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…There are sins that can be atoned for by an offering upon the altar, as in ancient days; and there are sins that the blood of a lamb, or of a calf, or of turtle doves, cannot remit, but they must be atoned for by the blood of the man.
Young is further quoted in Journal of Discourses:
Suppose you find your brother in bed with your wife, and put a javelin through both of them. You would be justified, and they would atone for their sins and would be received into the kingdom of God.2
His words are harshly vindictive. Jesus commanded Christians to turn the other cheek while leaving revenge to God. (Matt. 5:39; Rom. 12:18). The Bible offers the option of divorce, not murder, to the spouse of an adulterer (Matt. 19:9). I have studied the Old West more than most, and visited numerous “pioneer villages” in which the homes of nineteenth century settlers are restored, but have yet to read of or see a javelin propped in a corner in case a husband catches his wife in the act of being unfaithful. This is the kind of foolishness that prompted Alexander Campbell, a prominent religious leader of his day, to write (although of the Book of Mormon), “I would just as soon compare a bat to the American eagle…as contrast it with a single chapter in all the writings of the Jewish or Christian prophets.”3
A Doctrine of Satan
Blood atonement is the reverse of what the Bible teaches. Jesus came to save man from his sins by the shedding of his blood. Ephesians 1:7 declares, “In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses…” Think about it: If Satan wanted to create a doctrine completely opposite of the truth, what could be more contradictory than teach the lie that Christ’s blood won’t atone for some sins, but the blood of the sinner must atone for them?!
Blood Atonement Still Practiced
According to Wikipedia:
Blood atonement was…a teaching of the Mormon Church. Brigham Young first preached…blood atonement in the 1850s,… atonement taught that murder is so bad that the only way the murderer could pay for their sins was to be killed….The idea of blood atonement led to firing squads in…Utah for… years….4
The problem with the Wikipedia article is that many Mormons still believe in blood atonement, because the firing squad is now a method of capital punishment in Utah. While the state banned firing squads for a few years, it recently resumed them, making it the only state that executes by this method. A recent article said:
After convicted killer Ronnie Lee Gardner announced his intention to be executed by firing squad, national and international reporters suggested it was a throwback to the wild, wild West. Some Utahns, though, had a different explanation for why such an anachronistic execution technique remained an option in the 21st century: “blood atonement5.”
Conclusion
In light of such teachings, it is puzzlingly that intelligent folks remain Mormon. For more videos, visit WeldonLangfield.com. © 2020 Weldon Langfield
Note: Article may be reprinted, completely or in part, in its original, unedited form, and only with the author receiving credit.
[1] Journal of Discourses: Twenty-six Volumes. Liverpool: F.D. Richards, Latter-day Saints Book Depot, 1854-1886, Volume 4, p. 54.
[2] Ibid., Vol. 3., p. 247
[3] Alexander Campbell, “Delusions,” Millennial Harbinger, 2 (February,1831), 95.
[4]Wikipedia, s. v.” Blood Atonement.” Accessed June 6, 2020. https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_atonement
[5]Religion News Service, “Firing Squad Sparks Talk of Blood Atonement,” Accessed June 6, 2020. https://religionnews.com/2010/05/24/firing-squad-sparks-talk-of-mormon-blood-atonement