Jason

Only when the Bible is wrong. Which is most of the time.

No, the final statement is that the leaders are indirectly responsible because they were hyping up the membership with the bizarre idea that shedding a man's blood will save him because the Atonement can't. Not very difficult to carry that over to non-members. And could be interpreted to include non-members. That's what you're not getting.

Be a man and keep it to yourself. That's guy code. You owe it to your family to keep it to yourself. At the very least wait until your kids are grown up so that they have a stable home to live in. Ignore the otherwise poor advise given on this thread. These people obviously are thinking with their bibles and not with their heads. And for those of you who may condemn, my wife and I agreed that if a one-night-stand (not just kissing mind you) ever happened, and it was never gonna happen again, we'd both rather NOT know about it. So $uck it up bro.

I think one of his wives poisoned him. How else do you explain the sudden silence on the topic? Another coincidence? Rather convenient for you, huh?

Peace, my brother, is without question Divine. Unfortunately, if there are (which I believe John D. Lee's journal is in print, and he does fault BY) Im sure they're safely locked away by the Church. Since it's considered that anyone who isn't LDS is a "gentile". This actually made me laugh out loud. Reminds me of Adolf Hitler ordering non-existant troop regiments to the Russian front, and rambling about how victory was at hand. And the next time you accuse me of being an "anti-mormon" im gonna start accusing you of being an idiot. Look at it this way. You have a period of a couple of years where the First Presidency is peddling this belief that it's better to have your blood shed than to be a wretched sinner. Granted it's wording seems to imply that it's only for members, but we have first hand accounts of people who were non-mormon who felt that their lives and property were in danger, and they fled Utah because of it. Then we have a Zealous Bishop, a sealed spiritual Son of Brigham Young even, who murders a roaming band of Pioneers. Then all this talk about "blood atonement" abruptly stops forever. Coincidence?

Finally a voice that speaks up for God. Thank you.

I know, but it is a fastenating book...just tha same. Josephus had an agenda of "redeeming" himself with his Jewish brethren (because they saw him as a traitor) so, I don't believe everything he wrote either. BTW...do you know how to get a copy of "Fox's Book of Marters"? I gave mine to a friend of mine in the church. Have not been able to order one since. I'd like to replace it, but I thought it was out of print. Amazon has it for about ten bucks. http://www.amazon.com/Foxs-Book-Martyrs-Su...9987&sr=8-1

You're logic is jumping from a to k to p. What possessed this group of Mormons to think that killing non-Mormons was a "righteous" thing? We know that Jedidiah Grant had traveled throughtout the Utah Territory to preach "repentance" and exhorted quite a few LDS to be rebaptised as a sign of their renewed zeal for Mormonism. Now if we have a Conference talk by Grant that discusses blood atonement, what makes you think he wasn't preaching at least that much if not more while staying with local leaders like Lee? Where did these Mormons get the idea that killing anyone could be righteous? Were they getting tips from the Quran perhaps? We've hardly brought out all there is to this discussion, much less every sermon, and we have CK claiming checkmate? Checkmate perhaps for those who simply want to turn away from the game and play out a win in their minds. There is no easy answer for this disturbing historical event. But pretending that the leadership of the LDS Church couldn't possibly have anything to do with Mountain Meadows is a slap in the face of those who died there. And you still have yet to respond. Methinks this cuts you and everyone else to the bone because it's the straight TRUTH. Show me one instance from the Gospels where Jesus commanded anyone to death? Whining about alleged persecution may win you friends, but it does not make you right.

No Mormons don't embrace the gnostic scriptures. But just because they were labeled "heretical" doesn't mean that so-called orthodox Christians didn't practice the same thing. Quite a few scholars today are looking into the heterodox practices to come to a fuller understanding of the early Church. I recommend Paul Bradshaw. Fox's book of Martyrs is still in print, but it's accuracy is questionable.

What do you mean? They don't all have their own book or what? Historically inaccurate. The "Roman Catholic Church" as such didn't exist until the eleventh century. Before then it was part of the only Church. Which version of the First Vision are you using here, because some of them don't have him seeing God at all. Didymos was many things, but I don't know that he was a "top student" anymore than anyone else. Where do you get that from? Are you elevating the Gospel of Thomas into a canonical gospel? Are you suggesting that Arianism should have been accepted by Orthodox Theologians in the fourth century?

Mr. Obvious might say that Joseph changed the verses that don't fit for his own personal reasons.

Well God told me some stuff too...but then I wondered if I was just hearing voices again.

What the heck, here's a discourse of BY's outlining the curse of Cain: I've got 80 pages of this stuff. Let me know if you want to read more.

I wrote an 81 page booklet on the "Curse of Cain" about 8 years ago. I can give you more quotes on the reasons for the ban than you would care to read. None of them have anything to do with so-called pagan religions.

Snow, are you actually being serious, or just entertaining us with a story?

Because there's no objective way to determine if a word being uttered by another human being is literally the "word of God". Wouldn't you be afraid if some group claiming to speak for God gained power over the state, and began wholesale slaughter of a group of people for no other reason than some guy claims he's God's mouthpiece or Vicar on the earth?

Many flaws with that argument. The biggest is that Voodoo is of west African origin. If it were based on that, then why punish the rest of the continent?!

It's over for the Cav's.

And nobody here actually thinks it's wrong for "god" to command genocide?

Did you miss verse two that I quoted: "And the Lord said...."

Not around Canaan that I know of, but as I've said, plenty of scriptures discuss destroying unbelievers, which easily applies to any non-Israelite. This command to destroy numerous kingdoms: That's not my GOD talking there. Maybe it's your "god" but it's not mine. Mine is a GOD of love and peace.

But they were told too. You've missed the point.

Did they kill every man, woman and child in the land when they moved to Canaan? Now the Midianites and Moabites were among those who sought the destruction of early Israel. Numbers 22 confirms that it was territorial concerns that motivated the Midianites to attack Israel. Now if Balak had not sought the destruction of Israel, would he have been entangled in war? What was Moses command to the armies of Israel concerning the attacking Midianites? 'Go kill every man, woman and child in the land'? Did they go out in search of all Midianites in the territory and hunt them down to their extinction? Did Israel attack them because they weren't living the Laws of God? Didn't Moses say: 'But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves'? And didn't they spare those Midianites who stayed themselves and rose not against Israel? Why did the Midianites continue to exist for decades afterward if they had been utterly destroyed by Israel? What about Rahab, the harlot who was spared by Joshua (Josh 2:1, Heb 11:31, James 2:25) during Israel's entry into Canaan? What about the Canaanites who dwelled among Ephraim (Josh 16:10)? Why did Joshua warn against marrying and worshipping the gods of gentiles that remained 'among' Israel? (Josh 23) Old Utah and Old Israel were the same. The LORD's prophets only sought to preserve the people and their land from attacking enemies who sought their annihilation. They did NOT seek to embark on a crusade killing all unbelievers in their path. Once again, an appeal to Presdient Young's assertion of similitude of Utah to Israel to demonstrate the intentions and practices among LDS Leadership does not at all implicate them, but if indeed they did as Moses and Joshua, they are therefore blameless. -a-train They were told to wipe out all of Canaan. Midianites are not Canaanites. Don't confuse the two. And you're overlooking the obvious here: GOD doesn't ask anyone to kill another. EVER. Anyone who says He does is a LIAR and does not know GOD.

I didn't know that John Hajicek was a Strangite! He runs the restoration.org site. I always thought he was RLDS. Did he convert?