Black and LDS

[excaliber]

So its talking about native americans…and yet african americans were kept out of the priesthood.probably just long enuff to ensure that the majority were caucasians…then later letting a few blacks join.

I could be wrong, but why else keep other races out of an organizations hierarchy?

 

[po18guy]

I figure there are two LDS churches: the proto-Nazi one epitomized by Brigham Young, and the one which reads the BOM as an allegory on the consequences of racism.

Perhaps they need to work on excommunicating their proto-Nazis, rather than harrassing people who believe that the LDS church can change, if it honestly looks at its :coffeeread: history.

Thanks for your opinions, anyway. :twocents:

Young was certainly a KKK quality racist. No matter it was an attitude of the time - even a prevailing attitude. It was wrong. It is wrong. The LDS teaching did a big about face, which points out to me that from its foundation it did not possess the truth.

I seek the truth, so I look elsewhere.

 

[excaliber]

Young was certainly a KKK quality racist. No matter it was an attitude of the time - even a prevailing attitude. It was wrong. It is wrong. The LDS teaching did a big about face, which points out to me that from its foundation it did not possess the truth.

I seek the truth, so I look elsewhere.

Can a restoration church be corupted with false hood so much that it has to do an about face?

Why restore a new church if it dose no better then those that suposedly apostasizied?

 

[po18guy]

A lot of what BY is supposed to have said can not be verified and many seek to make a mountain where a mole hill may not even exist.

Never mind what he didn’t say. Look at what he did say, and believe. Amazing.

 

[po18guy]

Can a restoration church be corupted with false hood so much that it has to do an about face?

Why restore a new church if it dose no better then those that suposedly apostasizied?

Especially when the “great apostasy” cannot be narrowed down to more than a nebulous time frame. A total departure from the truth would be the easiest thing on earth to examine, locate and identify. Yet, no one in LDS, JW or SDA has been able to put their finger on it. They just somehow “know it”. Victims of a succession of false prophets. I pray for them.

 

[teancum79]

Perhaps, but there is a lot of smoke for no fire.

Ok

Have they recanted the curse of Cain being dark skin? Or the lines in the scriptures equating skin tone with soul condition?

Actually, all churches have sinners. There is no issue with this statement at all.

Salvation may have been for all, but in denying the priesthood to otherwise elidgeable males, was everyone made to feel at home?

Sorry I’ve not been on for awhile.

The issue of “feeling at home” can be complex. People may or may not have felt overly welcome, but such is an issue with many people of many races and cultures when entering something new. Not having a been there done that T-shirt I can’t say for sure.

 

[teancum79]

Never mind what he didn’t say. Look at what he did say, and believe. Amazing.

He said a lot he preached of Christ and his kingdom he taught people to be industrious, honest and forgiving. Yet some would have us think that all he ever said where unkind things about Black people and women.

Why is that?

 

[po18guy]

He said a lot he preached of Christ and his kingdom he taught people to be industrious, honest and forgiving. Yet some would have us think that all he ever said where unkind things about Black people and women.

Why is that?

Because it remains the elephant in the LDS living room. The sin of the man’s personal beliefs was not separated from his teachings. They were not separated from doctrine. They were one and the same. So, has truth changed?

 

[excaliber]

I want to see mormons separate themselves from the pack. Catholics can claim things knowone else can.

However muhamad and lots of others suposedly had an angelic visitor.
Jw and mormons provide the same close nit congregations.
both preach publicly…both are supposed to have more accurate scripture…both are currently receiving revelation.

How would a person know if jw or mormons were correct?

However catholics are different then even orthodox. With st peters athority.

Jw and mormon seem to be very nice groups…and its easy to like them.

 

[ralphinal]

Sorry I’ve not been on for awhile.

The issue of “feeling at home” can be complex. People may or may not have felt overly welcome, but such is an issue with many people of many races and cultures when entering something new. Not having a been there done that T-shirt I can’t say for sure.

This is one of the wisest posts that you’ve had.

there are tons of reasons people would not feel at home. A lack of similar people in the room is one. Another could be a language barrier.

My question is basically prior to the change in doctrine, did blacks feel discriminated against by Mormons or were there so few blacks in contact with them that it did not matter.

Was the rule changed before or after the Jazz moved to Utah?

 

[RebeccaJ]

Was the rule changed before or after the Jazz moved to Utah?

Rule changed1978, Jazz came to Utah in 1979. We had the Utah Stars (ABA) before then (1970).

More likely that the LDS church was growing and they faced determining just how the local leaders would know, exactly, whether or not they should ordain a new convert of a darker skin hue into their priesthood.

 

[ralphinal]

Rule changed1978, Jazz came to Utah in 1979. We had the Utah Stars (ABA) before then (1970).

More likely that the LDS church was growing and they faced determining just how the local leaders would know, exactly, whether or not they should ordain a new convert of a darker skin hue into their priesthood.

Ok. I was just making sure that it wasn;t the influx of rich black basketball players

 

[excaliber]

I sometimes laugh subjects like this of…HOWEVER I know EXACTLY what its like to want to serve what you think is Gods organization with all your mind,strength,and hart…but be held back from serving God because of race. IT WAS HORRIBLE!! BY FAR the worst thing I have EVER experienced. Even now Jw’s have only one black member in there governing body.

However jw’s did not openly do it…there headquarters hides it from the congregations. But my understanding is that Mormons OPENLY refused membership in the priesthood.
I visited the mormon church, men are to hold positions in the church.
It would hurt…realy hurt for anyone to be held back.

I expect racism from non christians…mabey even some inside of christianity that are not true christians…but NOT FROM A CHURCH ITSELF.
I have been reading this thread…and it seems that it is FACT that the mormon church itself held black’s back from priesthood based on race and not qualifications.

Many sins have been committed by catholics…but I have not seen the CHURCH itself proven guilty…only sinfull members of the church. And
the Catholic church will even denounce a POPE as a heritic…none are above the church.

Why was B.Y. not denounced as a heritic by the mormon church, instead of holding blacks from the priesthood?

I am sure there are many nice mormons who don’t have a racist bone in there body.

But this sounds like a checkmate.

If mormons hold to that racist belief, they are wrong.
If mormons denounce those beliefs as wrong, they are still wrong for teaching herasy.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Ok. I was just making sure that it wasn;t the influx of rich black basketball players

Nah, very few of the NBA players actually live here.

 

[SedesDomi]

Ok. I was just making sure that it wasn;t the influx of rich black basketball players

Nope; it was due to the growth of the LDS Church in places like Brazil, where (unlike in the U.S.) much or most of the population has some African ancestry.

 

[teancum79]

Because it remains the elephant in the LDS living room. The sin of the man’s personal beliefs was not separated from his teachings. They were not separated from doctrine. They were one and the same. So, has truth changed?

Truth does not change. At times our understanding of things does.

For example it is very widely taught that Joseph the “father” of Jesus was a carpenter. Some now suggest that he was in fact a stone cutter. According to a friend the term that was translated into carpenter means builder and depending on a persons frame of reference that word can have different meanings.

I still fail to see why people seek to define a person by only one of two aspects of who they where. Given the questionable nature of much of the recored for which he is judged so harshly for and the large number of good things done it seems a great injustice to assult the memory of a good person in this fashion.

 

[PaulDupre]

Truth does not change. At times our understanding of things does.

For example it is very widely taught that Joseph the “father” of Jesus was a carpenter. Some now suggest that he was in fact a stone cutter. According to a friend the term that was translated into carpenter means builder and depending on a persons frame of reference that word can have different meanings.

It amazes me when Mormons do this (and they do it all the time) - they equate little things like variations in the translation of a biblical word [carpenter vs. contractor vs. builder] which are really the same thing, with major LDS theological flip-flops [there is one God vs there are infinite gods] [blacks are cursed because they were unfaithful in the pre-existence vs all races are equal and we don’t know why blacks were denied the priesthood].

They routinely attack the bible to deflect attention from their doctrinal contradictions (just as Muslims do).

An abomination!

 

[po18guy]

Truth does not change. At times our understanding of things does.

For example it is very widely taught that Joseph the “father” of Jesus was a carpenter. Some now suggest that he was in fact a stone cutter. According to a friend the term that was translated into carpenter means builder and depending on a persons frame of reference that word can have different meanings.

I still fail to see why people seek to define a person by only one of two aspects of who they where. Given the questionable nature of much of the recored for which he is judged so harshly for and the large number of good things done it seems a great injustice to assult the memory of a good person in this fashion.

Slight change in occupation is just that - slight. Major change, such a: no blacks => blacks. Big change.

Carpenter to builder to whatever are all variations of a theme. Blacks are excluded (blaming god) and then using god(s) as a scapegoat for the uncomfortably late “revelation” which allowed them in also doesn’t play and reveals that we worship different Gods. Ours is infinite, pre-existed all matter, is perfect and cannot change. Yours is the exact opposite. Different Gods. Let’s not pretend.

 

[excaliber]

Truth does not change. At times our understanding of things does.

For example it is very widely taught that Joseph the “father” of Jesus was a carpenter. Some now suggest that he was in fact a stone cutter. According to a friend the term that was translated into carpenter means builder and depending on a persons frame of reference that word can have different meanings.

I still fail to see why people seek to define a person by only one of two aspects of who they where. Given the questionable nature of much of the recored for which he is judged so harshly for and the large number of good things done it seems a great injustice to assult the memory of a good person in this fashion.

The bible itself says that teachers are held to a higher standard.

Let me get this straight…a person claims to represent God in rebuilding a church lost for thousands of years. This person claims new revalation from God. This person screws up royaly.

And people are supposed to just forget about that.

The founders of the Catholic church seems to be Jesus Christ and the Apostles.

Now if God wanted to start all over again, obviously he knew he had some big shoes to fill.
So you are trying to tell me he chose a poligamist and a racist???

Come on now!!!

 

[RebeccaJ]

Truth does not change. At times our understanding of things does.

For example it is very widely taught that Joseph the “father” of Jesus was a carpenter. Some now suggest that he was in fact a stone cutter. According to a friend the term that was translated into carpenter means builder and depending on a persons frame of reference that word can have different meanings.

I still fail to see why people seek to define a person by only one of two aspects of who they where. Given the questionable nature of much of the recored for which he is judged so harshly for and the large number of good things done it seems a great injustice to assult the memory of a good person in this fashion.

The Greek word is tektonos, tektonos, which can translate to the generic “craftsman”. A carpenter is a craftsman.

BY was preaching LDS doctrine. Doctrine that your church practiced until 1978. Racism as doctrine, that is the “truth” he was teaching. Now you are saying that racism is no longer doctrine, and thus no longer truth, and in the same post saying that a carpenter is not a craftsman. And somehow this isn’t truth changing, but gaining understanding?

Please explain this “logic”, and what one has to do with the other.

And rather than addressing this head on, you choose a rhetorical appeal to “goodness”. You know we value honesty, and so you say BY was honest. Yes, he was damn straight about what he believed and taught and made no apologies for it. It is you, and other Mormons, who attempt to cover and make excuses for him. Which, is for all purposes, dishonest.