For a review of Part 1 go here, part 1
Now lets look at what Brigham Young said about his teachings.
I am here to give this people, called Latter-day Saints, counsel to direct them in the path of life...If there is any elder here, or any member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, who can bring up the first idea, the first sentence that I have delivered to the people as counsel that is wrong, I really wish they would do it; but they cannot do it, for the simple reason that I have never given counsel that is wrong; this is the reason (Journal of Discourses 16:161).
I know just as well what to teach this people and just what to say to them and what to do in order to bring them into the celestial kingdom, as I know the road to my office. It is just as plain and easy. The Lord is in our midst. He teaches the people continually. I have never yet preached a sermon and sent it out to the children of men, that they may not call Scripture. Let me have the privilege of correcting a sermon, and it is as good Scripture as they deserve (Journal of Discourses 13:95).
You have heard me say, a great many times, that there is not that man or woman in this Church, and there never was and never will be, who turn up their noses at the counsel that is given them from the First Presidency, but who, unless they repent of and refrain from such conduct will eventually go out of the Church and go to hell, every one of them (Journal of Discourses 17:159).
It seems really Clear to me, Brigham young sounds as if he is teaching what he believes to be fact and truth. I know many LDS claim that the Adam God Doctrine is false and maybe someone wrote it down incorrectly. Here is a few reasons why I do not believe it was taken down incorrectly. It was only two pages long at best, yet the King Follet discourse by Joseph Smith was 11 pages long, and LDS to this day claim, this was Joseph Smith GREATEST SERMON ever given.
So why would 2 pages by Brigham Young be written down incorrectly, yet the same guy writing what Joseph Smith taught, could write 11 pages with out error? Then the very first quote I give from the JoD by Brigham Young can be found in JoD volume 16. I happen to own the entire set of the JoD, so lets look at the time frame here, Volume one was written in January 1853. Volume 16 was written in April 1873, this is a difference of 20 years. I know that in that 20 year time frame their were people among the LDS who did not like Brigham Young's teaching of Adam God, So if he was in error, why did he not correct it, but go on to say what he did in volume 16? This is one Doctrine that has Changed.
For more on Adam God go here, Adam God And here, more Adam God
Now Brigham Young goes on to say,
We believe we have a correct idea of the character of the Son from the writings of the Apostles, so far as they learned it. But while he was tabernacling in the flesh, he was more or less contaminated with fallen nature. While he was here, in a body that his mother Mary bore him, he was more or less connected with and influenced by this nature that we have received. According to the flesh, he was the seed of Adam and Eve, and suffered the weaknesses and temptations of his fellow mortals (Journal of Discourses 6:95-96).
Here is a few problems with this and again shows changing Doctrine. LDS today teach Jesus was sinless, to examples are the teachings found in the Book, (True to the faith, a gospel reference) And (Mormon Doctrine) They claim Jesus was sinless, Jesus could not be sinless if he was (contaminated with fallen nature Then the Other problem is, LDS teach that (original sin) is a theory and false teaching. Well if Original sin is true, then the only way Jesus could have sin in Him was if He had and earthly father, But God is His father, So Brigham Young will later go onto say, Marry had sex with a mortal human to give birth to Jesus. So in effect Brigham Young teaches original sin by saying Jesus had our fallen nature, again another LDS doctrine that Changes. For more on Original Sin go here, original sin
Brigham Young goes onto teach Marry had sex with a mere human.
When the Virgin Mary conceived the child Jesus, the Father had begotten him in his own likeness. He was not begotten by the Holy Ghost. And who is the Father? He is the first of the human family; and when he took a tabernacle, it was begotten by his Father in heaven, after the same manner as the tabernacles of Cain, Abel, and the rest of the sons and daughters of Adam and Eve; from the fruits of the earth, the first earthly tabernacles were originated by the Father, and so on in succession (Journal of Discourses 1:50).
When the time came that His first-born, the Saviour, should come into the world and take a tabernacle, the Father came Himself and favoured that spirit with a tabernacle instead of letting any other man do it. The Saviour was begotten by the Father of His spirit, by the same Being who is the Father of our spirits, and that is all the organic difference between Jesus Christ and you and me (Journal of Discourses 4:218).
If the Son was begotten by the Holy Ghost, it would be very dangerous to baptize and confirm females, and give the Holy Ghost to them, lest he should beget children, to be palmed upon the Elders by the people, bringing the Elders into great difficulties (Journal of Discourses 1:51).
What a learned idea! Jesus, our elder brother, was begotten in the flesh by the same character that was in the garden of Eden, and who is our Father in Heaven. Now, let all who may hear these doctrines, pause before they make light of them, or treat them with indifference, for they will prove their salvation or damnation (Journal of Discourses 1:51).
The birth of the Saviour was as natural as are the births of our children; it was the result of natural action. He partook of flesh and blood—was begotten of his Father, as we were of our fathers (Journal of Discourses 8:115).
In relation to the way in which I look upon the works of God and his creatures, I will say that I was naturally begotten; so was my father, also my Saviour Jesus Christ. According to the Scriptures, he is the first begotten of his father in the flesh, and their was nothing unnatural about it(Journal of Discourses 8:211)
The fleshly body of Jesus required a Mother as well as a father. Therefore, the Father and Mother of Jesus, according to the flesh, must have been associated together in the capacity of Husband and Wife. (The Seer, 158)
But God having created all men and women, had the most perfect right to do with His own creation, according to His holy will and pleasure: He had a lawful right to over shadow the Virgin Mary in the capacity of a husband, and beget a Son, although she was espoused to another. (The Seer ,158)
Read Gospel Principles pg 57, Doctrines of Salvation 1:18, Articles of Faith 466-467, and Mormon Doctrine pg 547 and 742.
Yet again, more changing Doctrine, as the LDS no longer teach this idea.
Now we read Brigham Young teaches a few things here, He teaches that Keeping the law cleanse us from Sin, and the Blood of Christ cannot clean all our Sin. then he goes on to teach, Blood atonement.
We must believe that this same Jesus was crucified for the sins of the world, that is for the original sin, not the actual individual transgressions of the people; not but that the blood of Christ will cleanse from all sin, all who are disposed to act their part by repentance, and faith in his name. But the original sin was atoned for by the death of Christ, although its effects we still see in the diseases, distempers and every species of wickedness with which the human family as afflicted (Discourses of Brigham Young, p. 153).
keeping the commandments of God will cleanse away the stain of sin (Journal of Discourses 2:4).
There are sins that men commit for which they cannot receive forgiveness in this world, or in that which is to come, and if they had their eyes open to see their true condition, they would be perfectly willing to have their blood spilt upon the ground, that the smoke thereof might ascend to heaven as an offering for their sins; and the smoking incense would atone for their sins, whereas, if such is not the case, they will stick to them and remain upon them in the spirit world (Journal of Discourses 4:53).
There is not a man or woman, who violates the covenants made with their God, that will not be required to pay the debt. The blood of Christ will never wipe that out, your own blood must atone for it; and the judgments of the Almighty will come, sooner or later, and every man and woman will have to atone for breaking their covenants (Discourses of Brigham Young, p.385).
I do know that there are sins committed, of such a nature that if the people did understand the doctrine of salvation, they would tremble because of their situation. And furthermore, I know that there are transgressors, who, if they knew themselves, and the only condition upon which they can obtain forgiveness, would beg of their brethren to shed their blood, that the smoke thereof might ascend to God as an offering to appease the wrath that is kindled against them, and that the law might have its course. I will say further; I have had men come to me and offer their lives to atone for their sins. It is true that the blood of the Son of God was shed for sins through the fall and those committed by men, yet men can commit sins which it can never remit (Journal of Discourses 4:53-54).
I will take the Government of the United States, and the laws of Missouri and Illinois, from the year 1833 to 1845, and if they had been carried out according to their letter and spirit, they would have strung up the murderers and mobocrats who illegally and unrighteously killed, plundered, harassed, and expelled us. I will tell you how much I love those characters. If they had any respect to their own welfare, they would come forth and say, whether Joseph Smith was a Prophet or not, "We shed his blood, and now let us atone for it;" and they would be willing to have their heads chopped off, that their blood might run upon the ground, and the smoke of it rise before the Lord as an incense for their sins. I love them that much. But if the Lord wishes them to live and foam out their sins before all men and women, it is all right, I care not where they go, or what they do (Journal of Discourses 2:186).
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 of 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 shedding of their blood? Will you love that man or woman well enough to shed their blood? That is what Jesus Christ meant (Journal of Discourses 4:219-220).
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 (Journal of Discourses 4:220).
LDS no longer Teach Blood Atonement, and the Bible does not teach, keeping the entire law will remove our Sins, the Bible teaches only the Blood of Christ will do this. Rick B
No comments:
Post a Comment