|
|
| (24 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − | {{Articles FAIR copyright}} {{Articles Header 1}} {{Articles Header 2}} {{Articles Header 3}} {{Articles Header 4}} {{Articles Header 5}} {{Articles Header 6}} {{Articles Header 7}} {{Articles Header 8}} {{Articles Header 9}} {{Articles Header 10}}
| + | #REDIRECT [[Main Page]] |
| − | {{Resource Title|A FairMormon Response to Questions Asked in Swedish Fireside with Elder's Jensen and Turley}}
| |
| − | | |
| − | {{Swedish questions quick jump}}
| |
| − | {{parabreak}}
| |
| − | | |
| − | ==== ====
| |
| − | {{QuestionItem
| |
| − | |claim=
| |
| − | *Blood atonement. It’s just a strange thing altogether in my view.
| |
| − | *How many years was it practiced during this time?
| |
| − | *Did anybody die with blood atonement?
| |
| − | |answer=
| |
| − | *'''Question: Did the Church practice blood atonement?<br>Answer: Church leaders associated it with capital punishment.'''
| |
| − | <blockquote>
| |
| − | My personal belief is that during Joseph Smith’s time period, based on statements in the bible, Joseph Smith said that when men shed blood, their blood should be shed. He’s talking about scripture. And I think that when you got into the Brigham Young times, that scripture was taken literally for a time [because] leaders taught that if people killed, then they deserved capital punishment. That [yeah] Old Testament-style event. [And t]hat sort of bounces around in the 1850s in particular when people are talking about, well how do you do this, you know? Is it literal? How do you shed a person’s blood in the process of capital punishment? And it gets to the late 1870s when they’re basically saying to people, hey look our belief on this is the same belief that other people have who believe in capital punishment. Now that’s, [that's] my very rapid historical summary of it.<br>
| |
| − | —Elder Turley's response to this question at the Sweden fireside.
| |
| − | </blockquote>
| |
| − | *'''Question: What is the Church's position on blood atonement?<br>Answer: The Church states that blood atonement is not necessary.'''
| |
| − | <blockquote>
| |
| − | From a church standpoint, blood atonement, meaning that it’s required for people to have their blood shed when they commit capital crimes, the church has gone on record saying that’s not necessary. So that’s the church position on it.<br>
| |
| − | —Elder Turley's response to this question at the Sweden fireside.
| |
| − | </blockquote>
| |
| − | | |
| − | <blockquote>
| |
| − | We believe in "blood atonement" by the sacrifice of the Savior, also that which is declared in {{b||Genesis|9|6|}}. A capital sin committed by a man who has entered into the everlasting covenant merits capital punishment, which is the only atonement he can offer. But the penalty must be executed by an officer legally appointed under the law of the land. — {{IE|author=President Charles W. Penrose|article=Peculiar Questions Briefly Answered|date=September 1912|vol=15|num=11}}</blockquote>
| |
| − | | |
| − | <blockquote>
| |
| − | :The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints released this statement Wednesday:
| |
| − | ::In the mid-19th century, when rhetorical, emotional oratory was common, some church members and leaders used strong language that included notions of people making restitution for their sins by giving up their own lives.
| |
| − | ::However, so-called "blood atonement," by which individuals would be ''required'' to shed their own blood to pay for their sins, is not a doctrine of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. We believe in and teach the infinite and all-encompassing atonement of Jesus Christ, which makes forgiveness of sin and salvation possible for all people. —''[http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700041267/Mormon-church-statement-on-blood-atonement.html Deseret News]'' (Thursday, 17 June 2010), emphasis added.
| |
| − | }}
| |
