrong and quit trying to state my purpose.  You cannot read my mind, and evidently your reading comprehension leaves something to be desired as well. I was merely pointing out, by using the adjective, that religions ARE man-made. Mormonism HAD the doctrine of blood atonement, as i QUOTED BRIGHAM YOUNG, and then when it was not such a popular idea any more later leaders tried to deny the doctrine as it was originally presented. If stating that is trolling, then I guess I am a troll. However, I believe you are the one in error. So you were talking about all religions? I guess my reading comprehension is off, because when I read this: Quoted: And the truth is, Mormonism is a man-made religion subject to the whims of men.   And as soon as some other 'church" doctrines become unpalatable, the leaders of the religion will change those as well. I just see Mormonism as the point of the discussion. Maybe this is all just some misunderstanding, but for some reason I sense a strong anti-mormon sentiment from you. This sentiment seems to rub off in your posting style. Oh, and no I'm not a Mormon, and the owners of the site aren't Mormon's either.

Speaking in general terms, religions are man-made.  In the specific case at hand, Mormonism is a man-made religion.

Religions are man's attempts to attain salvation and/or a relationship with God and/or a higher state of being.  The religions simply differ in the specifics they provide, but basically the equation goes like this: Do these certain things that the religion tells you to do + abstain from doing the things that the religion tells you not to do = a good chance at reaching your goal.

True Christianity is based solely upon the word of God.  God has revealed that there is nothing man can do to redeem himself.  There is no number of "do's" that will earn God's favor.  And, since one sin makes man a sinner, a man can "turn over a new leaf" and refrain from sin as best he can - but he remains in that same, lost condition.  He cannot undo his sin.

The difference between true Christianity and religions is that GOD does all the work in true Christianity.  Jesus Christ (the one of the word of God, not the Jesuses of various "Chrisitan" religions) bore ALL the sins of men in his body on that cross.  HE PAID for EVERY ONE OF THEM.  God will GIVE, as a free gift, the righteousness of the Lord Jesus Christ to those who will simply turn from trying to obtain God's favor through their own acts, and place their trust in Jesus Christ, and Jesus Christ alone.  Those who are accepted of God are accepted IN HIM - Jesus Christ.  Not because of their own standing.

You cannot place a "name" on that.  That is not Catholicism, it is not Protestantism, it is not Seventh Day Adventism, it is not Mormonism.  It is not becoming a Jehovah's Witness, it is not being a member of the Church of Christ, or of the local Baptist church on the corner.  You cannot even call it Christianity, because religions have attempted to appropriate their own Jesuses that fit their man-made doctrines.  The masses, who have no desire for the word of God, and thus have very little understanding of it, blindly accept that these religions are "Christian" merely because they have devised their own version of Jesus Christ.

In this specific thread, it has been brought to light that the second prophet of the Mormon church, Brigham Young, specifically stated (and his statements appear in an official Mormon publication called the Journal of Discourses) that there are some sins that were not borne by Jesus Christ.  There are some sins for which His blood cannot pay.  This is totally incompatible with the word of God.

Mormonism is in fact, a man-made religion.  This thread exposes that truth, and the ardent follower of the religion does not like that fact - he does not like the discussion - and thus calls anyone who will discuss such things a "troll.'

That is generally the way such things go.  It certainly should not lead to a censorship of the discussion.

Quoted:  It certainly should not lead to a censorship of the discussion.

Criley,

Calm down, man.


You and I have discussed this before.


VA_Gunnut and I have discussed this before.

Shane333 and I have discussed this before.

All of us have strong opinions and beliefs.

Yours and mine happen to align pretty closely.

The way to accomplish things here (if anything can be accomplished here) is to do so slowly and out of love for each other.

Let's not forget that.


<---hasn't changed his beliefs, but is trying hard to change his delivery, and hoping others will do the same.

Quoted: What I will not tolerate are pissing matches, and name calling

You're no fun anymore.

Quoted: So, basically all religions are man made. They all have beleived or done things in the past that would not measure up too todays standards. They have all changed their beliefs or doctrines with the times, including Mormons. Is this a correct reading of your posts? I try not to censor discussions that are truely discussions. What I will not tolerate are pissing matches, and name calling (I'm not saying you did this).

I read it as "all religions but True Christianity (i.e. his version of Christianity)are man made."  

What's the point of the initial post?  A History lesson of the Latter-day Saints in Nauvoo?  There's no question stated.  Now everyone's starting in on the LDS Church and Shane is having to fend off the wolves?  What happened to respectability.  If I wanted someone to tell me what I believe, where I'm from, what my mother is, or whom I worship, I'd serve another 2-year mission.  

This thread going to be locked?

didnt a lizard tell the mormon leader how to write there morman bible?

Quoted: didnt a lizard tell the mormon leader how to write there morman bible?

Oh heck yea!  And Joseph Smith was a lazy vagabond who spent so much time looking for treasure with his peeping stone that he had actually was able to acheive digging up pool sized holes all over upstate New York.  In his freetime he sacrificed white puppies.  Or were they black puppies?

Funny ppl.

Quoted: Interestingly enough,  Governor Boggs really did enact the "Extermination Order" and it wasn't until 1976 that this order was rescinded.  That is to say that until 1976 it was legal to murder members of the LDS Church in Missouri.

Well, first off I am truly impressed with how civil this thread has remained (at least up until this post I am quoting, I have not yet read further)


In regards to the quoted content, there was (is?) an extermination Order in Lethbridge Alberta Canada towards those of the LDS faith (Cardston being a close LDS community of note) the law stated that LDS persons could be shot within 6 miles of the city on any day except I beleive saturday (the day they could come in to purcahse supplies). The law was still on the books when I lived in Lethbridge several years ago, though it has of course been superceded by other Dodified law (Charter of Rights and Freedoms for one....)



I find it interesting that after all the persecution the LDS church has suffered over the last 170 years they are as accepting and friendly as they are.  Forgiveness truly is a grand virtue



Edited because I shoudl have read further, of course this thread would not remain civil, the usual suspects always have to show up and spew the vitrious excrement they call posting and others woudl call trolling upon what could have otherwise been a fine thread (discounting the obvious attempt at trolling to begin with)


LDS, the only faith that is allowed to be trolled more than Islam on this board, truly sad.

Quoted: <SNIP> I find it interesting that after all the persecution the LDS church has suffered over the last 170 years they are as accepting and friendly as they are.  Forgiveness truly is a grand virtue

In September of 1832 Joseph Smith was in Kirtland, Ohio.  These were the very early days of the church and, despite opposition (Joseph Smith had been tarred and feathered earlier that same year) expectations were high.  The Saints were defiant of the mob and determined to persevere.

The governor did not send the militia because, he expected mass resistance by the Mormons to Joseph's own protection. The governor feared that, if peace officers tried to conduct Joseph to jail, gentile mobs would overwhelm the lawmen in order to lynch Joseph. The militia conducted Joseph to the jail in Carthage, Illinois, and locked him up with other loyal Mormon leaders in a cell on the second floor. The militia was stationed outside the jail to guard it. On the second day of Joseph's imprisonment, other militiamen who had been dismissed by the governor, marched into Carthage. Their faces were painted to conceal their identities. They were obviously about to commit some mayhem. When the disguised militiamen approached the jail, the guards on duty did nothing to impede their progress. As they mounted the steps of the jail, the vigilantes fired several shots. Joseph, who had a six-shooter, opened fire on the first vigilantes to reach the second floor. He wounded several of the attackers: then his pistol was emptied. As the vigilantes came on unopposed, Joseph ran for a window. As he straddled the window sill he was shot from behind by vigilantes inside the jail. At the same time, he was shot by their comrades on the ground below. Calling out, "Oh, my God!" Joseph fell to the ground. He was still alive when he hit the earth. Vigilantes standing over him put several more shots into him, ending his life at age thirty-eight.

humm...  Mormons?

Quoted: LDS, the only faith that is allowed to be trolled more than Islam on this board, truly sad.

You should trademark that quote there Penguin cuz it seems that this holds true in most forums that discuss religion these days.  Islam... ba-a-ad!  The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints... cultists.  I chuckled when I read it.  LOL

In all honesty, 2-years in Las Vegas, Nevada taught me to not let it bother me.  "I believe in Christ, so come what may..." is what one man said.  I stand by that.  Truly calumny has reared it's ugly head in this thread as well.  

Quoted: Actually, I thought Shane was doing a good job keeping the wolves at bay. I figured this was a good chance for the Mormons to help dispell the myths surounding the LDS.

If you'd like us too, sure.  Let me pull up a thread I posted on another site years ago.  BRB
---------

Edit
Found it.  It's a pretty big post.  Should I post it here or start a new thread about "Mormon Misconceptions"?

Quoted: Quoted: Actually, I thought Shane was doing a good job keeping the wolves at bay. I figured this was a good chance for the Mormons to help dispell the myths surounding the LDS. If you'd like us too, sure.  Let me pull up a thread I posted on another site years ago.  BRB --------- Edit Found it.  It's a pretty big post.  Should I post it here or start a new thread about "Mormon Misconceptions"?

I would like to read that...

me too,
please post

Quoted: me too, please post

Posted

Discussion has moved to a new thread.