Posted on 08/10/2002 5:45:29 PM PDT by JMJ333
Cubicle, if there's a point to be made somewhere in your #416, I can't figure out what it is.
Can you answer my questions in #420? They are very simple questions. If you can't answer them then you should be able to deduce some kind of point out of my #420.
Frankly I don't think you CAN answer them. Am I wrong?
I am doing a search and not feeling well so bear with me in this heat!
Now that Cain killed Able. Able did not have any posterity, because ABLE (seed) was also terminated.
So I remember the reading something about the reason for skin color is because their seeds were not to mixed.
At certain times the Lord was had convenants with different tribes and they fell out of grace from the Lord so he made it so those who still had the Lord's blessing were not to mixed their seed, or the convenant was broken and null and void.
Each race had to work out their problem to get back into the good graces of the Lord and if we are honest all of the races have been convenant breakers.
More to come.....
Answers to Gospel Questions, vol. 2 Smith, Joseph Fielding \ Doctrinal \ LDS Classics \ Teachings of the Prophets Apostle \ LDS Classics \ Teachings of the Prophets \ Doctrinal
173The Descendants of Cain
173Question: "My study of the scriptures has resulted in some 'unorthodox' conclusions, about which, if untenable, I should like to be put right with respect to the following: 173"1. The black race comes through only one of Ham's sons—Canaan.
173"2. The people known as Egyptians are not cursed with a black skin but have received another curse barring them from the priesthood. Egyptus was not a black woman.
173"3. Negroes are not precluded from holding the priesthood. I call attention to "2 Ne. 5:21II Nephi 5:21. 173"4. The curse pronounced by Noah on Pharaoh 'pertaining to the priesthood' was not because of the color of his skin. The first Pharaoh established an imitation patriarchal order of government patterned after the patriarchal reign of Adam, and also Noah. He could not have that 'right of priesthood' that is, the right of the patriarchal order, because he was not of the proper lineage. The right of that order was conferred upon Shem, the rightful heir."
173Answer: In the study of the scriptures, and especially these of a very ancient date, the first consideration is to discover that we have received such a meager record covering centuries of time. From Adam to Abraham is about 2000 years, yet it is all recorded in some twelve or fourteen pages. This history is, therefore, at best only a synopsis and most of the vital things are not even mentioned. Then again, this record has come down to us through manuscripts, many times copied and many times translated so that much of the "plain and precious" parts have been eliminated or changed. If we had the record in its purity and fulness as it was originally given, all of these obscure matters would be cleared.
174THE PATRIARCHAL PRIESTHOOD
174It is not expedient to go into this matter in the fulness which, perhaps, the subject demands, but here are a few reflections which may not have been considered. It is true that the patriarchal priesthood was handed down from father to son, and that the keys of it belonged to the oldest son by right of primogeniture; but notwithstanding this, all of the faithful men who obtained the priesthood had this patriarchal office from the days of Adam down to the days of Moses. This order of the priesthood was the one conferred upon these ancient prophets and teachers, whether they were the first-born or the last born, if they were faithful.
174Your attention is called to the fact that if this priesthood was the right of the first-born only, then the right would have been vested in Japheth, not Shem, after the flood, for Japheth was older than Shem. It could not be, then, on the ground of primogeniture that the descendants of Ham were denied the patriarchal priesthood. If this order was to be followed down to Moses, then Moses should not have been called to lead Israel, for he was of the tribe of Levi. Then again, we should remember that Moses got his priesthood from Jethro, who was not a descendant of Israel, but of Abraham through a younger branch of his family.
175BLACK SKIN WAS NOT THE CURSE
175The next question: "Was Cain cursed with a black skin?" Technically the black skin was not the curse, but the mark of the curse. The scriptures do not say that Cain was made black, but we read that his descendants were. ("Moses 7:22Moses 7:22.) We may well suppose that Cain was also black and that this was the mark the Lord placed upon him. ("Gen. 4:15Genesis 4:15.)
175The question also arises: "Why was it that Enoch and others of the prophets before the flood, avoided preaching the gospel to the descendants of Cain?" ("Moses 7:8Moses 7:8, "Moses 7:1212.)
175We learn that Noah was 450 years old when Japheth was born, and he was 492 when Shem was born, and Ham was born eight years later. Noah was a righteous man, and therefore we must conclude that he followed the admonition of the Lord to multiply. We reach the conclusion then, that Noah had numerous sons and daughters, but only three of his sons and their wives had faith enough to follow Noah into the Ark. What of the others? We get some light from the Pearl of Great Price:
175And the Lord said unto Noah: The daughters of thy sons have sold themselves; for behold mine anger is kindled against the sons of men, for they will not hearken to my voice. (Ibid., 8:15.)
176THE SEED OF CAIN HAD TO BE PRESERVED
176Could it not be said of Ham that he was righteous in that he followed his father into the Ark? The seed of Cain had to be preserved, and Cain was chosen for that mission. It is very possible that Ham received his name due to the fact that he married a black woman. We learn that the names of many individuals in those early years were given them—and often changed—due to incidents which occurred in their lives. For example, Esau's name was changed to Edom, and Jacob's name to Israel, and Abraham was at first known as Abram. It is likely that Ham's name was changed because he had a black wife, for ham is an adjective in Egyptian for black. The name Egyptus means forbidden. ("Abr. 1:23Abraham 1:23.) Is it not reasonable to believe that this has reference to the fact that her descendants, as well as her ancestors, were denied some great blessing? And that that great blessing was denial of the priesthood?
176We are informed that the right to the priesthood was denied Pharaoh, and this is in full accord with the attitude of Enoch and others before the flood. Then is it not reasonable to think that Ham named one of his sons Caanan after Cain? We may not be justified in declaring that the daughters of Ham were fair before the flood. We have no evidence that Ham had either sons or daughters before the flood. We have no evidence that it was the sons and daughters of any of the sons who entered the Ark who received the condemnation of the Lord. It could have been sons and daughters of other sons who refused to hearken to their father, and to the sons who rebelled, there may have been daughters who were fair. In fact, this is the plain implication of the scriptures.
177SIGNIFICANT EXPRESSIONS OF SCRIPTURE
177Reference that the "blood of the Canaanites was preserved in the land," and thus from Ham sprang the race which preserved the curse in the land are significant expressions. Again we read: "Now, Pharaoh being of the lineage by which he could not have right to the priesthood, notwithstanding the Pharaohs would fain claim it from Noah through Ham," is also significant. (Ibid., 1:27.) Is it not possible also that the Lord did curse the land so that it did not produce in its strength to Cain; and is it not possible that the Lord could have modified this in the case of some of Cain's descendants wherein they showed some measure of righteousness? (Ibid., 1:26.)
177It is true that the Negro race in their native land occupy lands of much heat, as well as they did before the flood, but such discussion does not aid us much in the matter of the curse placed on Cain and his posterity. In regard to this we should be satisfied with what the Lord has revealed in relation to Cain and his posterity. The Pearl of Great Price tells us definitely that the Egyptians were denied the priesthood. The Prophet taught his brethren that Cain was denied the priesthood and his posterity also to the latest generations. The promise was given that this curse, or restriction, will be removed, when the time comes in some future sphere, when Abel will have posterity. This evidence is collected and published in The Way to Perfection, chapters 15 and 16.
178Fortunately for the Negro, he is not denied entrance into the Church. He may be baptized for the remission of his sins and receive the gift of the Holy Ghost, and if true and faithful to the end, he may enter the celestial kingdom. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints holds out more for the Negro than any other religious denomination. Salvation in the Kingdom of God is open to him, with the promise that in the due time of the Lord, if he receives the gospel, all restrictions will be removed. We have in the Church many good, honest, faithful Negroes who fully understand.
178EVERY SPIRIT INNOCENT IN THE BEGINNING
178We are taught that every spirit was innocent in the beginning in the spirit world. It is equally true that every spirit comes into this world innocent as far as sin in this world is concerned. It is one of the most abominable, cruel and unreasonable doctrines that Satan ever introduced into this world to lay at the door of innocent, helpless babies, a sin which they never committed. Jesus Christ paid the debt for "original sin," or the bringing of death into the world. No other soul ever born, or that may yet be born, will be charged with any taint because of Adam's Fall. Jesus Christ came and paid that debt, and the sprinkling or touching the body of a baby with water to cleanse it from original sin, and to condemn it to "limbo," and deny it the mercies of the Lord if it is not so touched or sprinkled, comes close to being an unforgivable sin. Spirits who have received the privilege of coming to this earth had their agency in that spirit world. Some of them failed because of rebellion and were cast out with Lucifer. Others were not valiant and therefore came into this world under some restriction, and the Lord deals with them according to their works.
Next 4
The saddest story indeed. Because that story paints the Mormon god as a racist bigot.
I remember the reading something about the reason for skin color is because their seeds were not to mixed.
So god doesn't want black people to intermarry with white and delightsome people? Huh? What a bigot!
I am glad the God of the Bible is not such a bigot.
In fact when Moses married a black woman, (yes, he did) his brother and sister were all upset with him. They spoke against Moses because of the Ethiopian woman that he had married.
And what did God do????? Did God punish Moses for mixing his seed with the black race????? No!!!!!
He cursed Miriam with a skin disease which made her skin as white as snow!!!
I think God has a sense of irony. Because Miriam and Aaron were bigots and were judging Moses because of the fact that he had married a black woman, he turned Miriam as white as snow!
So the only known case of a curse from God changing the color of a person's skin was when God punished a bigot by turning her skin as white as snow.
Check it out. Numbers Chapter 12. It is one of the most ironic stories in the Bible. The moral of the story is, don't judge people by the color of their skin. God doesn't. The one true God doesn't. And God doesn't like it when people do.
Antiquities of the Jews Josephus, Flavius \ World Classics Non-LDS \ World History \ Religion Chapter 6
HOW EVERY NATION WAS DENOMINATED FROM THEIR FIRST INHABITANTS
1. Now they were the grandchildren of Noah, in honor of whom names were imposed on the nations by those that first seized upon them. Japhet, the son of Noah, had seven sons: they inhabited so, that, beginning at the mountains Taurus and Amanus, they proceeded along Asia, as far as the river Tansis, and along Europe to Cadiz; and settling themselves on the lands which they light upon, which none had inhabited before, they called the nations by their own names. For Gomer founded those whom the Greeks now call Galatians, [Galls,] but were then called Gomerites. Magog founded those that from him were named Magogites, but who are by the Greeks called Scythians. Now as to Javan and Madai, the sons of Japhet; from Madai came the Madeans, who are called Medes, by the Greeks; but from Javan, Ionia, and all the Grecians, are derived. Thobel founded the Thobelites, who are now called Iberes; and the Mosocheni were founded by Mosoch; now they are Cappadocians. There is also a mark of their ancient denomination still to be shown; for there is even now among them a city called Mazaca, which may inform those that are able to understand, that so was the entire nation once called. Thiras also called those whom he ruled over Thirasians; but the Greeks changed the name into Thracians. And so many were the countries that had the children of Japhet for their inhabitants. Of the three sons of Gomer, Aschanax founded the Aschanaxians, who are now called by the Greeks Rheginians. So did Riphath found the Ripheans, now called Paphlagonians; and Thrugramma the Thrugrammeans, who, as the Greeks resolved, were named Phrygians. Of the three sons of Javan also, the son of Japhet, Elisa gave name to the Eliseans, who were his subjects; they are now the Aeolians. Tharsus to the Tharsians, for so was Cilicia of old called; the sign of which is this, that the noblest city they have, and a metropolis also, is Tarsus, the tau being by change put for the theta. Cethimus possessed the island Cethima: it is now called Cyprus; and from that it is that all islands, and the greatest part of the sea-coasts, are named Cethim by the Hebrews: and one city there is in Cyprus that has been able to preserve its denomination; it has been called Citius by those who use the language of the Greeks, and has not, by the use of that dialect, escaped the name of Cethim. And so many nations have the children and grandchildren of Japhet possessed. Now when I have premised somewhat, which perhaps the Greeks do not know, I will return and explain what I have omitted; for such names are pronounced here after the manner of the Greeks, to please my readers; for our own country language does not so pronounce them: but the names in all cases are of one and the same ending; for the name we here pronounce Noeas, is there Noah, and in every case retains the same termination.
2. The children of Ham possessed the land from Syria and Amanus, and the mountains of Libanus; seizing upon all that was on its sea-coasts, and as far as the ocean, and keeping it as their own. Some indeed of its names are utterly vanished away; others of them being changed, and another sound given them, are hardly to be discovered; yet a few there are which have kept their denominations entire. For of the four sons of Ham, time has not at all hurt the name of Chus; for the Ethiopians, over whom he reigned, are even at this day, both by themselves and by all men in Asia, called Chusites. The memory also of the Mesraites is preserved in their name; for all we who inhabit this country [of Judea] called Egypt Mestre, and the Egyptians Mestreans. Phut also was the founder of Libya, and called the inhabitants Phutites, from himself: there is also a river in the country of Moors which bears that name; whence it is that we may see the greatest part of the Grecian historiographers mention that river and the adjoining country by the apellation of Phut: but the name it has now has been by change given it from one of the sons of Mesraim, who was called Lybyos. We will inform you presently what has been the occasion why it has been called Africa also. Canaan, the fourth son of Ham, inhabited the country now called Judea, and called it from his own name Canaan. The children of these [four] were these: Sabas, who founded the Sabeans; Evilas, who founded the Evileans, who are called Getuli; Sabathes founded the Sabathens, they are now called by the Greeks Astaborans; Sabactas settled the Sabactens; and Ragmus the Ragmeans; and he had two sons, the one of whom, Judadas, settled the Judadeans, a nation of the western Ethiopians, and left them his name; as did Sabas to the Sabeans: but Nimrod, the son of Chus, staid and tyrannized at Babylon, as we have already informed you. Now all the children of Mesraim, being eight in number, possessed the country from Gaza to Egypt, though it retained the name of one only, the Philistim; for the Greeks call part of that country Palestine. As for the rest, Ludieim, and Enemim, and Labim, who alone inhabited in Libya, and called the country from himself, Nedim, and Phethrosim, and Chesloim, and Cephthorim, we know nothing of them besides their names; for the Ethiopic war which we shall describe hereafter, was the cause that those cities were overthrown. The sons of Canaan were these: Sidonius, who also built a city of the same name; it is called by the Greeks Sidon Amathus inhabited in Amathine, which is even now called Amathe by the inhabitants, although the Macedonians named it Epiphania, from one of his posterity: Arudeus possessed the island Aradus: Arucas possessed Arce, which is in Libanus. But for the seven others, [Eueus,] Chetteus, Jebuseus, Amorreus, Gergesus, Eudeus, Sineus, Samareus, we have nothing in the sacred books but their names, for the Hebrews overthrew their cities; and their calamities came upon them on the occasion following.
3. Noah, when, after the deluge, the earth was resettled in its former condition, set about its cultivation; and when he had planted it with vines, and when the fruit was ripe, and he had gathered the grapes in their season, and the wine was ready for use, he offered sacrifice, and feasted, and, being drunk, he fell asleep, and lay naked in an unseemly manner. When his youngest son saw this, he came laughing, and showed him to his brethren; but they covered their father's nakedness. And when Noah was made sensible of what had been done, he prayed for prosperity to his other sons; but for Ham, he did not curse him, by reason of his nearness in blood, but cursed his prosperity: and when the rest of them escaped that curse, God inflicted it on the children of Canaan. But as to these matters, we shall speak more hereafter.
4. Shem, the third son of Noah, had five sons, who inhabited the land that began at Euphrates, and reached to the Indian Ocean. For Elam left behind him the Elamites, the ancestors of the Persians. Ashur lived at the city Nineve; and named his subjects Assyrians, who became the most fortunate nation, beyond others. Arphaxad named the Arphaxadites, who are now called Chaldeans. Aram had the Aramites, which the Greeks called Syrians; as Laud founded the Laudites, which are now called Lydians. Of the four sons of Aram, Uz founded Trachonitis and Damascus: this country lies between Palestine and Celesyria. Ul founded Armenia; and Gather the Bactrians; and Mesa the Mesaneans; it is now called Charax Spasini. Sala was the son of Arphaxad; and his son was Heber, from whom they originally called the Jews Hebrews. Heber begat Joetan and Phaleg: he was called Phaleg, because he was born at the dispersion of the nations to their several countries; for Phaleg among the Hebrews signifies division. Now Joctan, one of the sons of Heber, had these sons, Elmodad, Saleph, Asermoth, Jera, Adoram, Aizel, Decla, Ebal, Abimael, Sabeus, Ophir, Euilat, and Jobab. These inhabited from Cophen, an Indian river, and in part of Asia adjoining to it. And this shall suffice concerning the sons of Shem.
5. I will now treat of the Hebrews. The son of Phaleg, whose father Was Heber, was Ragau; whose son was Serug, to whom was born Nahor; his son was Terah, who was the father of Abraham, who accordingly was the tenth from Noah, and was born in the two hundred and ninety-second year after the deluge; for Terah begat Abram in his seventieth year. Nahor begat Haran when he was one hundred and twenty years old; Nahor was born to Serug in his hundred and thirty-second year; Ragau had Serug at one hundred and thirty; at the same age also Phaleg had Ragau; Heber begat Phaleg in his hundred and thirty-fourth year; he himself being begotten by Sala when he was a hundred and thirty years old, whom Arphaxad had for his son at the hundred and thirty-fifth year of his age. Arphaxad was the son of Shem, and born twelve years after the deluge. Now Abram had two brethren, Nahor and Haran: of these Haran left a son, Lot; as also Sarai and Milcha his daughters; and died among the Chaldeans, in a city of the Chaldeans, called Ur; and his monument is shown to this day. These married their nieces. Nabor married Milcha, and Abram married Sarai. Now Terah hating Chaldea, on account of his mourning for Ilaran, they all removed to Haran of Mesopotamia, where Terah died, and was buried, when he had lived to be two hundred and five years old; for the life of man was already, by degrees, diminished, and became shorter than before, till the birth of Moses; after whom the term of human life was one hundred and twenty years, God determining it to the length that Moses happened to live. Now Nahor had eight sons by Milcha; Uz and Buz, Kemuel, Chesed, Azau, Pheldas, Jadelph, and Bethuel. These were all the genuine sons of Nahor; for Teba, and Gaam, and Tachas, and Maaca, were born of Reuma his concubine: but Bethuel had a daughter, Rebecca, and a son, Laban.
This is interesting. I noticed nothing required as to the nature of God
Could one believe in the traditional trinity? Or that God the father is a spirit? Or is that folded into the required belief by virtue of believeing thjat JS was a prophet?
******
SEE WHAT HAPPEN TO MY OLIVED BRANCH ~ OUCH!
I am afraid my post #426 is going to get lost in this tirade, I don't like unplesantness I try to have a search and understanding discussion. There is no need to bash one or their faith! These tantrum are hard to take and I am not feeling well. I think a responce like that was uncalled for, I was sincere in my efforts to find understanding. I know the LDS has never been a racist Church and understood things from a Biblical since, not as the world dictates in its ignorance. Don't mean you R7
176Could it not be said of Ham that he was righteous in that he followed his father into the Ark? The seed of Cain had to be preserved, and Cain was chosen for that mission. It is very possible that Ham received his name due to the fact that he married a black woman. We learn that the names of many individuals in those early years were given them—and often changed—due to incidents which occurred in their lives. For example, Esau's name was changed to Edom, and Jacob's name to Israel, and Abraham was at first known as Abram. It is likely that Ham's name was changed because he had a black wife, for ham is an adjective in Egyptian for black. The name Egyptus means forbidden. ("Abr. 1:23Abraham 1:23.) Is it not reasonable to believe that this has reference to the fact that her descendants, as well as her ancestors, were denied some great blessing? And that that great blessing was denial of the priesthood?
176We are informed that the right to the priesthood was denied Pharaoh, and this is in full accord with the attitude of Enoch and others before the flood. Then is it not reasonable to think that Ham named one of his sons Caanan after Cain? We may not be justified in declaring that the daughters of Ham were fair before the flood. We have no evidence that Ham had either sons or daughters before the flood. We have no evidence that it was the sons and daughters of any of the sons who entered the Ark who received the condemnation of the Lord. It could have been sons and daughters of other sons who refused to hearken to their father, and to the sons who rebelled, there may have been daughters who were fair. In fact, this is the plain implication of the scriptures.
Amen Marlowe..God is NOT a respector of persons..He looks on the heart..
Here we have yet another hijacked trashing and bashing thread that has gone on for days. P-Marlowe is not a Calvinist, but he is leading the bashing this time just like the aggressive Calvinists do, going on and on and on, not knowing when to stop, bashing with racist accusations. In the last thread, now pulled, drstevej, who is a Calvinist, went on and on and on, not knowing when to stop, bashing with sexist accusations, and he is joining in here too, see for example #343 and #439 just above.
When a conservative commentator is doing a great job of being colorblind, but the liberal activist keeps injecting race into the "discussion" in order to imply that conservatives are racist, who is really the racist?
It does no good to reply to them. They just ignore our solid, thorough, and thoughtful reasoning, accuse us of whining, and continue with their bashing. There are people like that in this world, and they try to take over whatever forum will allow it. If we did not reply, they would claim victory, boast of driving us from the field, and backbite us endlessly. If they persuade us to descend to their level (and they succeed in part with some of us occasionally) then the moderators cannot distinguish the predators from their intended victims.
Predatory attackers will not stop until they are banned. They are like crows who take over tree after tree, driving the songbirds away. The Smoky Backroom forum is not intended for one-sided predatory situations like these.
It is past time to pull this thread. The Admin Moderator has already posted one warning. But if these guys are not banned, they will just do it again and again, hijacking thread after thread, bashing and trashing.
I don't spend the time I should in the News forum, because these attackers soak up so much of my available FR time demanding well-researched answers to their "questions" (and then throw them away as though I had not replied).
I am sorry to burden you with this, but the forum rules are not being enforced well enough. People's reputations are being trashed, and our replies and calls for better behavior ignored by the attackers. Too much predatory behavior is getting in under the radar, since the individual posts are not sufficiently egregious, I guess. Where the police are not sufficiently vigilant, the Mafia muscles in.
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.