Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Benji

The Mountain Meadows Massacre

Recommended Posts

Many of you may be interested to know that there is currently a film being made about the worst act of domestic terrorism to occur on US soil until the Oklahoma city bombing. I am referring to the Mountain Meadows Massacre which happened in September of 1857 in Southern Utah. Considering the magnitude of this event, it is very interesting how little attention it has gotten historically. My question here is who was really responsible for this atrocity? Consider the following sermon from Mormon prophet Brigham Young which was given only 7 months prior to the massacre:

"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..." (Sermon by 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, pp. 219-220)

Of course I'm sure many will claim that this was not "offical church docrtine" either but that didn't prevent the murder of over 100 people which at least one Mormon (adopted son of Brigham Young, John D. Lee) was convicted of and sentenced to death for.

It's interesting that this information is considered "anti-mormon" despite the fact that everything I have presented is merely the words of Mormon leaders, some of whom are considered prophets of God.

Share this post


Link to post

Benji, I do not see any intent from you to have a discussion. I am not clear on what you are calling "anti-Mormon" but to use a quote that you claim is from the Journal of Discourses and call it anti-Mormon is ridiculous and has no purpose beyond provocation.

If you do not become responsive you are going to be put on the queue. You will be blocked from beginning new threads until you show you are capable of carrying on a dialogue in the threads you have already begun.

Share this post


Link to post

Wow, benji, I was so underwhelmed. This shocking new story (only around for148 years or so!), with "everything I have presented is merely the words of Mormon leaders, some of whom are considered prophets of God."

Where are the words of multiple leaders, and multiple prophets? Everything you have presented is one tiny piece of a sermon by one man.

Sorry Benji. You don't do your homework. I won't be visiting any of your topics again. I have a life. And if all you have to do is start multiple "ooh, shock, why didn't you Mormons know all this bad stuff?" threads, it appears that you need a life which will give you something constructive to do, instead of merely trying to tear down all the time.

Share this post


Link to post

Dunamis,

I was referring to the fact that several people have accused my information as being "Anti-Mormon" when it is merely the words of Mormon leaders. The purpose of this thread is to have a dialogue about the Mountain Meadows Massacre and who was ultimately responsible for it. As for other threads, I have been carrying out dialogue on several.

Benji

Share this post


Link to post

You need to read our board policy, Benji. Slapping up disembodied quotes and repeating your negative feelings is not considered to be a discussion on this board.

Share this post


Link to post
Wow, benji, I was so underwhelmed. This shocking new story (only around for148 years or so!), with "everything I have presented is merely the words of Mormon leaders, some of whom are considered prophets of God."

Where are the words of multiple leaders, and multiple prophets? Everything you have presented is one tiny piece of a sermon by one man.

Sorry Benji. You don't do your homework. I won't be visiting any of your topics again. I have a life. And if all you have to do is start multiple "ooh, shock, why didn't you Mormons know all this bad stuff?" threads, it appears that you need a life which will give you something constructive to do, instead of merely trying to tear down all the time.

Charity,

You may be familiar with the massacre but it is largely unknown. As for the words of multiple leaders, I have quoted Bruce R. McConkie, Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, and Wilford Woodruff.

Benji

Share this post


Link to post
You may be familiar with the massacre but it is largely unknown.

You are on an LDS board. It is well-known here. If you have a point make it.

Share this post


Link to post
You need to read our board policy, Benji. Slapping up disembodied quotes and repeating your negative feelings is not considered to be a discussion on this board.

Well, I apologize if you are offended by my perspective. As someone who was born and raised in Mormonism, my goal is to raise issues that I was never taught growing up and discuss them.

Benji

Share this post


Link to post
You are on an LDS board. It is well-known here. If you have a point make it.

My point is that the sermon Brigham Young preached 7 months prior to the massacre encourages the spilling of blood.

Benji

Share this post


Link to post

Benji, check your post. You only quote Brigham Young. Do you read your own posts? I always preview posts before I add reply.

Share this post


Link to post
Well, I apologize if you are offended by my perspective.

This is the kind of non-response that has no purpose other than to provoke. It certainly does not foster any kind of discussion.

As someone who was born and raised in Mormonism, my goal is to raise issues that I was never taught growing up and discuss them.

You have chosen a board that probably has some of the best informed and educated Mormons and nonMormons around. If you are under the impression the inhabitants do not know these things and most if not all of the literature about them you are going to have a very difficult time here.

Share this post


Link to post
Benji, check your post. You only quote Brigham Young. Do you read your own posts? I always preview posts before I add reply.

Charity,

Do a search for "all posts by this member" on my profile and you will see that I have quoted all of those men in various posts.

Benji

Share this post


Link to post
You are on an LDS board. It is well-known here. If you have a point make it.

My point is that the sermon Brigham Young preached 7 months prior to the massacre encourages the spilling of blood.

That is quite possible. Is that it?

Share this post


Link to post
That is quite possible. Is that it?

Well, I would like to have a dialogue about it and see what others think.

Benji

Moderator: A dialogue about what people think? The debate usually comes down to who was responsible. Is that what you are getting at? If so you will need to provide documentation and respond to those who also provide data. It takes one post to say what you "think". That is not a discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Moderator: A dialogue about what people think? The debate usually comes down to who was responsible. Is that what you are getting at? If so you will need to provide documentation and respond to those who also provide data. It takes one post to say what you "think". That is not a discussion.

My documentation is the sermon from Brigham that I cited which supports my view that he was ultimately responsible. I would like to know if others agree or disagree and to respond with their views on who was repsonsible and why.

Benji

Share this post


Link to post

benji wrote: "Do a search for "all posts by this member" on my profile and you will see that I have quoted all of those men in various posts."

What a crock. You should post on this thread, anything that is pertinent to this topic. I am not going to go back and read everything you have ever posted to try to tease out something you might have thought applied to this topic. In your topic statement, you quoted one person, and only a few words from a very long sermon. Then you said ALL the evidence from multiple persons. I said I wasn't going to read any more posts from you. But then I wanted to see what Dunamis was saying. You have added nothing. Sayonara.

Share this post


Link to post

This seems to be the type of thread where somebody makes an accusation and provides very little if any evidence to support the accusation, but this person demands that eveybody else do all the work and provide all the evidence.

It's the old "I don't have to demonstrate that you are wrong, but you have to demonstrate that you are right" routine. This is covered in great detail in the second chapter of the Anti-Mormon Field Manual.

What else has been done in this thread is to take piece of information that has been discussed to death, but present it in such a way to make it seem that this piece of information has been hidden by the Church.

Share this post


Link to post

I confess I was responsible.

Share this post


Link to post
...about the worst act of domestic terrorism to occur on US soil until the Oklahoma city bombing...

This is a joke. Why not look up Haun's Mill, Far West, Indepenance and Nauvoo for times when many men woman and children were not only murdered, but tortured and raped. Why not look up the 'extermination order', which was an order:

signed by Missouri Governor Lilburn W. Boggs on October 27, 1838, that stated, "The Mormons must be treated as enemies, and must be exterminated or driven from the State."

Wow, those mormons (even the woman and children as the order doesn't discriminate) were either to leave or murdered LEGALLY on sight. Yes, my friend, that was the US government in action. But forget that, those pesky mormons killed all them people in the mountain meadows and it was the worst act of terrorism until the oklahoma city bomb!!!

Share this post


Link to post
My documentation is the sermon from Brigham that I cited which supports my view that he was ultimately responsible.

The few lines you supplied document no such thing. You are making a habit of inflammatory global accusations with little or no support. Clean it up fast, Benji. Consider this a warning.

Share this post


Link to post
Yes, my friend, that was the US government in action. But forget that, those pesky mormons killed all them people in the mountain meadows and it was the worst act of terrorism until the oklahoma city bomb!!!

Actually, it was STATE government in action, but your point is well taken.

Share this post


Link to post
... As for the words of multiple leaders, I have quoted Bruce R. McConkie, Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, and Wilford Woodruff.

Benji

You have quoted church leaders? Ya right.

NO you haven't.

You have been ripping sound bites out of context. That is called yellow journalism in some circles, and I boldly proclaim it to be cowardly.

Share this post


Link to post

Lets add some context:

Brother Cummings told you the truth this morning with regard to the sins of the people. And I will say that the time will come, and is now nigh at hand, when those who profess our faith, if they are guilty what some of this people are guilty of, will find the axe laid at the root of the tree, and they will be hewn down. What has been must be again, for the Lord is coming to restore all things. The time has been in Israel under the law of God, the celestial law, or that which pertains to the celestial law, for it is one of the laws of that kingdom where our Father dwells, that if a man was found guilty of adultery, he must have his blood shed, and that is near at hand. But now I say, in the name of the Lord, that if this people will sin no more, but faithfully live their religion, their sins will be forgiven them without taking life.

You are aware that when brother Cummings came to the point of loving our neighbours as ourselves, he could say yes or no as the case might be, that is true. But I want to connect it with the doctrine you read in the Bible. When will we love our neighbour as ourselves? In the first place, Jesus said that no man hateth his own flesh. It is admitted by all that every person loves himself. Now if we do rightly love ourselves, we want to be saved and continue to exist, we want to go into the kingdom where we can enjoy eternity and see no more sorrow nor death. This is the desire of every person who believes in God. Now take a person in this congregation who has knowledge with regard to being saved in the kingdom of our God and our Father, and being exalted, one who knows and understands the principles of eternal life, and sees the beauty and excellency of the eternities before him compared with the vain and foolish things of the world, 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 of 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 or sisters likewise, when they have committed a sin that cannot be atoned for without the sheding of their blood? Will you love that man or woman well enough to shed their blood? That is what Jesus Christ meant. He never told a man or women to love their enemies in their wickedness, never. He never intended any such thing; his language is left as it is for those to read who have the Spirit to discern between truth and error; it was so left for those who can discern the things of God. Jesus Christ never meant that we should love a wicked man in his wickedness.

Now take the wicked, and I can refer to where the Lord had to slay every soul of the Israelites that went out of Egypt, except Caleb and Joshua. He slew them by the hands of their enemies, by the plague, and by the sword, why? Because He loved them, and promised Abraham that He would save them. And He loved Abraham because he was a friend to his God, and would stick to Him in the hour of darkness, hence He promised Abraham that He would save his seed. And He could save them upon no other principle, for they had forfeited their right to the land of Canaan by transgressing the law of God, and they could not have atoned for the sin if they had lived. But if they were slain, the Lord could bring them up in the resurrection, and give them the land of Canaan, and He could not do it on any other principle.

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 (in the last resurrection there will be) 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, until our elder brother Jesus Christ raises them up-conquers death, hell, and the grave. 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. The wickedness and ignorance of the nations forbid this principle's being in full force, but the time will come when the law of God will be in full force.

This is loving our neighbour 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. Any of you who understand the principles of eternity, 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.

Christ and Belial have not become friends; they have never shaken hands; they never have agreed to be brothers and to be on good terms; no never; and they never will, because they are diametrically opposed to each other. If one conquers, the other is destroyed. One or the other of them must triumph and utterly destroy and cast down his opponent. Light and darkness cannot dwell together, and so it is with the kingdom of God,

Now, brethren and sisters, will you live your religion? How many hundreds of times have I asked you that question? Will the Latter-day Saints live their religion? I am ashamed to say anything about a reformation among Saints, but I am happy to think that the people called Latter-day Saints are striving now to obtain the spirit of their calling and religion. They are just coming into the path, just waking up out of their sleep. It seems as though they are nearly all like babies; we are but children in one sense. Now let us begin, like children, and walk in the straight and narrow path, live our religion, and honour our God.

With these remarks, I pray the God of Israel to bless you forever and ever, for you are the best people on earth. I can say that I am happy that you are doing so well as you are. Continue to increase in all the graces of God's Spirit until the day of His coming, which I desire with all my heart, in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen.

http://journals.mormonfundamentalism.org/V...fJDvol4-42.html

Where those killed in MMM Adulturers?

NO

Where any of them Members?

NO

So how can BY teaching of the spilling of ones blood (note these are members not Gentiles) to pay for Adultury be construed to have any connection what so ever with MMM?

:P

Share this post


Link to post
So how can BY teaching of the spilling of ones blood (note these are members not Gentiles) to pay for Adultury be construed to have any connection what so ever with MMM?

My point is Brigham preached that it was okay to kill people and the implications of that teaching could very well lead to something like the MMM. If it is okay to kill church members, why not others?

Benji

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...