Adolf Hitler & The Plan of Salvation

Today is the 66th anniversary of Adolf Hitler’s death, and it got me thinking about how LDS theology views Hitler in its plan of salvation.

We are all well aware of the horrific monstrosities that were perpetrated by Hitler when he became the fascist leader of Nazi Germany during WWII, as well as his role  in the events of the holocaust. To me, such a person as Hitler is beyond redemption or forgiveness. There is no evidence that, if given a chance, he would have changed his ways during his lifetime had he not completed suicide. But what of his next life?

The Plan of Salvation

The Plan of Salvation

The Plan of Salvation (An Overview)


Once upon a time (according to LDS theology), we were all little balls of light known as intelligences. Elohim (aka. God) & his wives, while hanging out near the planet Kolob, then started breeding by transforming these intelligences into spirit children of their very own – the first of which was Jehovah (aka. Jesus), another being Lucifer (aka. Satan). Our Heavenly Father then decided to gather his hundreds of billions (if not trillions) of children together and tell them how they can progress in their existence by following a plan. This plan, being similar to the one Elohim’s own god had put him through, was that all spirits require a physical body in order to procreate and grow. Therefore, he presented his plan of having all of his children be given a physical body and be tested as to how well they can behave themselves & follow his gospel after he erases their memory of the pre-existence. However, because humans are fallible, Elohim would need a volunteer to be a saviour, and suffer the atonement, die, and be resurrected in order to allow all the other spirit children to be able to repent and return home (this is obviously the ONLY way for the plan to work). Jehovah volunteered for that position.

Lucifer, on the other hand, decided it would be much better and more efficient if we were all forced to make good decisions so that no one would be ‘lost’, and he’d want all the praise and credit for it. God didn’t like that Lucifer’s plans restricted our free agency, nor that Lucifer wanted the credit (God’s a bit of a megalomaniac & jealous type, as can be seen from the Old Testament). So, since only 2 plans were presented among the countless spirits, God put it to a vote. One third decided they liked God’s plan, another third were rather undecided, and the final third preferred Lucifer’s plan. Because God is fair, loving, and respects free agency so much, he decided to ban Lucifer and his followers to Outer Darkness (aka. Hell). The remaining two-thirds would then be given a physical body and live on God’s new planet, named Earth, after passing through the veil of forgetfulness.

Mortal Life

According to LDS theology, if you are reading this, you are one of the two-thirds who followed Elohim’s plan; if you’re white, you were of the one-third who actively chose to follow, but if you’re black, you were of the one-third who were undecided (more on this topic another time). You are now being tested to see how well you can fight your cognition, reason, rationality, logic, and all other “worldly” things, and to see how well you live up to Mormon standards. Don’t worry if LDS missionaries haven’t come knocking at your door, because those who hadn’t been given the opportunity to receive the ‘fullness’ and ‘truthfulness’ of the LDS gospel will have such an opportunity in the afterlife.

Spirit World

After death, Mormons believe that our spirits will be whisked away to the Spirit World, where we will be divided up into two groups: Mormons & non-Mormons. Mormons go to Spirit Paradise, for they have had sufficient opportunity to receive the gospel and embraced it. While Non-Mormons go to Spirit Prison (yes that’s right, there’s prison in the afterlife) for those who have not  had sufficient opportunity to receive the gospel or who have rejected it. Here, these poor souls will suffer the unfortunate ordeal of having to sit through lectures on the ‘truthfulness’ of the gospel as taught by the Mormons who come down from Spirit Paradise to teach. Those who hadn’t received the gospel on Earth are given a second chance to accept it and be baptized (or accept the proxy baptism that has been done on their behalf in a LDS Temple) in order to move up to Paradise. At this point – being that they’ve already died and are still in some kind of existence – the decision is a bit of a no-brainer. However, those who had joined the Church in their earthly life and subsequently rejected it (such apostates as myself), we do not get this second chance to move into Spirit Paradise. Instead, we’re re-taught the gospel, and then given the choice to admit we were wrong or stick to our convictions and continue to deny the LDS gospel.


After everyone has been taught (or finished teaching) in the spirit world, it’s then time for the resurrection. Everyone who has ever lived gets resurrected, whether you’re Hitler, Mother Teresa, or Joseph Smith. There will be two days of resurrections, separated by a Millennium. The first day of resurrection is for those who made it into Spirit Paradise; The morning is for true believing Mormons (TBM), and the afternoon is for those who worked their way out of Prison and into Paradise. The Millennium will then let the day-1 ‘resurrectees’ spend a 1000 years hanging out with Christ in an orgy of bliss, while those who remain in Spirit Prison have to burn in ‘Hell’ for 1000 years as they wait for the second resurrection. The second day of resurrection will then let the charred souls of Spirit Prison get resurrected. After we’re all reunited with our perfected bodies (which of course, will be “white and delightsome” – no matter what ethnicity you were on Earth), we’ll then take a number and get in line for our final judgement.

Judgement Day

On Judgement Day, God will direct us to the degree of glory he feels we deserve, based on both our faith and works. For TBMs, or those who accepted the gospel in the Spirit World (first ‘resurrectees’), they’ll go straight to the Celestial Kingdom. Here they’ll be further divided up based on whether they were simply baptized (lowest level), baptized & endowed in the temple (mid-level), or baptized, endowed, and sealed/married in the temple (highest level). For those who are from Spirit Prison (second ‘resurrectees’), they will be divided up based on how honourable they were in life. Good people who, even in the afterlife, have not accepted the gospel, will go to the Terrestrial Kingdom. Bad people who continue to reject God and the gospel will be sentenced to the Telestial Kingdom (side note: ‘Telestial’ is a made-up word only used by the LDS). Finally, sons of perdition (those who had a perfect knowledge of God & Christ, and still rebelled against them. ie: Cain) will experience a second death, and be tossed out to Outer Darkness to join with the 1/3 of the spirits who followed Lucifer and didn’t receive a body in the first place.

If you were so lucky as to have reached the highest level of the Celestial Kingdom, you get to become gods (or the wives of gods) like Elohim. You can then perpetuate the eternal progression by creating your own worlds on which to torture souls! If, however, you didn’t quite make it to Heaven’s elite, you get to be servants and angels for eternity! Doesn’t the idea of being a servant for eternity make you feel all warm and cozy inside? What a fantastic plan God has set up for us! (Please note the sarcasm.)

Adolf Hitler

Now that you’ve been briefed on the workings of God, Heaven, and Earth, let’s take a look at how someone like Adolf Hitler fits into this plan.

Hitler was born on Earth, therefore we can assume that he was one of the spirits who hadn’t followed Lucifer. He was white, so we know he actively chose Elohim’s plan rather than being undecided. He was also born after Joseph Smith had ‘restored’ the gospel to the Earth, so Hitler must have been one of the most faithful of the spirits since he was sent here in these latter-days. As far as I know, Hitler hadn’t been baptized into the LDS Church during his lifetime, so we can assume his spirit has gone to Spirit Prison where he will be taught the gospel along with all his Third Reich buddies and all the Jews he murdered. Assuming Hitler then accepts the gospel, and repents, he will be quickly raised up to the Paradise section of the Spirit World. This is because good Mormons have already completed all of Adolf Hitler’s temple work on his behalf as of 1994. (Hitler, by proxy, was baptized on September 30, 1993, endowed on April 27, 1994, and sealed to his wife Eva Braun on June 14, 1994 – there are some slight discrepancies in the exact dates.)

This means when it comes to the first day of the resurrection, Hitler could be privileged enough to be counted among many Mormons and subsequently, he will then get to be in Jesus’s presence for the millennium. Meanwhile, I (being an apostate) will remain in Spirit Prison to burn and contemplate the consequences of my decisions for 1000 years. Then, after I get resurrected in round two, Hitler and I will line up for judgement. God will then take pity on Hitler for not having had the opportunity to see the light in his lifetime, and will see that he’s been a good follower ever since. Because all of Hitler’s temple ordinances have been taken care of, Hitler will be assigned to the highest level of the Celestial Kingdom, where he will then be able to literally create his own world full of superior white, blonde-haired, blue-eyed, antisemitic people! Of course, apostates like myself, will be the ever-helpful servants to these next-generation gods as we dwell in the Terrestrial or Telestial Kingdoms for all eternity.

Don’t you just love God’s wonderfully fair, just, and loving plan of salvation?


I realize that there are a few different (and contradictory) interpretations of the Plan of Salvation, and that some claim even apostates will be able to be forgiven in the Spirit World in order to gain Celestial glory. However, I don’t believe in this crap now, nor will I ever accept such a ‘god-awful’ plan as my way to salvation. Therefore, even if the Mormons are right and there is an afterlife as they’ve described, I will continue to reject such a prejudicial, limiting, and fixed plan. As with all Mormon thinking, choices always come down to either right or wrong, and so they don’t seem to ask, “Why did we only have the choice between Elohim’s and Lucifer’s plan?” or “Why would one-third be punished for exercising their ‘god-given’ right to choose?” If your only choice is to do ‘A’ with only positive consequences, or ‘B’ with only negative consequences, you’re not really being given much of a choice, are you?

As for Hitler being given the opportunity for Celestial glory, I find it funny that the most immoral and evil people will be given a second chance, while those who reject LDS mythology are threatened with eternal damnation.



So the USA has finally killed Osama bin Laden. He can easily be substituted for Hitler in my above description – something that YouTube user MormonGags has done brilliantly:


Posted on 2011-04-30, in Mormonism and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 32 Comments.

  1. You assume here that this version/interpretation of the plan is complete and fully understood. I daresay that is more than likely not the case. I expect this is the basic outline and trust that God is fair that all will receive their “just” rewards. I don’t have all the answers but I believe that God does and that as pre-mortal beings, we did understand it and were “apparently” just fine with it.

    Feel free to continue with semantics and nit picking…..

    • Hello TB,
      I do assume that the LDS Church’s interpretation of the Plan of Salvation is complete and fully understood, seeing as the Church’s leaders pride themselves on their campaign slogans, “We have the fullness of the Gospel” and “The One True Church”, not to mention a Prophet who claims to have a direct communication with God. As for your comment about me nit picking semantics, I find this funny considering that the vast majority of what differentiates the hundreds of Christian denominations comes down to simple semantics.
      I’d appreciate a more thorough argument than to simply claim that what I’m doing is “semantics and nit picking.” So please feel free to expand on that thought so that I may have a chance to properly defend my position. Otherwise, your comments just come across as unjustified; something akin to “yeah, well, whatever”.

  2. Rejecting an obvious fraud is easy. Keep searching.

    youtube -mhfm1

    • I’m not really sure what you’re getting at with your fortune-cookie statement. However, based on your YouTube channel, I’ll assume you mean to say that Mormonism is an obvious fraud, and by “keep searching” you mean to say that I should seek out your version of the God myth, known as Catholicism. Swapping one “obvious fraud” for another isn’t going to help me in any way.

  3. *facepalm* You know, I was looking for a way to compare and contrast Catholic salvation with that of Mormons, and this was really helpful. Also, it really brought home to me (again) how Mormonism has very little to do with historical Christianity. Its like some nut-job just decided to cobble together a bunch of sci-fi stories and slap some Jesus into the mix.

    Where do mixed-race kids fit into all of this? I’m wondering if my kids would be considered Lamanites (or is it Nephites?) because Mr. Serrano and I are planning to have kids. Is that creepy doctrine about murdering people who engage in mixed-race sex still floating around?

    • Hi Katorikurant, good to hear from you again!
      If you really want to see what kind of sci-fi stories are in LDS theology, try a google search for Joseph Smith’s remarks about the Quakers living on the moon who live for a thousand years, or Brigham Young’s comments on the inhabitants of the Sun! Both said these things with such conviction!

      As for mixed-race kids, early prophets went on and on about how even 1 drop of ‘negro’ blood would taint the child and prevent them from receiving the priesthood. This of course, was eliminated in 1978 when blacks were finally allowed to have full membership privileges. However, there have been other apostles who have said (I’m paraphrasing) that all the other races fall on some kind of scale based on how well they supported God’s plan in the pre-existence. So rather than the 3 groups stated above, it’s more of a spectrum: blacks on one end (reluctantly agreed to the plan), the American aboriginals would be somewhere in the middle along with the Chinese, middle-easterners, etc., and whites on the other end (fully supported the plan).

  4. Also…no wonder the Jews are pissed at the Mormons. Did you ever hear about the controversy over the post-death baptisms of a bunch of Holocaust Jews? At the time I learned of this, I had no idea of how insipid this idea can get. My Catholic grandma and non-denominational uncle were both post-posthumously baptized, and both would have been supremely angry to have had their beliefs disregarded in that way.

    It blows my mind how people try to manipulate you even after you’re dead.

    • Yes, I have heard about this; talk about disrespecting other cultures/religions. The Church has since made it a policy that one can only do baptisms & temple work for the dead for Holocaust victims if they’re a direct ancestor, rather than randomly adding names of those who don’t have any connection.

      Only days after Elizabeth Taylor died, her temple work papers where being processed and added to the cue (there’s a minimum 1 year waiting period after someone’s death before they can proceed).

  5. shematwater

    Well, the problem with this is that, while the LDS doctrine is as complete as we will ever have it in this life, we still do not have a full understanding; and besides this, the article confuses things a whole lot, assuming that generallities literally apply to everyone.
    From this we get the ridiculous claim that no faithful person could ever be born of non-white descent (which ignore the fact of Ham’s wife) and that no white man was less than fully valiant to the Lord in the pre-existance (which compltely ignores things like Pharaoh at the time of Moses).
    Gereralities are useful for teaching general principles, but they are not effective in illustrating individual cases. As they say in medicine “there is no text book case.”

    Now, beyond this, the article fails to acknowledge the LDS doctrine that no Murderer can ever rise above the Telestial Kingdom in Heavem, and thus they will all be in the second resurrection, having suffered in hell for the thousand years of the Millennium.
    Simply put, there is no way in heaven for Hitler to be redeemed, for he is a mass murderer and hater of his fellow men. He will suffer the damnation of murderers. After all, if David, who lived righteously all his life, but committed murder in the case of Uriah, could not attain forgiveness (D&C 132: 39) how can anyone believe that Hitler can. And no amount of posthumorous temple work will change anything.

    • Considering what I have learned from living with Mormons, Progressive Ex-Mo is simply restating what is taught. I just liked that he actually had a flow chart, which helped me to put things into a visual perspective.

      I will not get into an apologetics debate on here (since that’s kind of rude to hijack somebody’s blog) but I will say that its very typical of Mormon theology to state that something totally is “how its done” and then go back and minimize/rationalize whatever it happened to be the second it reflects bad on the beliefs (which are always confused with people).

      Progressive Ex-Mo’s flow chart is actually quite similar to the one that the missionaries tried to sell me. The only difference is an absence of delicious sarcasm.

      • Sorry! I wasn’t logged in and didn’t realize it. My comment is above!

        Also…LOL at Osama.

      • I think you are confusing members belief with actual church theology.

        Now, I am not sure which part of my comment you are addressing here, so please clarify.

    • shematwater: I agree with you that “Gereralities are useful for teaching general principles, but they are not effective in illustrating individual cases”, however you then contradict yourself when you say “no Murderer can ever rise above the Telestial Kingdom in Heave[n]” – this IS a generality, and contradicts the other LDS doctrine that says everyone will be given a chance to receive the fullness of the Gospel! What constitutes a ‘murder’? Abortion? Accidental Manslaughter? Euthanasia? At-fault fatal car accident? Suicide? Self-defence that ends in the death of the perpetrator? I could go on for a while, so I hope you get my point. If you can’t apply generalities to individual cases, then there’s not much point in teaching them is there?

      Again, I agree with you in that it is a “ridiculous claim that no faithful person could ever be born of non-white descent”. However, this is precisely what Brigham Young taught, and what Bruce R. McConkie wrote in his book “Mormon Doctrine” (1958) on p. 616:

      “Racial degeneration, resulting in differences in appearance and spiritual aptitude, has arisen since the fall. We know the circumstances under which the posterity of Cain (and later of Ham) were born with the characteristics of the black race. …The Book of Mormon explains why the Lamanites received dark skins and a degenerate status… If we had a full and true history of all races and nations, we would know the origins of all their distinctive characteristics. In the absence of such detailed information, however, we know only the general principle that all these changes from the physical and spiritual perfections of our common parents have been brought about by departure from the gospel truths…”

      The Book of Mormon regularly states that when the people were righteous, they became “white and delightsome”, while when they were wicked, they became dark-skinned. So it seems possible (in LDS theology) that you can be white even if your parents were dark. (Side note: How the hell does that work with what we know of genetics now?)

      Simply put, LDS theology is severely flawed and contradictory.

    • Hitler could still be exalted according the Church doctrine, as only the denial of the Holy Ghost is completely unpardonable if you haven’t entered the covenants of the temple. But then you run into the question of who bc scriptures / prophet to believe, because Brigham Young is quoted as supporting what you just said, that blood must be atoned for by the blood of the murderer being shed rather than the Atonement taking hold.

      I remember being confused about this as a missionary, and I think the truth is that the Church has changed its stance over time.

  6. shematwater


    First, I never denied that physical alterations have been the result of sin. This is clearly taught as doctrine, and I do accept it (though I am not going to discuss it here). Also, genetics means absolutely nothing, as God is perfectly capable of altering a person’s genetics if he so desires. This is a matter of faith, not a matter of science.
    However, this is not what you are talking about. You assert that “if you’re white, you were of the one-third who actively chose to follow, but if you’re black, you were of the one-third who were undecided.”
    The alterations of physical appearance were caused by sins in this world, not in the previous. While it has been taught that many (never given a number, so the assertion of one third of your own thought) have been born into these lines due to actions in the previous life, it is not a rule without exception. It is a general idea, and thus cannot be effectively applied to individuals.
    People who were very righteous in the pre-existance may have been born into the line of Cain, while those who were not were born into the line of Israel, or other lines. Thus, only a revelation from God can declare the actions of the individual while in the Pre-existance, not the musing of mortal minds.

    As to Murder, this is not a generality. A generality is something that is applied to a group while acknowledging that exceptions are possible. It is saying that, in general, this rule or concept applies. This is how the idea of the actions of pre-existence affects this life is applied. It is taught that, in general, we can say that a person born into this line or whatever was of this group in the pre-existence. With murder this is not the case. It is never applied as “in general murderers are condemned,” but that “all murderers” without exception are condemned. It is not a general principle.

    As to what constitutes murder, that is a good question. The scriptures give us several clues. Doctrine and Covenants 132 gives us “Commit murder wherein ye shed innocent blood.”
    In the Law of Moses there were the cities of santuary. When one fled to these, if they could prove manslaughter they were not killed, but intentional murder was always punished by death.
    In 1 John 3: 15 we learn that hating a person is murder (which is also where it says that no murderer can have eternal life).
    Murder is the intentional killing of a person that is innocent of offense, or the killing out of revenge or hatred. Accidental death is not murder, nor is self defense, for the other person is not innocent.
    If David could not attain forgiveness for the murder of one innocent person, I find it very difficult to believe that HItler could attain forgiveness after the murder of millions.

    • Shematwater:

      You’re assertion that “genetics means absolutely nothing, as God is perfectly capable of altering a person’s genetics if he so desires” is amusing to me. If genetics and other natural laws mean nothing, then why would God have taken the time to create such things? Why make physical (skin color) traits a matter of genetics if it’s only being used as an indication of how righteousness of a person? Why not make us all like Pinocchio, except instead of having our noses grow with every lie told, our skin darkens with every unrighteous thought and deed? And what ever happened to “man will be punished for their own sins”? God seems to have punished a whole ancestral line over one man’s actions – unless, of course, the spirits who get sent to these blackened bodies are already less righteous. This brings me to a quotation from Apostle Bruce R. McConkie:

      …those who were less valiant in pre-existence and who thereby had certain spiritual restrictions imposed upon them during mortality are known to us as the Negroes. Such spirits are sent to earth through the lineage of Cain, the mark put upon him for his rebellion against God and his murder of Abel being a black skin (Mormon Doctrine, pp.476-77).

      Or how about a quotation from Apostle Mark E. Petersen:

      Is there reason then why the type of birth we receive in this life is not a reflection of our worthiness or lack of it in the pre-existent life? … can we account in any other way for the birth of some of the children of God in darkest Africa, or in flood-ridden China, or among the starving hordes of India, while some of the rest of us are born here in the United States? We cannot escape the conclusion that because of performance in our pre-existence some of us are born as Chinese, some as Japanese, some as Latter-day Saints. These are rewards and punishments, fully in harmony with His established policy in dealing with sinners and saints, rewarding all according to their deeds….

      Let us consider the great mercy of God for a moment. A Chinese, born in China with a dark skin, and with all the handicaps of that race seems to have little opportunity. But think of the mercy of God to Chinese people who are willing to accept the gospel. In spite of whatever they might have done in the pre-existence to justify being born over there as Chinamen, if they now, in this life, accept the gospel and live it the rest of their lives they can have the Priesthood, go to the temple and receive endowments and sealings, and that means they can have exaltation. Isn’t the mercy of God marvelous?

      “Think of the Negro, cursed as to the priesthood…. This Negro, who, in the pre- existence lived the type of life which justified the Lord in sending him to the earth in the lineage of Cain with a black skin, and possibly being born in darkest Africa—if that Negro is willing when he hears the gospel to accept it, he may have many of the blessings of the gospel. In spite of all he did in the pre-existent life, the Lord is willing, if the Negro accepts the gospel with real, sincere faith, and is really converted, to give him the blessings of baptism and the gift of the Holy Ghost. If that Negro is faithful all his days, he can and will enter the celestial kingdom. He will go there as a servant, but he will get celestial glory (Race Problems—As They Affect The Church, Address by Mark E. Petersen at the Convention of Teachers of Religion on the College Level, delivered at Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah, August 27, 1954).

      Both of these Apostles have very clearly illustrated (in absolutist, not general terms) that our earthly nationalities are a direct result of our worthiness in the pre-existence. Therefore, your assertion that “People who were very righteous in the pre-existance may have been born into the line of Cain … or other lines [and] only a revelation from God can declare the actions of the individual while in the Pre-existance…” is greatly undermined. Also, could you please provide a reference as to where you got this idea from? To me, you seem to be “confusing members belief with actual church theology”, as I have never heard or come across any notion that a fully-righteous spirit was ever born into a black-skinned body.

      As for the one-third number I used, I got it directly from the Bible Dictionary on

      As for murder, I again must disagree and restate that murder is not only a generality, but a highly subjective on at that. The fact that you stated “the scriptures give us several clues… as to what constitutes murder” only goes to show how unclear of a definition we have for what God would define as murder. If murder is the shedding of innocent blood, then what of the situation where an abortion is used to save the life of the mother? By LDS terms, the fetus is an innocent life and abortion is murder, so is the doctor a murderer for saving the woman’s life? Or how about soldiers in war? There’s a lot of hatred toward the enemy when they are fighting in the battle fields, so does this make soldiers murderers? I only use these examples to show how there are many exceptions to your absolutist ‘all murderers will suffer damnation’ rule. If Abraham had actually killed his son Isaac, as God had commanded him to do, then this, by your assertion, would have made Abraham a murderer and unable to gain celestial glory.

      I find it amusing that we are opposites on these issues: you see murder as an absolute and the race/pre-existence matter as a generality, while I see murder as a generality and see the Church’s stance on race/pre-existence as being clearly described as an absolute. In my experience with the Church, their theology is rarely presented in general terms, and is quite often preached as literal and absolutist.

  7. ProgExMo– I love reading your responses because they’re so well-researched and complete with proof/examples, and you express yourself very well and very thoroughly! The thing Mormons need to realize is that a large group of ex-Mormons are ex-Mormons because of the extensive research we did. We didn’t leave the Church in order to rebel or live a sinful lifestyle like the Church leaders would have everyone believe. We left it because of all the inconsistencies…the prejudice…the true origins of the Church and its doctrine (created by an ego-maniac with a big imagination who was the “Dungeon Master” of the fantasy-world he created!)…the crazy and illogical proclamations its leaders have made and recorded and then tried to retract over the decades, etc. We probably know more about the Church than its own members do! Thank you for representing us so well, and showing Mormons and non-Mormons alike the reality of the LDS Church.

  8. shematwater


    First, as to the one third comment. Please read this entry again, as you are definitely not accurate in your betrayal of it.
    It is true that one third of the spirits were cast out and became devils, but no where in this article does it separate the other two-thirds by any definite numbers.
    I quote “Although one-third of the spirits became devils, the remaining two-thirds were not all equally valiant, there being every degree of devotion to Christ and the Father among them. The most diligent were chosen to be rulers in the kingdom.”

    Thus, for you to say what you did is a false representation of LDS doctrine. I can only hope that the rest of your research is of a better grade.

    As to murder, the two instances you address are actually addressed by the LDS church.
    Abortion: Church leaders have said that some exceptional circumstances may justify an abortion, such as when pregnancy is the result of incest or rape, when the life or health of the mother is judged by competent medical authority to be in serious jeopardy, or when the fetus is known by competent medical authority to have severe defects that will not allow the baby to survive beyond birth. But even these circumstances do not automatically justify an abortion. Those who face such circumstances should consider abortion only after consulting with their local Church leaders and receiving a confirmation through earnest prayer.

    War: If Latter-day Saints must go to war, they should go in a spirit of truth and righteousness, with a desire to do good. They should go with love in their hearts for all God’s children, including those on the opposing side. Then, if they are required to shed another’s blood, their action will not be counted as a sin.

    So we have official LDS doctrine explaining that war is not murder, if conducted in a spirit of righteousness (as Captain Moroni, or Moses and Joshua). We also know that under some circumstances abortion is not murder.

    As to Abraham, he would not have been guilty of any sin, for it cannot be sin to obey the commands of God, otherwise God would be unjust.

    There really is no ambiguity or generality to this principle, when it is understood.
    However, I will agree that we should not judge any individual, as we do not have the same understanding as God and thus cannot accurately judge. Which is why I said I cannot believe Hitler could be saved, and avoided a direct condemnation, as that is the province of God.

    Now, as touching the race question: In light of the comments quoted, I will stand by what I said. Taking on Brother Peterson’s reasoning, Egyptus was born to the lineage of Cain, was blessed in this life and chosen to be one of the eight that would survive the flood. This was a choice made in the pre-existence, and thus she had been valiant enough to gain this great blessing. Also, since all those born into the black race who lived since 1978 are afforded all the blessings of the gospel it is logical to assume that all of them were great and valiant men in heaven, for they were born after the restrictions were removed.
    On the other hand, Cain was born as a son of Adam at a time of greatness in the Earth, with perhaps the greatest mortal father ever to live. But we know that he was not valiant in heaven, for he is perdition (not a son of perdition, but perdition itself).
    There are enough examples in history to justify the belief in the exceptions, and neither of the quotes you give mandates an absolute rule. God places people on this earth in certain times and locations to fulfill his purposes. If his purpose requires a valiant person to be born into the line of Cain (such as Egyptus) he will choose a person willing to fulfill that need. If, however, his purpose requires the less valiant in the line of Israel or some other line, he will choose a person suited to that purpose (like Pharaoh at the time of Moses).

    To say that a specific individual was or was not valiant in the previous life based on race is not possible. I agree that you can assume such, but not that you have prove such, and thus to speak of any individual in this way is not a proper application of the concept.

    • Shem:

      I concede that I don’t have a scriptural reference for my claim that the remaining two-thirds were further divided in an exact half. This use of one-third with Lucifer, one-third valiant, one-third not-so-valiant, is a common description that I was taught in seminary, institute, and Sunday school lessons. I should have wrote that the remaining two-thirds fall into a gradient of righteousness, which would then result in the varying skin tones and nationalities as their earthly consequence to said righteousness. In any case, my argument is not based on having an exact number, and it is irrelevant to the issue.

      As for the race issue, you seem to be confusing the rewards & punishments of the pre-existence with that of this existence (Earth-life). As the quotations indicate, the punishment for a man having been less valiant in the pre-existence was that he would be born cursed with black skin and not able to hold the priesthood. This is to say nothing about the righteousness of that man after he is born. Even Pharaoh, who, as it is told, lived a righteous life on Earth, was still black and unable to have the priesthood (Abraham 1:26). Your assertion that Egyptus “had been valiant enough to gain this great blessing [of being spared during the flood]” does not speak to her level of obedience in the pre-existence.

      Side note: you claim that Egyptus’s survival was “a choice made in the pre-existence”. I have to ask, where did you get this from? Seeing as there is only a singular mention of her in the scriptures (Abraham 1:23 or 1:25 depending on which Egyptus – mother or daughter – to which you speak) I find it much more likely this is of your own thought. However, if Egyptus was predetermined to survive the flood, then that would indicate she had some kind of destiny that she was unable to change once she was born into this existence. This would open an entirely new can of worms (one that I will not get into in this debate) as the very idea of destiny is contrary to the LDS theological assertion that we all have free will.

      Nowhere has anyone claimed that a black man couldn’t be righteous, only that, in the pre-existence, he wasn’t as righteous as he could’ve/should’ve been. According to LDS theology, skin colour is an indication of one’s righteousness in the pre-existence, but does not determine their mortal righteousness.

      According to the very definition you provided, “Murder is the intentional killing of a person that is innocent of offence…”, then abortion, in any situation, is murder. The difference you’re claiming is that if it’s justified in the eyes of God, then there is no sin associated with said murder. This is entirely different than claiming it is NOT murder. So as long as the murder of another is justified, it is, by your assertion, an exception to the “all murderers are condemned” rule and thus it is only a generality, not an absolute.

      However, it seems that you’ve amended your definition of murder, in that it must be unjustified. This begs the question, what is unjustified? Without knowing all the appropriate justifications, we cannot have a sure way of knowing whether the killing of someone is unjustified in the eyes of God, only that a select few are justified. Therefore, your definition of murder (the intentional, unjustified killing of an innocent person) is pragmatically difficult to defend.

      Regardless of definition, we have strayed from the original issue in that we have been debating whether there are exceptions to murder, when originally it was whether there are exceptions to the eternal punishment of murder – as in the case of Hitler. We both agree that Hitler was a murderer by any definition, so arguing the semantics is a distraction from the issue.

      Are all murderers condemned, regardless of whether they have had the opportunity to receive the fullness of the gospel? Or do they get a chance to redeem themselves in the afterlife? To answer this question, I’ll turn to

      “In the spirit prison are the spirits of those who have not yet received the gospel of Jesus Christ. These spirits have agency and may be enticed by both good and evil. If they accept the gospel and the ordinances performed for them in the temples, they may leave the spirit prison and dwell in paradise.” (Gospel Principles, Chapter 41: (The Postmortal Spirit World,

      According to the above passage, Hitler will be given the opportunity to accept the gospel while he awaits final judgment in Spirit Prison. If he accepts it, then the baptism & temple ordinances that were done on his behalf take hold and his sins will be washed away. Due to the atonement and the proxy baptism for his remission of sins, it follows that Hitler will be pure in the sight of God and will graduate to Spirit Paradise, where he waits to enter into the Celestial Kingdom.

      Through the work we do in temples, all people who have lived on the earth can have an equal opportunity to receive the ful[l]ness of the gospel and the ordinances of salvation so they can inherit a place in the highest degree of celestial glory. (Gospel Principles, Chapter 46: (The Final Judgement, [emphasis mine]

      These passages show that LDS theology allows for “all people who have lived on earth” to “accept the gospel and ordinances performed for them in the temples [by proxy]” so that they can have “equal opportunity” to “inherit … celestial glory”. There are no exceptions given to this, as it is quite absolutist in it’s wording.

      “Also in the spirit prison are those who rejected the gospel after it was preached to them either on earth or in the spirit prison. These spirits suffer in a condition known as hell. … After suffering for their sins, they will be allowed, through the Atonement of Jesus Christ, to inherit the lowest degree of glory, which is the telestial kingdom.” (Gospel Principles, Chapter 41: (The Postmortal Spirit World,

      This passage reiterates my point that since Hitler, a mass murderer, hadn’t received the gospel during his life, he will get that opportunity in the afterlife. Then, provided he accepts the gospel, Hitler can receive celestial glory. In contrast, I, having never murdered, did receive the gospel and have subsequently rejected it. Therefore, I do not get another chance, and am restricted to the Telestial Kingdom.

  9. Francis Vessigault

    The statement that says that Adolf Hitler received or accepted the Gospel and all the saving ordinances of Celestial salvation is totally absurd.
    Adolf Hitler as a murderer and mass murderer will never Never gain Celestial glory where Eloheim the Father and Jesus Christ dwell.
    Even the middle degree of glory, the beautiful Terrestrial world is beyond his reach.
    The best place Hitler and the likes like Stalin, Pol Pot will get is telestial damnation or the lowest degree of the lowest kingdom of glory.
    All the wicked in telestial glory will be visited occasionally by the Holy Ghost but these abominable wicked men will be in the telestial resurrection be For ALL ETERNITY separated from Our Heavenly Father, the very AllMighty Eloheim and Jehovah. They will be servants, unmarried to all eternity.

    As for myself, Francis Vessigault, because I was baptized and confirmed by proper Priesthood authority on April 6 1997 and I am obedient to my baptismal covenant, I will gain Celestial Glory, BUT MORE IMPORTANT, I received the Melchizedek Priesthood on
    March 1 1998 and I went to the LDS Temple in Hong Kong on May 22 1998 and served a valiant mission and I am keeping my Temple covenants, I know that I will gain the Highest degree of Celestial Glory and be Crowned King with my future Eternal Companion as Celestial Queen.

    Although, I married and was sealed to my previous companion in 2001, I went through a divorce. Unlike my ex wife who left the faith, I kept and I am still keeping my Temple covenants. I have a daughter who was bron in 2002.
    I baptized and confirmed my daughter on May 15 2010 and that date is Sacred to me and to my Heavenly Father because the Resurrected and Exalted John the Baptist gave the Priesthood of Aaron on May 15 1829.

    I am Elder Francis Vessigault and I know that my mortal parents will gain Celestial Exaltation and Eternal Life as King and Queen and because of my personal righteous attitude towards my Heavenly Father and by being obedient to His commandments, the Lord Jesus Christ will give me a Special Eternal Woman to me and have me sealed to a Choice woman during the Millenium Reign.
    This is a small list of Exalted beings:
    Heavenly Father Eloheim and His Wives.
    The Lord Jesus Christ as Jehovah and His Wives Mary, Martha and lovely Mary Magdalene.
    King Adam as Michael the Archangel and very beautiful Queen Eve…

  10. PROG

    Thank you for the concession. My point in bringing it up was to show the most obvious error in posts and thus point out that less obvious ones are not that unlikely.

    Considering murderers (and murder is not the same as murderer) none will ever inherit the Celestial glory. John tells us this in 1 John 3: 15
    “Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him.”

    So, considering that in war the common soldier of one army is guilty of committing a murder when he kills the common soldier of the other army, how can we say he is justified. Simply put, he is not the murderer. His commanding officers (or those who instigated the war) are the murderers and thus they will be the ones who are denied Celestial Glory. The common soldier, though the actual act was his, the intention was not his and the desire was not his. As such he is not a murderer, but a soldier.
    Considering Abortion, while the act again may be murder the person performing the act is not necessarily a murderer, if the act is performed under the guidelines given by God through his chosen leaders.

    The act of murder can, at times, be justified. But a murderer can never be justified. The difference here is in the verb “to do” and “to be.” One who does, but is not may be justified. But one who does and is can never be justified.

    As to receiving the gospel while in prison, all men will be preached the gospel. However, a murderer has already rejected it. A person who is convicted of murder in this life cannot be baptized and are thus forever barred from the Celestial Kingdom. Once a person is sealed in the temple and promised exaltation the only way he can loose this promise is by becoming a murderer. How can anyone claim that this same standard is not applied in the spirit prison? Your quotes prove nothing, for a murderer cannot accept the gospel, for they are barred from it. The rest will have the opportunity, and even a murderer will learn of it, but they just as they are barred from it here, so will they be barred from it there.

    As to the race issue, I never once claimed that this was based on our actions in this life, all though I would contend that the initial cursing was (for Cain was not cursed for his pre-existent actions, but for killing Abel). However, I will hold that it is not a rule with no exception, as is shown in the scriptures.
    I stand by what I said concerning Egyptus. I say it based on many things, but it can be directly supported by your quote from Brother Peterson. If we are all born into our various circumstance due to our actions in the pre-existence, than it was her actions that caused he to be born at the time of Noah and chosen to be one of the Eight to survive the flood. It has nothing to do with destiny, but with the foreplanning of God. Noah likely had more than one wife, and he likely had several children before the flood. In fact, Shem, Ham and Japheth likely had children before the flood, and may have had more than one wife. Yet it was these three sons that were chosen, and their wives (specifically Egyptus) to be with Noah on the Ark. It is unreasonable to assume that this was done randomly or without the divine guidance and approval of God. These people were chosen, and to be chosen for such a life does not come simply from this life. After all we are told that Jeremiah was chosen before he was born for his mission, as was Abraham and all the Noble and great ones of the heavens. To claim that these people were not is illogical. As such, they had to have been worthy of this calling before they came to this earth, and thus we can assume they were valiant.
    Your assumptions do not follow a logical flow of thought. You read what appears to be absolute and don’t seem to think beyond the actual words to everything else.

  11. You seem very angry and bitter, and display a profound lack of respect for others’ beliefs. I’m sorry you’re at that point, and hope you’re able to make whatever changes you need to to be happier. Take care.

    • Thanks for your comment, Greg. You seem very defensive and quick to draw conclusions. You have no idea who I am, and I don’t appreciate your assumption that I am not already happy. I’m curious to know what you hoped to accomplish by making your short, belittling comment on my blog? Next time, please say something with a little more substance, otherwise there’s really no point to making these petty remarks.

  12. Thanks for sharing just how completely UNrelated Mormonism is to the real Jesus Christ, God, salvation plan, Satan, and everything else in the Christian Bible. It makes me so sad that Mormons think they are ‘Christians’. They are so deceived by this false doctrine. I pray that you might some day come to know the real Jesus.

  13. Most respectfully, LDS doctrines regarding the Plan of Salvation for the family of God could NOT and indeed, herein, ARE NOT adequately or even accurately captured in this or any other overly simplistic drawing or ongoing commentary about the implications of that drawing. The “title” of this heuristic device is misleading. The drawing itself is a grossly reductionistic and linear version of an artist’s rendition (one of very many versions), with a few pieces and principles of the Plan of Salvation tossed in for effect. As such, the very layout of the drawing, the arguments made, as well as the conclusions reached are, sadly, convoluted regarding the most fundamental and holistic doctrines of salvation for anyone let alone Hitler. It’s a bit like folding a paper airplane and then claiming it accurately represents the complexity, decades of engineering, testing, assembly and cooperative functionality of a modern commercial jet. A lifetime of careful study in the right materials is required and is my invitation to readers.

    • Perhapse rather than simply claiming the article is wrong or misleading you could properly articulate HOW or WHY is it wrong or misleading?

      • How interested are you in a more complete examination? I find most of these conversations do not merit the time it takes to write them…I hope I’m incorrect. Respectfully.

  14. Ok Tom, please let me attempt to elucidate my comments above with this first run at it. Let me know if it helps and I’ll continue addressing your request. First (but not least), the drawing being used in this examination is typical of very many I’ve seen over the course of my 62 years. Sadly, in almost every instance the “title” given to the arrangement of circles and lines drawing is, “The Plan of Salvation.” Very many well meaning people, committed teachers, and authors then go to great lengths to explain for, speculate on, come to conclusions about and even add scriptures and prophetic quotes here and there to the drawing in an attempt to give it credence.

    It is generally assumed I think, though almost never acknowledged, that having seen this oversimplified drawing thousands of times therefore makes it “true”, gives it a kind of explanatory validity, maybe even makes it the equivalent to the Plan of Salvation itself! I would warn us of that very way of thinking. Seeing a popular artist’s rendition of a painting of Jesus thousands of times gives it no validity or accuracy either. It’s guesswork at best, a “rendition” at best.

    What’s worse is that we generally don’t realize we are thinking that way in the first place. So, we merrily role along thinking we’re looking at an accurate and perhaps complete enough rendition of “The Plan of Salvation” to then use the drawing (and it’s many hidden assumptions) as a basis for discussion. That this happens perhaps millions of times across the planet does not make it any more accurate. That very kind speculative discussion is happening in this blog and seems to be using the drawing as the foundation of may conclusions and arguments. There’s a far better and more accurate starting point.

    Here’s is my first invitation for our readers. It’s just a silly drawing! It’s NOT the Plan of Salvation…it’s an artist’s rendition (like all drawings) of our way of generally making sense out of a huge conglomeration of related doctrines that could not possibly be reduced into a drawing regardless how sophisticated and colorful it becomes (and I’ve seen some real imaginative drawings that attempt to capture and explain everything).

    So, the first major misguided step (there are several others), is to assume that naming the drawing “The Plan of Salvation” gives any validity to the drawing itself or any credence to our speculative (and inaccurate) conversations and conclusions that follow. If the ongoing conversation above seems silly or offensive in it’s conclusions to some of you then perhaps we might benefit in stopping to question and examine our assumptions first to see if they are grounded in the truth.

    As stated earlier, the simplicity of a paper airplane could not possibly “stand in place of” nor accurately represent the complexity of a 747 airliner. We attempt to do this very thing when giving this very simple drawing far more credit than it deserves. I hope this first step helps guide the conversation onto more solid footing.

    • I actually agree with you on many of the points that you make; however there’s an underlying problem to all of your points: this graphic of the plan of salvation, or the many variants of it, has been used in official teaching materials throughout the church for many many years, essentially giving it the effect of being considered truth by the church’s members regardless of its accuracy. From this perspective it doesn’t matter if it’s actually true or not, because it’s being taught and learned as such. This ultimately points to my overarching perspective on the church and its teachings, that it simply cannot be true since there is so much misinformation circulating in the church, it’s teachings, and it’s doctrine that is all within the control of its prophetic leaders and their supposed ability to clarify these things through direct revelation.

      • Tom, I see your point, I hear it all the time from my students, neighbors, and patients who want to discuss “issues” that they have with the “Church” (which almost always means their reading of some doctrinal position, the local people or their local leaders…I used to teach at BYU in the Religion Department so they think I have something to offer them). Seeing this drawing here and there as you say (and it’s everywhere actually), would indeed give the impression you state BUT only if you take the drawing as representative of the actual thing.

        Your argument might be the same as saying that seeing pictures of Nephites and Lamanites all over the place gives the same impression. Sadly, many do think these ancient people looked and dressed in their “bath robes” and all lived in Central America. Similarly, Noah’s Ark resides as a “picture” in most adults minds the same way it did when they were 3 yr. olds in Primary. ha ha How does one get that out of their head if they insist on keeping childish things into adulthood?

        You know that no pictures or drawings of things are the same as the things themselves, you know this I am sure. A popular painting of Jesus was, years ago, rumored to have been re-painted to fit the Prophet at the time’s depiction of him. Many members bore tear filled expressions of it’s likeness to the Savior after the “faith promoting rumor” really got going. Of course it was not true but so many “believed” in their gullible fashion that is so prevalent among us. All orthodox communities suffer the same thing,it is not unique to Mormons. How are the brethren to ever keep silly people from silly conclusions? They teach us every 6 months, some listen, some don’t…the one’s that don’t do not hold sway over the ones that do.

        Respectfully, my points above are made no less viable because this silly drawing appears in Church publications. The word THE or a the millions of periods at the end of sentences or any drawings or pictures in church publications makes them no more or less “doctrinal” just because they all appear in church publications. Right? Yet, I see your point…these things are “in there” none the less and many take them as reality when they are “renditions” only.

        I’m not sure what you mean by “it’s doctrine that is all within the control of its prophetic leaders and their supposed ability to clarify these things through direct revelation” … what is “in control” once it reaches another’s ears and interpretive meanderings.

        Well, I hope this helps a little…I welcome your thoughts.

  1. Pingback: Adolf Hitler & The Plan of Salvation | hilarionphang

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: