D. A. PARSONS by D. A. Parsons

Review and Herald Publishing Association · Takoma Park Station, Washington, D. C. · Dec 24, 1908

D. A. PARSONS

By D. A. Parsons

Mormonism — No. 3

D. A. PARSONS

Modern Molochism

The first recorded case of polygamy is that of Lamech, who “took unto him two wives. . . . And Lamech said unto his wives . . . I have slain a man.” Tracing his line back to Cain, we find it said of him, “Cain rose up against Abel his brother, and slew him.” This same murderous spirit that controlled the first polygamists has been and is still associated with modern polygamy.

Astonishing as it may seem to some, yet it is true that the Mormon prophets and leaders who have made the Latter-day Saints what they are now, urge with all their “divine authority” and “priesthood power” that “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 and sisters likewise when they have committed a sin that can not be atoned for without the shedding of blood? Will you love that man or woman well enough to shed their blood? That is what Jesus meant.”

These words were spoken by Brigham Young to thousands, on Feb. 8, 1857, and the sermon was published with his sanction in the official organ of the Mormon Church, and also in their “Journal of Discourses,” Vol. IV, page 219. In the publishers’ preface of this volume, Young’s words, and those of other leaders, are spoken of thus: “To the saints their words are as the words of God.” On page 53 are some more of these “words.” He says:—

“I know 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, that I have had men come to me and offer their lives to atone for their sins.”

Every student of ancient history will recognize in these statements the teachings of ancient Moloch. Men were urged to offer themselves as human sacrifices to appease an offended and angry god. The prophets of Mormonism urge the same thing. That the “law” referred to was the law of Jehovah is clearly seen by another statement from Brigham Young. We now quote from page 220:—

“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 these principles being in full force, but the time will come when the law of God will be in full force.

“This is loving our neighbor 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. Any of you who understand the principles of eternity, if you have sinned a sin requiring the shedding of blood, except the sin unto death, would not be satisfied nor rest until your blood should be spilled, that you might gain that salvation you desire; that is the way to love mankind.”

A few lines further on, as a closing exhortation to these remarks, Mr. Young says: “Now, brethren and sisters, will you live your religion?” We feel impelled to ask, Did this Latter-day Saint live up to his religion? Did this Mormon prophet, invested with “divine authority,” ever take the life of a sinner in Zion City? He unhesitatingly replies, “I have had men come to me and offer their lives to atone for their sins.” He does not say whether he complied with these requests, but if he did not do so, it was because he did not live up to his own teachings. Do not forget that when this fidei defensor taught these “principles of eternity,” he was the channel through which they believed God spoke to them; and every loyal Mormon to-day will tell you that he was a true prophet.

He was not the only leader to advocate human sacrifice. In a sermon delivered before a great gathering on Sept. 21, 1856, the following statement was made by Pres. J. M. Grant, counselor to Young:—

“I say that there are men and women that I would advise to go to the president immediately, and ask him to appoint a committee to attend to their case; and then let a place be selected, and let that committee shed their blood. . . . I would ask how many covenant breakers there are in this city and in this kingdom. I believe there are a great many; and if they are covenant breakers, we need a place designated, where we can shed their blood. . . . I am speaking to you in the name of Israel’s God.”—“Journal of Discourses,” Vol. IV, page 50.

It is not necessary for us to comment at length on these statements made by their prophets, seers, and revelators. Their blood-thirsty doctrines stand out too clear to be misunderstood. They teach a human blood atonement. They assert that the spilled blood of a poor wretch groveling in his sins can do for him that which the blood of Christ can not do, and they urge their members to murder their transgressing neighbors, asserting that “that is what Jesus meant;” “that is the way to love mankind.”

It was not persecution that moved the Mormons to advocate murder. It was not done to protect homes, wives, or children. “Will you live up to your religion?” exclaimed Brigham Young as a fitting climax to one of his most blood-thirsty sermons. It was a part of their religion then, and it is certainly a part of it yet. The church can not truthfully deny her own statements, for in doing so she would repudiate her own prophets. Nothing could hinder the Mormon Church from carrying into effect these doctrines; for their human sacrifices were not slain in public. The victims were urged to report themselves quietly and voluntarily to some brother or sister, or to the president of the church, and, if to the latter, it was recommended that a committee be appointed to “shed their blood” in some quiet and selected place.

Not Legal Executions

Nor does that man keep truth on his side who says, as some have said, that these were legal executions for murder. Such an unscrupulous quibble seems almost too transparent to justify further exposure.

The president of the Mormon Church, speaking in 1905 of human sacrifice, said it was, and is still, made necessary by “certain grievous sins.” Now if murder is one of these sins, what are the others? Even the president himself exposes the quibble without mercy when he attempts to justify the doctrine by calling attention to five men “whom the Lord slew,” not one of whom was guilty of murder.

Doctrine of Human Sacrifice Confirmed\nin 1905

Mormonism has not changed. As recently as 1905 the Mormon Church published a work advocating this very doctrine

of human sacrifice as the only means of salvation under certain conditions. Under the heading of “Doctrine of Blood Atonement,” their president, prophet, seer, and revelator says:—

“What is that doctrine? . . . It is simply this: through the atonement of Christ all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the gospel. . . . But man may commit certain grievous sins—according to his light and knowledge—that will place him beyond the reach of the atoning blood of Christ. If, then, he would be saved, he must make sacrifice of his own life to atone, so far as in his power lies, for that sin; for the blood of Christ alone under certain circumstances will not avail. . . . This is the doctrine of Christ our Redeemer, who died for us. This is the doctrine of Joseph Smith, and I accept it.”—“Blood Atonement and Plural Marriage—A Discussion,” pages 55, 56. (Italics theirs.)

“Do you want a few references of where men were righteously slain to atone for their sins? What about the death of Nechor (Alma 1:15), Zemnariah and his followers (3 Nephi 4:27, 28)? What about Er and Onan, whom the Lord slew? Gen. 38:7, 10. Nabad and Abihu (Lev. 10:2), and the death of Achan? Joshua 7:25. Were not these righteously slain to atone for their sins?”—Ib., page 57.

The leader of Mormonism then quotes Brigham Young to prove how and why they were slain:—

“He slew them by the hand of their enemies, by the plague and by the sword. Why?—Because he loved them, and promised Abraham that he would save them.”—Ib.

These statements were officially published by the Mormon Church to justify the doctrine of human sacrifice as taught by Brigham Young. The statements explain that, under certain sinful conditions, the spilled blood of a human sacrifice must supplement the atonement of Christ, or his atonement would utterly fail to save them. This is exalting the human above the divine. This is idolatry. It is paganism.

From what has been presented, it must be evident to all that there is no vital difference between Mormonism and ancient heathenism. Its only variance is in form and subtility. It is more subtle because its rites, mysteries, and secret temples masquerade under the name of Christianity; and its pagan sacrifices beg to supplement the atonement of Christ to make his atonement all-powerful. It varies from paganism but little in form. The human offerings to Moloch were for all the people; but in Mormonism the victim must “make sacrifice of his own life to atone” for his sins only.

It is not against the Mormon individual that we take up our pen. It is against their doctrines. We have only the most tender feelings for those who have been blinded by the enemy of Jesus. He loves and desires to save them. We believe that many in the Mormon Church are sincere in their convictions; and that others there, feeling the absence of their Saviour, are earnestly pleading to know his will and to hear his voice. May our Heavenly Father gently lead them all from darkness into light, from the human to the divine, and from the teachings of men to the true gospel of Jesus our Lord.

Asheville, N. C.