Posted on 01/06/2014 3:53:42 PM PST by Colofornian
In the recently released statement on lds.org on Race and the Priesthood, the modern Mormon Church disavows “that blacks or people of any other race or ethnicity are inferior in any way to anyone else…” This unequivocal truth, that no race or ethnicity is superior to another, is something that Spain (1542), Quakers (1600s), Pennsylvania (1790), England (1807), Abraham Lincoln (1865), and Christians of any era who believe the Bible, know. According to the Bible, God shows no favoritism—never by skin color—and commands his people to do the same.
Lincoln, who often quoted the biblical God, was displeased with the Utah Territory for its stance as a slave territory (and for its polygamy). Finally in 1978, 113 years after Lincoln and 24 years after Brown vs. Board of Education, the Mormon Church gave black members of African ancestry (why not restrict Native Americans—they were the unrighteous dark-skinned Lamanites of the Book of Mormon?) equal access to the priesthood, ergo its Celestial kingdom, eternal life, and the potential for godhood.
As a professor at Brigham Young University (1999-2008), I taught, among other things—multiculturalism. In class, some of my generational LDS students proposed that those with black skin were blighted with something they called “the curse of Cain.” Alarmed by this belief, I began to investigate LDS scriptures on the topic and discovered scriptural support in the Book of Mormon and the Pearl of Great Price corroborating students’ beliefs.
Because these scriptures still exist, are read, and revered, the lingering conundrum for the Mormon Church is this: How to explain the 20-some passages of LDS scripture that can be considered racist. So, this new attempt to state a non-biased position on race, which falls short of an apology, ignores the challenge of present-day scriptures.
As well intended as the latest words on the official church website are, they can affect no real change in policy or teachings because these scriptures remain. Why call these scriptures racist? The definition of racist is the belief that some races of people are better than others because of their race, their skin color. This is precisely what the LDS scriptures STILL teach. Here are few examples just from the Book of Mormon:
Alma 3:6 “And the skins of the Lamanites were dark, according to the mark which was set upon their fathers, which was a curse upon them because of their transgression and their rebellion against their brethren…”
3 Nephi 2:15 “And their curse was taken from them, and their skin becamewhite like unto the Nephites;”
3 Nephi 19:30 “And when Jesus had spoken these words he came again unto his disciples; and behold they did pray steadfastly, without ceasing, unto him; and he did smile upon them again; and behold they werewhite, even as Jesus.”
As these passages explain, the Lamanites (forerunners of the dark-skinned Native Americans descended from the Jews according to the Book of Mormon) were given a mark of dark skin as a curse for their transgression, not toward God, by the way, but toward their brethren, the “righteous” Nephites. Later when some Lamanites became righteous, the curse was removed and their skin became white.
This repulsion for the LDS racist scriptures I had discovered began to soften my heart toward the biblical God who, according to the Bible, is no respecter of persons and who shows no favoritism. When I read the Bible, its teachings were unmistakably clear because they were repeated over and over. One of these undeniable themes is that God is no respecter of persons and shows no favoritism, no bias.
What to do with the racist scriptures? If the LDS Church moves to remove them, then that calls into question all other things Joseph Smith wrote as scripture and said came from God. Can the Mormon Church say they’re an allegory that means something other than what they say literally? As of today, the church is still defending the four standard works on their official website as “utterly reliable” and “pure truth.”
What happens if they just go “OK, our scriptures are racist. So?”
Well, if they admit the scriptures are racist, it leaves only a few possibilities. Either:
a) Joseph Smith is a reliable prophet, but the Mormon God is racist.
or
b) God isn’t racist, but Joseph Smith is not a reliable prophet
Obviously, neither option is attractive from a PR standpoint.
Isn’t this just the historical version of the “I’m not a racist, some of my best friends are black!” defense?
The reality is people either are truth seekers and peace makers which are the children of God, or they spend their time tearing down and delight in manufacturing doubt and fear.... which is not of the Lord
False prophets are the wagging tongues of ravening wolves!
15 ¶Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?
17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.
18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.
19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.
“The reality is people either are truth seekers and peace makers which are the children of God, or they spend their time tearing down and delight in manufacturing doubt and fear.... which is not of the Lord”
Jesus spent plenty of time tearing down those who taught falsehoods, trying to twist the Word of God. Might want to be careful about what you condemn.
Jesus spent plenty of time tearing down those who taught falsehoods, trying to twist the Word of God. Might want to be careful about what you condemn.
***
condemn? those are the words of the Lord In Matthew 7
He commands, Judge not; ask of God; beware of false prophets
And he tells us how to discern the ravening wolves
False prophets are the wagging tongues of ravening wolves!
15 ¶Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?
17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.
18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.
19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.
“condemn? those are the words of the Lord In Matthew 7 “
The latter part of your post was from Scripture, but not the top part, to which I was referring. Those were your own words.
“And he tells us how to discern the ravening wolves
False prophets are the wagging tongues of ravening wolves!”
No, that’s not what the verse says (you quote it in your own post, so it should be easy for you to verify that). The verse says that false prophets, inwardly, are like ravening wolves. Not that they are “wagging tongues of ravening wolves”. That is your own invention, apparently.
“All things come to pass in the due time of the Lord. So for the LDS Church to not ordain Black people for a length of time, is totally in keeping with the pattern God has maintained from Adam on down. And God doesn’t care about your PC’ness.
It’s no different than the Levites. Or Jesus Himself, not teaching anyone but the Jews. Blacks were allowed to join the Church however. But all things in the due time of the Lord.
Just as Jesus eventually allowed the Gentiles to hear the gospel, so eventually Jesus allowed the Blacks to hold the priesthood.”
Well, that’s a novel defense at least. The problem with it is that there was just one chosen people to the Lord (the Israelites), and once Christ tore the veil of the Temple, it was opened to ALL peoples. There was no additional restriction levied only on blacks that remained after Christ. So, obviously, whatever restrictions the LDS placed on blacks couldn’t have come from God.
I see where you are coming from but other places it the scriptures say the same thing.
"Jesus spent plenty of time tearing down those who taught falsehoods, trying to twist the Word of God"
BTW That is not tearing down Jesus chasten, teaches, reproves, or rebukes.
That IS what the Bible says though, isn't it? What it DOES say is:
For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance. For as ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their unbelief: Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy. For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all. (Romans 11:29-32)
Really? Can't be persuaded.... what you're teaching doesn't match the Bible.
Do you not see a difference between God offering mercy as a reward for the repentance of men and God changing His mind about His solemn decrees about what is right or wrong? As it turned out, Abraham's plea did not change God's mind at all since He already knew His judgment on Sodom and Gomorrah was correct. I hope you grasp the significance of when God can be petitioned for mercy and the futileness of asking Him to change what, in His omniscience and holiness, He has declared. God's "gifts and callings" are without repentance seems to clarify, at least for me, that those whom He has called and the gifts He has given will not be recalled, are irrevocable and will not change.
Perhaps the Mormon god isn't all powerful, omniscience or knows the end from the beginning? Maybe because of these weaknesses, he couldn't know that what he told Joseph Smith to write in the BOM about the black race would someday be something that Mormons would find uncomfortable and limiting of their appeal to the world and he'd have to change his mind about. Maybe, like this, he also messed up the command about plurality of marriage and had to take that one back, too.
I'll stick with the REAL, TRUE God, if you don't mind. He isn't caught off balance or needs to be talked into changing what He declares is right or wrong. Maybe you should consider Him as well.
Gal 5
19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.
Ezek.22
23 ¶And the word of the Lord came unto me, saying,
24 Son of man, say unto her, Thou art the land that is not cleansed, nor rained upon in the day of indignation.
25 There is a conspiracy of her prophets in the midst thereof, like a roaring lion ravening the prey; they have devoured souls; they have taken the treasure and precious things; they have made her many widows in the midst thereof.
26 Her priests have violated my law, and have profaned mine holy things: they have put no difference between the holy and profane, neither have they shewed difference between the unclean and the clean, and have hid their eyes from my sabbaths, and I am profaned among them.
27 Her princes in the midst thereof are like wolves ravening the prey, to shed blood, and to destroy souls, to get dishonest gain.
I imagine a wolf wearing sheep's clothing is going to do EVERYTHING he can to blend in. The thing about counterfeits is they are so close to looking like the real thing that it takes a keen discernment to know the fake from the real. I imagine these wolves are going to use the same language as the sheep as well as looking like them. No doubt they are probably going to assemble with the sheep and appear for all practical purposes AS sheep so as not to scare off the real ones. One of THE ways Jesus said the wolves could be identified is that they want to scatter the sheep. That's a hunting technique pack animals use to pull individuals away from the flock, and the protection of the shepherd, to more easily attack and feed. The rest of the sheep get spooked but don't seem to get any wiser the next time the tactic is used.
We should beware of these false prophets among us and fight them off with the Sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God. We should not be pulled away from the flock by vanity, compliments, flattering words, vain promises or words pleasing to our ears. We should remain with the teachings of the Shepherd and not be lured away by hirelings who do not care for the sheep and who run away when the wolves slip in. Sometimes the hireling IS a wolf.
Then your own prophet, Joseph Smith qualifies as a false prophet/ravening wolf because he did PLENTY of tearing down, causing doubt and fear of Christianity. By your own judgment, Mormonism is not of the Lord.
“I see where you are coming from but other places it the scriptures say the same thing.”
Quote those other passages then?
“BTW That is not tearing down Jesus chasten, teaches, reproves, or rebukes.”
Great, then I will chasten, teach, reprove, and rebuke people about Mormonism all I please, mmkay?
You do know when Jesus did this it By the power of the Holy Ghost other wise the Spirit of the Lorddeparts and the
chasten, teach, reprove, and rebuke is from the natural man and no longer in the Spirit of the Lord!
That’s fine with me. If the Lord, on judgement day, says “you rebuked those Mormons, not the Holy Spirit”, I will be glad to have it added to my ledger.
Joey Smith , Brigham Young, and the rest of the Mormons were racists..
even up to last month the modern Mormons have confessed they were racist as late as 2013..
are they still ???
are there any black women who are priests ???
are there any blacks in the 70s ??? the Quorums ??? the 1st presidency ??? has there been a black “prophet” man or woman since 1978 ???
35 years since the Mormon god change its mind and yet white men became prophet and grand poohah of the Mormons in much fewer years ...Young was only a Mormon for about 10 years...so its not time in the religion...
its good ol racism...
Smith’s View on Race and Skin Color
The first instance of racism in Smith’s new religion can be found in the Book of Mormon, published in 1830.[11] Here we find the story of a group of Israelites who migrate to America at approximately 600 BC. They soon divide into two groups—the righteous Nephites are described as “white” and “delightsome” while the rebellious Lamanites are cursed by God with a “dark” skin, also referred to as a “skin of blackness”:
2 Nephi 5:21-23: And he [God] had caused the cursing to come upon them, yea, even a sore cursing, because of their iniquity. . . . wherefore, as they were white, and exceedingly fair and delightsome, that they might not be enticing unto my people the Lord God did cause a skin of blackness to come upon them. . . . And cursed shall be the seed of him that mixeth with their seed; for they shall be cursed even with the same cursing. And the Lord spake it, and it was done.”
Jacob 3:5: Behold, the Lamanites your brethren, whom ye hate because of their filthiness and the cursing which hath come upon their skins. . .
Alma 3:6: And the skins of the Lamanites were dark, according to the mark which was set upon their fathers, which was a curse upon them because of the transgression and their rebellion. . .
The descendants of these rebellious people were believed by the early Mormons to be the American Indian.[12] While their dark skin was seen as a sign of God’s curse on them, Indians were allowed to join Mormonism and be ordained to its priesthood.
Soon after starting his church in 1830, Joseph Smith began a revision of the Bible. Without knowing either Hebrew or Greek, Smith supposedly relied on divine guidance in correcting the text. Part of his revision is printed in the Pearl of Great Price as the Book of Moses, where we find the scriptural roots of the LDS concept of the origin of black people:
Moses 7:8: . . . and there was a blackness came upon all the children of Canaan, that they were despised among all people.
Moses 7:12: . . . Enoch continued to call upon all the people, save it were the people of Canaan, to repent . . .
Moses 7:22: And Enoch also beheld the residue of the people which were the sons of Adam; and they were a mixture of all the seed of Adam save it was the seed of Cain, for the seed of Cain were black, and had not place among them.
Smith seems to have been adapting the racial arguments of his day, which were used to justify slavery, when formulating his teaching that blacks were under the curse of Cain.[13]
When Mormons started settling in Missouri in the early 1830’s their attitude toward Native Americans and blacks became a concern of their neighbors. Many Missourians worried that Smith’s church, founded in New York, was anti-slavery. After the Mormons published an article “Free People of Color”[14] in their Evening and Morning Star, the non-Mormons worried that it was meant to encourage blacks to immigrate to the Mormon settlement in Independence, Missouri. To calm local fears, the Mormons immediately printed an “Extra” sheet for the paper, in which they announced:
Having learned, with regret, that an article entitled FREE PEOPLE OF COLOR, in the last number of the Star, has been misunderstood, we feel in duty bound to state, in this Extra, that our intention was not only to stop free people of color from emigrating to this state, but to prevent them from being admitted as members of the Church.[15]
After a few abolitionists came to the Mormon settlement at Kirtland, Ohio, in 1836, Smith was concerned that this would cause problems between the Mormons and the Southerners. In an article for the Messenger and Advocate, Smith laid out his lack of support for the abolitionists and his views on slavery. He wrote:
I have learned by experience that the enemy of truth does not slumber, nor cease his exertions to bias the minds of communities against the servants of the Lord, by stirring up the indignation of men upon all matters of importance or interest; therefore I fear that the sound might go out, that “an Abolitionist” had held forth several times to this community, . . . all, except a very few, attended to their own vocations, and left the gentleman to hold forth his own arguments to nearly naked walls. . . .
It is my privilege then to name certain passages from the Bible, pronounced by a man who was perfect in his generation, and walked with God. And so far from that prediction being averse to the mind of God, it remains as a lasting monument of the decree of Jehovah, to the shame and confusion of all who have cried out against the South, in consequence of their holding the sons of Ham in servitude. “And he said, Cursed be Canaan: a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.” “Blessed be the Lord God of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.” (Gen. 9:25,26). . . . What could have been the design of the Almighty in this singular occurrence is not for me to say; but I can say, the curse is not yet taken off from the sons of Canaan, neither will be until it is affected by as great a power as caused it to come; . . . I do not believe that the people of the North have any more right to say that the South shall not have slaves, than the South have to say the North shall. . . . All men are to be taught to repent; but we have no right to interfere with slaves, contrary to the mind and will of their masters.[16]
On Tuesday, January 25, 1842, Joseph Smith commented “that the Indians have greater cause to complain of the treatment of the whites, than the negroes, or sons of Cain.”[17] A year later, January 2, 1843, Joseph Smith gave this assessment of blacks:
At five went to Mr. Sollars’ with Elders Hyde and Richards. Elder Hyde inquired the situation of the negro. I replied, they came into the world slaves, mentally and physically. . . . Had I anything to do with the negro, I would confine them by strict law to their own species, and put them on a national equalization.[18]
Ironically, right at the time Joseph Smith was developing his racial doctrines he allowed the ordination of a black man named Elijah Abel.[19] 1Abel was “ordained an elder on March 3, 1836, and a seventy April 4, 1841.”[20]
In 1842 Smith published his new scripture, the Book of Abraham, in the Times and Seasons, the LDS newspaper in Nauvoo, Illinois. This has since been canonized in the Pearl of Great Price and reflects Smith’s growing racist attitude towards blacks and priesthood:
Now this king of Egypt was a descendant from the loins of Ham, and was a partaker of the blood of the Canaanites by birth.
From this descent sprang all the Egyptians, and thus the blood of the Canaanites was preserved in the land.
The land of Egypt being first discovered by a woman, who was the daughter of Ham, and the daughter of Egyptus, which in the Chaldean signifies Egypt, which signifies that which is forbidden;
When this woman discovered the land it was under water, who afterward settled her sons in it; and thus, from Ham, sprang that race which preserved the curse in the land.
Now the first government of Egypt was established by Pharaoh, the eldest son of Egyptus, the daughter of Ham, and it was after the manner of the government of Ham, which was patriarchal.
Pharaoh, being a righteous man, established his kingdom and judged his people wisely and justly all his days, seeking earnestly to imitate that order established by the fathers in the first generations, in the days of the first patriarchal reign, even in the reign of Adam, and also of Noah, his father, who blessed him with the blessings of the earth, and with the blessings of wisdom, but cursed him as pertaining to the Priesthood.
Now, Pharaoh being of that lineage by which he could not have the right of Priesthood, notwithstanding the Pharaohs would fain claim it from Noah, through Ham, therefore my father was led away by their idolatry. (Pearl of Great Price, Book of Abraham, 1:21-27)
LDS author Stephen Taggart observed:
With the publication of The Book of Abraham all of the elements for the Church’s policy of denying the priesthood to Negroes were present. The curse of Canaan motif borrowed from Southern fundamentalism was being supported within the Church by a foundation of proslavery statements and attitudes which had emerged during the years of crisis in Missouri. . . . [21]
When a reporter asked LDS President David O. McKay in 1961 about the basis for the policy of restricting blacks from priesthood, “he replied that it rested solely on the Book of Abraham. ‘That is the only reason,’ he said. ‘It is founded on that.’ “[22] Even though the LDS Church now denounces racism, how are readers to interpret racial statements in the LDS scriptures?[23]
It should be noted that the story of Noah’s curse on Ham and Canaan in Genesis, chapter nine, never connects the curse to race, skin color or to Africa. The same can be said of the curse on Cain in Genesis, chapter four. The Bible does not identify the mark placed on Cain as being a black skin. These interpretations arose centuries later in an attempt to justify slavery.
http://www.utlm.org/newsletters/no118.htm
If you somehow don't think that was the case, then perhaps you missed this "bulletin" from the apostle Paul:
22 Jews demand signs and Greeks look for wisdom, 23 but we preach Christ crucified... For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified. (1 Cor. 1:22-23; 2:1)
The very heart of the Gospel is encapsulated in 1 Corinthians 15...and note the phrase "first importance" (minus all the restoration crap add-ons Mormonism's usurpers pour on):
"3 For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that...
(a)...Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures,
(b) ... 4 that he was buried,
(c)...that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures,
(continuing) ...5 and that he appeared to Cephas, and then to the Twelve. 6 After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, 8 and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.
Did you catch what Paul said were "first principles" -- of "first import" there?
Jesus dying (for our sins), His death & His resurrection!!!
Guess what? Except for some prophecies He gave His closest disciples that this was going to happen (and they still largely didn't comprehend it yet), NONE of that -- His death, burial, & resurrection, occurred during Jesus' public ministry time to the Jews...
ALL: Do you see how Mormonism's flimsiest "logic" goes? Illogical for them to consider anyBODY else...anything else...than Jesus Christ on Calvary, Jesus Christ buried in the tomb, and Jesus Christ Alive Again as whatever false Gospel Mormonism's hucksters hurl at people!
The problem is that Mormonism's missionary indoctrination program stuffs its grassroots Lds with a completely different "gospel" to what's above.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.