Jump to content

Animal sacrifice in the Millenium?


livy111us

Recommended Posts

I started to believe in this idea years ago after reading several statements by Joseph Smith, and scriptures in Ezekiel and Malachi. However, I've changed my mind on the issue after reading a recent article on the subject. In short:

http://expoundlds.com/sacrifice.html

The short answer is NO.

Here is a brief rundown of the reasons for a negative response to this question:

The Book of Moses plainly states that animal or blood sacrifice was insituted with Adam as a means of pointing toward the atonement of Jesus Christ.

The Book of Mormon plainly states that animal or blood sacrifice ended with the atonement of Jesus Christ (Alma, 3 Ne). This message is repeated for Latter-day Saints in the LDS Bible Dictionary and elsewhere.

In 1823 the angel Moroni evidently recited prophecy-based scriptures connected with a latter day offering by 'sons of Levi.'

In 1829 John the Baptist (a literal 'son of Levi') restored the Aaronic Priesthood so that latter-day-adopted 'sons of Levi' could fulfill Malachi's prophecy of making an 'offering in righteousness' (see Oliver Cowdery's canonized statement in the PofGP).

In 1832 the Lord provided information about the latter day 'acceptable offering,' the people involved, and the location (D&C 84).

In 1840 Joseph Smith said that Malachi's prophecy about the 'sons of Levi' and their offering would be fulfilled by the Saints and sacrifice would be restored.

In 1841 the Lord indicated that in the Nauvoo Temple the Saints would offer 'memorials' of sacrifices by the 'sons of Levi' (D&C 124).

What about the idea that non-LDS lineal Levites will fulfill Malachi's prophecy in a temple that they build?

The Lord assigned that role (in D&C 84) to the Latter-day Saints because non-LDS people have no priesthood authority that is divinely recognized.

Doesn't Ezekiel's vision of the future Israelite temple prove that animal sacrifice will be restored?

The Lord showed that vision to a temple priest who lived in 600 B.C. Ezekiel's temple is a Millennial structure but animals can't be slain in a terrestrial state.

Doesn't Malachi's prophecy prove that animal sacrifice will need to be restored?

The Hebrew word for 'offering' in that passage of scripture refers most often in the Old Testament to something of a bloodless nature.

What about all those statements by LDS Church leaders and commentators who expect animal sacrifice to be restored?

Such statements rely heavily on Joseph Smith's statement in 1840 but the Lord clarified the situation the very next year in a canonized revelation. In any situation where there is a discrepancy between what the scriptures teach and what any Latter-day Saint teaches the scriptures take precedence.

Won't animal sacrifice need to be restored in order to complete the 'restoration of all things'?

Where did the Lord say any such thing? What He did say is clearly recorded in D&C 124.

That, of course, is a condensed version of a longer, more detailed article here:

http://expoundlds.com/sonsoflevi.html

Thoughts?

Link to comment

I started to believe in this idea years ago after reading several statements by Joseph Smith, and scriptures in Ezekiel and Malachi. However, I've changed my mind on the issue after reading a recent article on the subject. In short:

http://expoundlds.com/sacrifice.html

The short answer is NO.

Here is a brief rundown of the reasons for a negative response to this question:

The Book of Moses plainly states that animal or blood sacrifice was insituted with Adam as a means of pointing toward the atonement of Jesus Christ.

The Book of Mormon plainly states that animal or blood sacrifice ended with the atonement of Jesus Christ (Alma, 3 Ne). This message is repeated for Latter-day Saints in the LDS Bible Dictionary and elsewhere.

In 1823 the angel Moroni evidently recited prophecy-based scriptures connected with a latter day offering by 'sons of Levi.'

In 1829 John the Baptist (a literal 'son of Levi') restored the Aaronic Priesthood so that latter-day-adopted 'sons of Levi' could fulfill Malachi's prophecy of making an 'offering in righteousness' (see Oliver Cowdery's canonized statement in the PofGP).

In 1832 the Lord provided information about the latter day 'acceptable offering,' the people involved, and the location (D&C 84).

In 1840 Joseph Smith said that Malachi's prophecy about the 'sons of Levi' and their offering would be fulfilled by the Saints and sacrifice would be restored.

In 1841 the Lord indicated that in the Nauvoo Temple the Saints would offer 'memorials' of sacrifices by the 'sons of Levi' (D&C 124).

What about the idea that non-LDS lineal Levites will fulfill Malachi's prophecy in a temple that they build?

The Lord assigned that role (in D&C 84) to the Latter-day Saints because non-LDS people have no priesthood authority that is divinely recognized.

Doesn't Ezekiel's vision of the future Israelite temple prove that animal sacrifice will be restored?

The Lord showed that vision to a temple priest who lived in 600 B.C. Ezekiel's temple is a Millennial structure but animals can't be slain in a terrestrial state.

Doesn't Malachi's prophecy prove that animal sacrifice will need to be restored?

The Hebrew word for 'offering' in that passage of scripture refers most often in the Old Testament to something of a bloodless nature.

What about all those statements by LDS Church leaders and commentators who expect animal sacrifice to be restored?

Such statements rely heavily on Joseph Smith's statement in 1840 but the Lord clarified the situation the very next year in a canonized revelation. In any situation where there is a discrepancy between what the scriptures teach and what any Latter-day Saint teaches the scriptures take precedence.

Won't animal sacrifice need to be restored in order to complete the 'restoration of all things'?

Where did the Lord say any such thing? What He did say is clearly recorded in D&C 124.

That, of course, is a condensed version of a longer, more detailed article here:

http://expoundlds.com/sonsoflevi.html

Thoughts?

Stay with the Biblical scriptures.............

Link to comment

Are you agreeing with animal sacrifices? If so, why?

I am because that's what the Biblical scriptures indicate. Will that last throughout the Millenium? I don't know. Perhaps (speculating here) the Lord wants to give the House of Israel (more specifically the Levites) the opportunity to get it right and offer as they were supposed to, but with their hearts in the right place this time. Then there would be an end. I really don't know.

What I do know is if you wait awhile the church may change it's mind again and go in another direction........

Link to comment

I don't think the Church endorses this view, therefore, probably won't change it's mind IMO. I think the evidence, as provided in this article: http://expoundlds.com/sonsoflevi.html

It seems to be based on a false assumption by Joseph Smith whom abandoned the idea later in life. The article also does a great job at explaining the biblical passages as well.

One excerpt reads:

"As in other apocalyptic visions, the symbols often are not meant to portray literally the

events, people, or things, but to characterize or idealize them. It seems that such is the case with

this vision. It depicts the future glories of Israel

Link to comment

I don't think the Church endorses this view, therefore, probably won't change it's mind IMO. I think the evidence, as provided in this article: http://expoundlds.com/sonsoflevi.html

It seems to be based on a false assumption by Joseph Smith whom abandoned the idea later in life. The article also does a great job at explaining the biblical passages as well.

One excerpt reads:

"As in other apocalyptic visions, the symbols often are not meant to portray literally the

events, people, or things, but to characterize or idealize them. It seems that such is the case with

this vision. It depicts the future glories of Israel

Link to comment

I started to believe in this idea years ago after reading several statements by Joseph Smith, and scriptures in Ezekiel and Malachi. However, I've changed my mind on the issue after reading a recent article on the subject. In short:

http://expoundlds.com/sacrifice.html

The short answer is NO.

Here is a brief rundown of the reasons for a negative response to this question:

The Book of Moses plainly states that animal or blood sacrifice was insituted with Adam as a means of pointing toward the atonement of Jesus Christ.

The Book of Mormon plainly states that animal or blood sacrifice ended with the atonement of Jesus Christ (Alma, 3 Ne). This message is repeated for Latter-day Saints in the LDS Bible Dictionary and elsewhere.

In 1823 the angel Moroni evidently recited prophecy-based scriptures connected with a latter day offering by 'sons of Levi.'

In 1829 John the Baptist (a literal 'son of Levi') restored the Aaronic Priesthood so that latter-day-adopted 'sons of Levi' could fulfill Malachi's prophecy of making an 'offering in righteousness' (see Oliver Cowdery's canonized statement in the PofGP).

In 1832 the Lord provided information about the latter day 'acceptable offering,' the people involved, and the location (D&C 84).

In 1840 Joseph Smith said that Malachi's prophecy about the 'sons of Levi' and their offering would be fulfilled by the Saints and sacrifice would be restored.

In 1841 the Lord indicated that in the Nauvoo Temple the Saints would offer 'memorials' of sacrifices by the 'sons of Levi' (D&C 124).

What about the idea that non-LDS lineal Levites will fulfill Malachi's prophecy in a temple that they build?

The Lord assigned that role (in D&C 84) to the Latter-day Saints because non-LDS people have no priesthood authority that is divinely recognized.

Doesn't Ezekiel's vision of the future Israelite temple prove that animal sacrifice will be restored?

The Lord showed that vision to a temple priest who lived in 600 B.C. Ezekiel's temple is a Millennial structure but animals can't be slain in a terrestrial state.

Doesn't Malachi's prophecy prove that animal sacrifice will need to be restored?

The Hebrew word for 'offering' in that passage of scripture refers most often in the Old Testament to something of a bloodless nature.

What about all those statements by LDS Church leaders and commentators who expect animal sacrifice to be restored?

Such statements rely heavily on Joseph Smith's statement in 1840 but the Lord clarified the situation the very next year in a canonized revelation. In any situation where there is a discrepancy between what the scriptures teach and what any Latter-day Saint teaches the scriptures take precedence.

Won't animal sacrifice need to be restored in order to complete the 'restoration of all things'?

Where did the Lord say any such thing? What He did say is clearly recorded in D&C 124.

That, of course, is a condensed version of a longer, more detailed article here:

http://expoundlds.com/sonsoflevi.html

Thoughts?

Hey Tyler. Is there something wrong with that web server that the expound LDS is on? I have tried to go to it and it just sits there and spins without ever bringing up the site.

Ed

Link to comment

Tyler, I think this is a nice idea, and I find it refreshing to think that there may not have to be more animal sacrifices.

I didn't particularly find the article very convincing that there will *not* be though.

If we take this thing of no death in the Millenium too literally, I can see why it would be attractive to assume there will not be any death.

But all that the scriptures are really saying when it says that there will be no death is that resurrection will be instantaneous, not that there would be no death.

Furthermore, the "second coming" isn't necesarily to be equated with the "day of burning" when Jesus comes in glory. Until the day of burning comes, there will still be death.

Many things have to happen before the day of burning even after the Savior's first appearance at Adam-Ondi-Ahman.

President Benson clarified that there will be at least three or more appearances of the Savior that constitute the second coming that are not to be equated with the day of burning.

The main appearances are: (1) An appearance at Adam-Ondi-Ahman (2) an appearance at Jerusalem when his foot touches the mount of Olives during Armageddon to end the war and

(3) The coming in glory/day of burning.

Other appearances I have heard of are: An appearance in Salt Lake City that Wilford Woodruff spoke of. I wish I could find the quote.

The sacrifice of the sons of Levi can conceivably happen before the day of burning comes, before death is ended.

I read somewhere that there would be sacrificial altars at the temple of the New Jerusalem.

So I think this is a nice idea, but I don't find it convincing yet. I think taking the idea that that there would be no more animal sacrifice at all is being too strict in the interpretation of that scripture. I need to study this thing out more.

Ed

I don't think the Church endorses this view, therefore, probably won't change it's mind IMO. I think the evidence, as provided in this article: http://expoundlds.com/sonsoflevi.html

It seems to be based on a false assumption by Joseph Smith whom abandoned the idea later in life. The article also does a great job at explaining the biblical passages as well.arti

One excerpt reads:

"As in other apocalyptic visions, the symbols often are not meant to portray literally the

events, people, or things, but to characterize or idealize them. It seems that such is the case with

this vision. It depicts the future glories of Israel

Link to comment

So, to take the "revisionist" position, we must also somehow deal with Joseph Smith's statements. I'm not saying that I believe everything Joseph Smith ever said on every subject, such as moonmen and ten tribes on another planet. But still, the issue is, Joseph Smith clearly taught something contrary to that position:

it is generally supposed that sacrifice was entirely done away when the Great Sacrifice [i.e.,] the sacrifice of the Lord Jesus 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 . . .

These sacrifices, as well as every ordinance belonging to the Priesthood, will, when the Temple of the Lord shall be built, and the sons of Levi be purified, be fully restored and attended to in all their powers, ramifications, and blessings. This ever did and ever will exist when the powers of the Melchizedek Priesthood are sufficiently manifest; else how can the restitution of all things spoken of by the Holy Prophets be brought to pass. It is not to be understood that the law of Moses will be established again with all its rites and variety of ceremonies; this has never been spoken of by the prophets; but those things which existed prior to Moses

Link to comment

Archived

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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...