Difference between revisions of "Did 19th century church leaders have a list of crimes that were "worthy of death?""

Revision as of 09:55, 13 July 2008

This article is a draft. FairMormon editors are currently editing it. We welcome your suggestions on improving the content.

Criticism

• Critics expand to idea of blood atonement to include a long list of crimes that were alleged to be "worthy of death."

Source(s) of the criticism

• Bill McKeever, "Blood Atonement - If It Was Never Taught, Why Do So Many Mormons Believe It?", Mormonism Research Ministry (web site)
• Jerald and Sandra Tanner, The Changing World of Mormonism (Moody Press, 1979), Chapter 20.( Index of claims )

Response

Critics have created a long list of crimes for which they claim the 19th century church required death through blood atonement. The critics conflate blood atonement with captial punishment in order to promote the idea that the 19th century church was willing to kill anyone who disobeyed the law.

Blood atonement: what it is?

Main article: Blood atonement Blood atonement is a concept taught by Brigham Young and several other early Church leaders. It states that:

1. There are certain sins of apostacy that may not be covered by Christ's atonement. Such apostacy would involve church members who had already been endowed and made covenants in the temple.

2. That a person willing to repent of such sins might need to be 'willing allow their own blood to be shed to do so.

Critics expand "blood atonement" to include a list of unrelated crimes

Critics mine statements from early church leaders to make it appear that "blood atonement" was being applied to others for a variety of crimes against their will. The following table lists the crimes that the critics claim were "worthy of death," and the sources that they use to support this assertion.

Conclusion

 ^{[needs work]}

Endnotes

None

Further reading

FAIR wiki articles

• Blood atonement

FAIR web site

• FAIR Topical Guide:

External links

Printed material