Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
SettingDogStar

Animal Sacrifice

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, SettingDogStar said:

"Elijah was the last prophet that held the keys of this priesthood, and who will, before the last dispensation, restore the authority and delive[r] the Keys of this priesthood in order that all the ordinances may be attended to in righteousness.'' ("Words of Joseph Smith", 5 Oct 1840)

I wonder where else Joseph Smith talked about "the last dispensation?" As far as I have read, he never stated that the last dispensation had started...

(P.S. And no, for the apologists I'm not looking for all the quotes from subsequent presidents of the Church!!!!) 

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

I am assuming this is some kind of animal cruelty dig and I have to ask....do we know better now?

A sacrificial meal shared by a family at the temple is not that far off from celebrating Thanksgiving or Christmas.

 

I like that we know that an animal sacrifices it's life for human consumption and not just something that comes from a store. Everyone should look at an animal as if they sacrificed their lives for us. 

It's not an animal cruelty dig unless that life was taken and left to bleed and not be used for sustenance or something. 

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

The wheat from the threshing floor is actually ground

 That threshing floor was eventually the temple site near Golgotha

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Araunah

I shall be thinking about this for a very long time.  Wow.

I also noted that "Araunah" means Lord.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
33 minutes ago, RevTestament said:

I wonder where else Joseph Smith talked about "the last dispensation?" As far as I have read, he never stated that the last dispensation had started...

(P.S. And no, for the apologists I'm not looking for all the quotes from subsequent presidents of the Church!!!!) 

I am curious about that. I could have sworn their was scripture sayinthis was the last but perhaps I’m forgetting. Lemme dig into this.

Share this post


Link to post
49 minutes ago, RevTestament said:

Well, like Protestants, we see it symbolically as the body and blood, partaken in remembrance of Him rather than believing that the priests actually convert the bread to flesh and the wine to blood.  We do not believe in transubstantiation. I would say we are more Protestant on this issue really. The bread is no more His flesh than the lambs sacrificed and eaten by the Levitical priests before Yeshua - those priests just didn't typically realize their sacrifices were to commemorate one done for them by the lamb of God. Hopefully, now we do. It seems hindsight is not yet 20/20...

While it is symbolic the ordinance itself has incredible power. It is not just commemoration. The ordinance allows the Holy Ghost to burn away our sins.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Maidservant said:

I shall be thinking about this for a very long time.  Wow.

I also noted that "Araunah" means Lord.

Yes and then there are the olives for the oil which are pressed and thereby "annoint" the wheat in the bread- also in memory of Gethsemane.

And of course that threshing floor is now under the dome of the Rock, and is the traditional location of Abraham's near sacrifice of Issac.

It is wonderful to contemplate all this during the sacrament.

 

Edited by mfbukowski
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, Maidservant said:

Indeed. 🙂  I love the Catholic way of viewing and practicing the Eucharist.

People don't really pay attention, but there is an altar in every LDS chapel, upon which there is the shroud placed, and upon which the body and blood (i.e. a person, Savior, or Lamb) has been placed and 'killed', shattered really, into hundreds of pieces and drops, and resurrected inside each one of us.

Exactly.

When I was serving as bishop, I would ask the priests, "Where is the altar in this building?"  After the blank looks, we would delve into this.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, SettingDogStar said:

I am curious about that. I could have sworn their was scripture sayinthis was the last but perhaps I’m forgetting. Lemme dig into this.

Well, D&C says things like this:

"30 For unto you, the aTwelve, and those, the First Presidency, who are appointed with you to be your bcounselors and your leaders, is the cpower of this priesthood given, for the last days and for the last time, in the which is the dispensation of the dfulness of times,"

But each time I note that it does not quite say the last dispensation had begun... that seems to be something later presidents and church leaders declared. In fact D&C makes it quite clear that Joseph Smith was in the sixth seal:

D&C 77:   

Q. What are we to understand by the angel aascending from the east, Revelation 7th chapter and 2nd verse?A. We are to understand that the angel ascending from the east is he to whom is given the seal of the living God over the twelve tribes of bIsrael; wherefore, he crieth unto the four angels having the everlasting gospel, saying: Hurt not the earth, neither the sea, nor the trees, till we have sealed the servants of our God in their cforeheads. And, if you will receive it, this is dElias which was to come to gather together the tribes of Israel and erestore all things.

10Q. What time are the things spoken of in this chapter to be accomplished?A. They are to be accomplished in the asixth thousand years, or the opening of the sixth seal.

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, The Nehor said:

While it is symbolic the ordinance itself has incredible power. It is not just commemoration. The ordinance allows the Holy Ghost to burn away our sins.

???

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, The Nehor said:

While it is symbolic the ordinance itself has incredible power. It is not just commemoration. The ordinance allows the Holy Ghost to burn away our sins.

This is what we believe, too. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

I'm about to go on a roller-coaster of my trip down this discovery.  I tell you the following in the hopes it saves you the same trip.

15 hours ago, SettingDogStar said:

"it is generally supposed that Sacrifice was entirely done away when the great sacrifice was offered up—and that there will be no necessity for the ordinance of Sacrifice in future, but those who assert this, are certainly not acquainted with the duties, privileges and authority of the priesthood. or with the prophets The offering of Sacrifice has ever been connected and forms a part of the duties of the priesthood. It began with the priesthood and will be continued until after the coming of Christ from generation to generation—We frequently have mention made of the offering of Sacrifice by the servants of the most high in ancient days prior to the law of Moses, which ordinances will be continued when the priesthood is restored with all its authority power and blessings. Elijah was the last prophet that held the keys of this priesthood, and who will, before the last dispensation, restore the authority and delive[r] the Keys of this priesthood in order that all the ordinances may be attended to in righteousness.'' ("Words of Joseph Smith", 5 Oct 1840)

I had held that this quote never used the word "animal" in it.  I had believed that the sacrifice was that of a broken heart and a contrite spirit.

Additionally, I found another quote (I'm not able to look it up right now, I hope someone else may make up for my weakness EDIT: see @mfbukowski's quote below) that declared that offering up the records of the dead (temple work) would be the "offering unto the Lord" that the Sons of Levi would offer (per D&C 13).  

This made sense to me because animal sacrifice was had before Christ, but work for the dead had not begun.  After the Atonement, animal sacrifice was done away, but work for the dead commenced.  Both were the primary purposes of the temples of their time.

Then this quote:

Quote

... the restitution of all things spoken of by all the Holy Prophets be brought to pass be brought to pass It is not to be understood that, the law of moses will be established again with all it rights and variety of ceremonies, ceremonies, this had never been spoken off by the prophets but those things which existed prior Mose's day viz Sacrifice will be continued—It may be asked by some what necessity for Sacrifice since the great Sacrifice was offered? In answer to which if Repentance Baptism and faith were necessary to Salvation existed prior to the days of Christ what necessity for them since that time.'' (Words of Joseph Smith)

The context and wording here are VERY difficult, if not impossible, to interpret to mean anything other than animal sacrifice.  I had to have a major paradigm shift to absorb this.

After I pondered and prayed about this, I really wondered. Then the answer I received was quite stunning as well as comforting.

"Why is this even an issue?  What does it matter?  Why does this disturb you?"

Very good questions.  And it was also a wake up call.  Sacrifice is sacrifice.  We sacrifice what the Lord asks us to sacrifice.  If He asks us to sacrifice a broken heart and a contrite spirit, we do so.  If the next day, year, era, He asks us to sacrifice animals, we do so.  If he asks for temple work for the dead, then we do so.  If he were to command every male to be circumcised, we'd do so.

What we sacrifice is not so important as the fact that we are being humble and willing to do all things the Lord has commanded us.  Have we not all made covenants to sacrifice all things?  Then why is it difficult to sacrifice one thing, but not another?  Is it pride in our current cultural norms that prevents us from obeying a commandment simply because it is distasteful to us?  Perhaps some of our "cultural norms" need to be placed on the altar of sacrifice?

I think a farmer (who grows his own animals and slaughters them himself) would be much more willing to perform such a sacrifice than our modern sanitized, forensic world we live in.

The bottom line is: We obey God.

Edited by Carborendum
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, RevTestament said:

I wonder where else Joseph Smith talked about "the last dispensation?" As far as I have read, he never stated that the last dispensation had started...

I wonder what specific wording you're looking for and why the given wording is insufficient.  If Joseph says that Elijah would come and restore keys before the Last Dispensation (which has now happened) and you want specific wording saying "The Last Dispensation has begun" I wonder what it would take to convince you.

Share this post


Link to post
14 hours ago, JAHS said:

"For he is like a refiner's fire, and like fuller's soap; and he shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver, and he shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver, that they may offer unto the Lord an offering in righteousness. Let us, therefore, as a church and a people, and as Latter-day Saints, offer unto the Lord an offering in righteousness; and let us present in his holy temple, when it is finished, a book containing the records of our dead, which shall be worthy of all acceptation." (D&C 128:24)

Rather than animal sacrifices, this seems to allude to how we now can make an "offering in righteousness" as we perform temple work for our ancestors. 

A book of remembrance of THEIR sacrifices!

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, RevTestament said:

???

You have never felt that? I am getting to where I am near tears in every sacrament meeting. It is a wonderful experience. It makes you new and pure again.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
9 hours ago, SettingDogStar said:

A couple of things on this. 

1) It would definitely seem that rebuilding the Jewish temple and the sons of Levi (with the lower priesthood) performing sacrifices to the pleasing of God is imperative to the last days. So I’m in agreement there.

2) In the quotes by Joseph isn’t he also referring to the restoration of Melchizedek level sacrifices. Not just those performed by the Jews in their temple but performed by those with the higher law. He has some reference to the sacrifices the patriarchs made and that those must returns specifically saying the sacrifices of the Law of Moses will not be returning. I guess I’m a little confused. Are they the same thing? Or two separate events?

You are correct.  Both are clearly the case, although I have no idea just how such higher sacrifices would be performed inside the Nauvoo Temple -- maybe outside on a specially constructed altar.  Or perhaps at the coming Great Temple in Independence, Missouri, at the Center Stake of Zion.  Here is a photo of Jewish priests (kohens of the tribe of Levi) preparing to make animal sacrifice in Jerusalem this past December:

Activists for the rebuilding of the Temple conduct ritual, Jerusalem, December 10, 2018.

https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-jerusalem-municipality-rejects-plea-to-practice-animal-sacrifice-for-future-temple-1.6729388 .

Share this post


Link to post
38 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

.......................................

Additionally, I found another quote (I'm not able to look it up right now, I hope someone else may make up for my weakness EDIT: see @mfbukowski's quote below) that declared that offering up the records of the dead (temple work) would be the "offering unto the Lord" that the Sons of Levi would offer (per D&C 13).  

This made sense to me because animal sacrifice was had before Christ, but work for the dead had not begun.  After the Atonement, animal sacrifice was done away, but work for the dead commenced.  ..................................

Actually, we know from II Maccabees 12 that temple work for the dead was practiced by the Jews, but we do not know how extensively this was practiced.  In any case, the Jews are not likely to much care about LDS concerns when their new temple is built.

Share this post


Link to post
31 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Actually, we know from II Maccabees 12 that temple work for the dead was practiced by the Jews, but we do not know how extensively this was practiced. 

  1. This was in the apocrypha.
  2. I don't see anything mentioning the temple here.  Just that they made a sacrifice and offered prayers on behalf of the dead.  That is a far cry from a bona fide  temple ordinances.
  3. Yes, how extensively was this practiced?  It may have been a partial apostate practice -- like prayer circles outside the temple.
31 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

In any case, the Jews are not likely to much care about LDS concerns when their new temple is built.

I'm not sure how this fits into the conversation.  I was talking about OUR doctrine regarding work for the dead prior to the Atonement, not the Jews' belief about their practices thousands of years ago (or lack thereof).

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

You have never felt that? I am getting to where I am near tears in every sacrament meeting. It is a wonderful experience. It makes you new and pure again.

I have come to tears at the time of sacrament, yes. But it was remembering the suffering of our Savior in atonement of our sins that did it. There is one name under heaven by which are sins are forgiven, and it is not the Holy Spirit. That was never His job. The Holy Ghost does not burn away our sins. At least that is not the way I look at it. I'm sorry to be particular about it. Our sins are not forgiven unless we repent of them to our Savior and our God. This has nothing to do with the Holy Spirit, whose job is to teach/reveal, and help us remember. So, why are we baptized in the name of the Holy Spirit? I don't think the world has fully understood that, but it is for our resurrection, and not our redemption from sin. The Holy Spirit only indirectly assists by leading people to our Redeemer. Nevertheless, I am glad that you feel the spirit burning in you at the time of sacrament. That speaks well of your repentance. I would say that it is a confirmation of your salvation at that particular moment. :) 

Edited by RevTestament
typo

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Carborendum said:

Sacrifice is sacrifice.  We sacrifice what the Lord asks us to sacrifice.  If He asks us to sacrifice a broken heart and a contrite spirit, we do so.  If the next day, year, era, He asks us to sacrifice animals, we do so.  If he asks for temple work for the dead, then we do so.  If he were to command every male to be circumcised, we'd do so.

 . . . . . .

The bottom line is: We obey God.

I don't see this as an issue of obedience.  But, then again, I don't see anything as an issue of obedience.  (I tend to set down heavy on the 'agency' side, although not to say that obedience and agency are mutually exclusive.)

If it is a matter of meat eaters, then performing sacrifice to make it sacred; I don't have a problem.  Or some temporary device if it truly points the mind, body, and soul to the deeper truth.  But there isn't something better? Or let's just be plain and not learn only by a ritual with hard side effects.

What is difficult for me at this time is the sense of teleological progression to higher law(s).  And part of that is the knowledge that animals are persons with the right to life.  I feel that the Hindu approach to cows, making them sacred by living, rather than killing them.  I don't know that the 'celestial law' involves vegetarianism, but I personally think that it does.  I think it involves not eating anything but light.  You have to stop eating and killing things you can have a conversation with i.e. animals in celestial.  Again, is there a verse and chapter on this? Maybe not.  But it's where my understanding has gone based on a variety of threads and factors that DO have verse and chapter.  (Not that I build my world view solely from verse and chapter.  There is much that is right that has never been written and never could.)  The problem I have with it is if I would not kill a child on an altar, I would not kill a pigeon.  Because I would have repented of thinking a pigeon is something much different than my child.  To me, that is a falsehood; that we can't see better how precious every life form is; brother bear and all that.  I mean, obviously I would rather a pigeon than my child die, but I would rather another's child than mine die too, if those were the choices.  Let's not make them the choices.

It is also a better understanding (or as I say at this time) of 'sacrifice': to make holy, to give life to oneself and others.  It is not about losing something or going without something or killing something or something getting hurt.  Sacrifice is the opposite.  If you think of the Sun of our solar system and how it 'sacrifices' daily--it is what it is, a burning being, and by its burning It gives life to our planet.  I do have a hard time thinking of how a commitment to life would involve a killing ritual for the sake of prophecy (which is not the only sake that I'm saying every one is coming from, but its one).   Sacrifice is to give of oneself to allow others to live, instead of taking from others so that only you can live.

We sacrifice by living, not by dying.

So saying we need to do something simply and only to prove or show the Restoration as if there were boxes to be ticked off (again not saying it is everyone's point of view or only point of view, only one possible), I really think that is a poor way for me personally to accept things as right.

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, Carborendum said:
  1. This was in the apocrypha.
  2. I don't see anything mentioning the temple here.  Just that they made a sacrifice and offered prayers on behalf of the dead.  That is a far cry from a bona fide  temple ordinances.
  3. Yes, how extensively was this practiced?  It may have been a partial apostate practice -- like prayer circles outside the temple.

I'm not sure how this fits into the conversation.  I was talking about OUR doctrine regarding work for the dead prior to the Atonement, not the Jews' belief about their practices thousands of years ago (or lack thereof).

Sorry to interrupt but I believe Daniel confirms that a daily sacrifice was practiced at the temple. You can find references to it in Daniel 8, 9 & 11. For instance Daniel 9:27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

This is after the Messiah is "cut off" and i believe is properly understood as the "week" or prophetic seven days of the seven years war in which the temple was destroyed in the midst of the week or 70 AD, thus causing the daily sacrifices performed in the temple to cease.

However, just to be clear, unlike Robert I am not proposing that animal sacrifice will ever be reinstituted. The Mosaic law was a lower or teaching law full of symbolism. Those sacrifices were symbolic, and there is no sense of repeating them once the events they symbolize transpire. Quite simply, man has yet to understand them, but that is no reason to reinstitute them. 

Share this post


Link to post
27 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

have been a partial apostate practice -- like prayer circles outside the temple.

This might be off topic but that is definitely not an apostate practice. Haha The early saints had prayer circles often outside of the temple.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Carborendum said:

The bottom line is: We obey God.

Fair enough, but there’s no sin in minor speculation. It at least gets us thinking! 😂

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Carborendum said:

I wonder what specific wording you're looking for and why the given wording is insufficient.  If Joseph says that Elijah would come and restore keys before the Last Dispensation (which has now happened) and you want specific wording saying "The Last Dispensation has begun" I wonder what it would take to convince you.

The given wording is insufficient because it does not say that the last dispensation has begun. It says it will occur in the last days. D&C never quite says the last dispensation has begun:

Doctrine and Covenants 27:13

13 Unto whom I have acommitted the bkeys of my kingdom, and a cdispensation of the dgospel for the elast times; and for the ffulness of times, in the which I will gather together in gone all things, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth;

Doctrine and Covenants 121:31

31 All the times of their revolutions, all the appointed days, months, and years, and all the days of their days, months, and years, and all their aglories, laws, and set times, shall be revealed in the days of the bdispensation of the fulness of times—

Shall be revealed in the dispensation of the fulness of times is not the same as are being revealed in this the last dispensation. A dispensation of the gospel for the last dispensation is not the same as the last dispensation of the gospel in this the last dispensation.

I have addressed this issue before, but seem to be a lone voice. Nor was the last dispensation of the priesthood restored by Joseph Smith I believe more keys are to be revealed or "dispensated." So I just disagree that the last dispensation was initiated by Joseph Smith. He never seemed to say so - nor does D&C. It seems to just be assumed. 

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, Maidservant said:

I don't see this as an issue of obedience.  But, then again, I don't see anything as an issue of obedience.  (I tend to set down heavy on the 'agency' side, although not to say that obedience and agency are mutually exclusive.)

If it is a matter of meat eaters, then performing sacrifice to make it sacred; I don't have a problem.  Or some temporary device if it truly points the mind, body, and soul to the deeper truth.  But there isn't something better? Or let's just be plain and not learn only by a ritual with hard side effects.

What is difficult for me at this time is the sense of teleological progression to higher law(s).  And part of that is the knowledge that animals are persons with the right to life.  I feel that the Hindu approach to cows, making them sacred by living, rather than killing them.  I don't know that the 'celestial law' involves vegetarianism, but I personally think that it does.  I think it involves not eating anything but light.  You have to stop eating and killing things you can have a conversation with i.e. animals in celestial.  Again, is there a verse and chapter on this? Maybe not.  But it's where my understanding has gone based on a variety of threads and factors that DO have verse and chapter.  (Not that I build my world view solely from verse and chapter.  There is much that is right that has never been written and never could.)  The problem I have with it is if I would not kill a child on an altar, I would not kill a pigeon.  Because I would have repented of thinking a pigeon is something much different than my child.  To me, that is a falsehood; that we can't see better how precious every life form is; brother bear and all that.  I mean, obviously I would rather a pigeon than my child die, but I would rather another's child than mine die too, if those were the choices.  Let's not make them the choices.

Before I get into the response, I want you to know that I don't have a problem with someone being a vegetarian.  I certainly don't agree.  But I'll have common respect for someone who chooses a particular diet over another.  And I certainly see some dietary advantages.

The problem with setting it aside is that you've developed an entire religion around it in your post here.  Without considering that animals hold the same right to life as humans, there really is no substance to anything you said here.  Why is an animal life more important than a plant life?  Do you eat any vegetables?  Why is that justified and taking an animal life is not?  Remember, we're not Hindus.

So, forgetting the vegetarian mindset, is there any other argument you have?

5 minutes ago, Maidservant said:

It is also a better understanding (or as I say at this time) of 'sacrifice': to make holy, to give life to oneself and others. 

I get what your saying here. But given the context of this thread, I'd say it is obtaining spirit for ourselves, and giving spirit to others.  And there are many ways to do that.

5 minutes ago, Maidservant said:

It is not about losing something or going without something or killing something or something getting hurt.  Sacrifice is the opposite.

Actually sacrifice is not the opposite. It is also not the equivalent.  But sacrifice does require it.  Something good must be given up to obtain something better.  To characterize it as "something getting hurt" is a red herring.  I could just as easily say that "sacrificing our time, talents, and means" is also "something getting hurt."  But it isn't -- any more than sacrificing an animal would be.

5 minutes ago, Maidservant said:

 If you think of the Sun of our solar system and how it 'sacrifices' daily--it is what it is, a burning being, and by its burning It gives life to our planet.

Yes.  But we're not balls of self-sustaining nuclear fusion with a lifespan in the billions of years, are we?  We're mortals who have to live and die in a short lifespan in which we need to do and learn much with limited understanding and knowledge.  We do what we can and must.

5 minutes ago, Maidservant said:

 Sacrifice is to give of oneself to allow others to live, instead of taking from others so that only you can live.

Again, how is it different for an animal than a plant?  It is life.  We end plant life by eating vegetables.

5 minutes ago, Maidservant said:

We sacrifice by living, not by dying.

Tell that to Jesus Christ.  Tell that to the fallen in the military.  Tell that to the first responders who have given their lives.  Not a sacrifice to give one's life?

5 minutes ago, Maidservant said:

So saying we need to do something simply and only to prove or show the Restoration as if there were boxes to be ticked off (again not saying it is everyone's point of view or only point of view, only one possible), I really think that is a poor way for me personally to accept things as right.

I have no idea where you got that from.  Maybe someone else said it on this thread.  But I didn't notice it.

Share this post


Link to post
18 minutes ago, SettingDogStar said:

This might be off topic but that is definitely not an apostate practice. Haha The early saints had prayer circles often outside of the temple.

CFR

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...