Black and LDS

[Chaldean_Rite]

I have read the Book of Mormon, and the Spirit of the Lord bears winess to me that it is a book of scripture, a revelation from God, and it is true.

zerinus

One time a few mormos came over my house and I told them that I had a revelation from, I think I said Moses and St. John, and they belived me. I was shocked how gullible they were.

Don’t they realize that all pubic revelation closed during the Apostolic era and they shouldn’t base their religion on private revelation of some Joseph Smith?

2 Peter 1
20 Understanding this first, that no prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation.

 

[OnlyAmbrose]

All this talk of racial discrimination within Mormonism seems rather pointless. Who cares if the LDS Church was racist when:

1. Joseph Smith made prophecies which didn’t come true
2. There is no trace of Hebrew DNA in any Native American DNA
3. There is no trace of Hebrew language in any Native American language
4. There is no archaeological evidence to back up anything in the book of Mormon, let alone climactic battles that end a civilization
5. The “book of Abraham” doesn’t actually say anything that Joseph Smith said it does.

Not to derail the thread or anything, I’m just trying to express my point of view on this. Given the staggering amount of evidence against Mormonism and the absolute absence of evidence in favor of it, trying to catch the LDS church on a moral ambiguity seems like trying to pound in a nail with a toothpick when there’s a perfectly good hammer just waiting to be used

 

[zerinus]

One time a few mormos came over my house and I told them that I had a revelation from, I think I said Moses and St. John, and they belived me. I was shocked how gullible they were.

Don’t they realize that all pubic revelation closed during the Apostolic era and they shouldn’t base their religion on private revelation of some Joseph Smith?

2 Peter 1
20 Understanding this first, that no prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation.

There is nothing in the Bible that says public revelations ceased in the time of the Apostles. That is not what that verse means, even according to the scriptural interpretaion that you yorself had given. In that link that you had provided to the Douay-Rheims Bible, it interprets that particular verse as follows:

20 “No prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation”… This shows plainly that the scriptures are not to be expounded by any one’s private judgment or private spirit, because every part of the holy scriptures were written by men inspired by the Holy Ghost, and declared as such by the Church; therefore they are not to be interpreted but by the Spirit of God, which he hath left, and promised to remain with his Church to guide her in all truth to the end of the world. Some may tell us, that many of our divines interpret the scriptures: they may do so, but they do it always with a submission to the judgment of the Church, and not otherwise.

I generally agree with that interpretation—although I would question that the Catholic or Chaldean churches now have the exclusive right of interpretation—but that does not mean that public revelations have come to an end. Joseph Smith was a prophet like Moses. He came to establish a new dispensation of the gospel, because the old one had apostatized. That right of interpretation now rests with the LDS Church. But that does not mean that public interpretations have come to an end either. The LDS Church has now both the right of interpretation, as well as the right to bring public revelations for the Church as well as for the whole world.

zerinus

 

[scipio337]

There is nothing in the Bible that says public revelations ceased in the time of the Apostles. That is not what that verse means, even according to the scriptural interpretaion that you yorself had given. In that link that you had provided to the Douay-Rheims Bible, it interprets that particular verse as follows:

20 “No prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation”… This shows plainly that the scriptures are not to be expounded by any one’s private judgment or private spirit, because every part of the holy scriptures were written by men inspired by the Holy Ghost, and declared as such by the Church; therefore they are not to be interpreted but by the Spirit of God, which he hath left, and promised to remain with his Church to guide her in all truth to the end of the world. Some may tell us, that many of our divines interpret the scriptures: they may do so, but they do it always with a submission to the judgment of the Church, and not otherwise.

I generally agree with that interpretation—although I would question that the Catholic or Chaldean churches now have the exclusive right of interpretation—but that does not mean that public revelations have come to an end. Joseph Smith was a prophet like Moses. He came to establish a new dispensation of the gospel, because the old one had apostatized. That right of interpretation now rests with the LDS Church. But that does not mean that public interpretations have come to an end either. The LDS Church has now both the right of interpretation, as well as the right to bring public revelations for the Church as well as for the whole world.

zerinus

He wasn’t a prophet. All of his prophesies failed. We know what the Scriptures say about failed prophecy, right?

No Christian sect, at any time history, has revelation been interpreted to be as such. History’s not on your side. Of course, you can always resort to the “The Holy Spirit showed me” when faced with an insurmountable amount of evidence.

 

[PaulDupre]

He’s lucky he didn’t try dating any white women.

“the penalty would be death on the spot. It will always be so.”

• Brigham Young

 

[RebeccaJ]

Ancecdotes of one student at BYU is about the same as the Mormon Indian Placement program. Lots of Native American children living in Mormon homes, most were treated very well, as part of their host families. while at the same time, the mormon prophet of the time was pointing out how their living with mormons was causing their skin to turn white, because of their newly acquired righteousness.

 

[zaffiroborant]

From the Aaronic Priesthood Lesson Manual lesson - lesson number 31.
*Quotation and discussion
Compare the results of the vote with the following statement by President Spencer W. Kimball. Have a young man read it.

“We recommend that people marry those who are of the same racial background generally, and of somewhat the same economic and social and educational background (some of those are not an absolute necessity, but preferred), and above all, the same religious background, without question” (“Marriage and Divorce,” in 1976 Devotional Speeches of the Year [Provo: Brigham Young University Press, 1977], p. 144).

• Why is it so important for a couple to be worthy members of the Church? Ensure that the following points are discussed:

1. Exaltation cannot be attained without celestial marriage.
2. Religious values are powerful, and conflicting values can cause continual stress.
3. President Kimball quoted a survey showing that “only about one out of seven non-member spouses would be converted and baptized into the Church” (“Marriage and Divorce,” p. 152).
4. When one spouse is not converted to the gospel, the children are caught between the differing values of the parents.

• Why is it important for a couple to have a similar economic, educational, and cultural background?*

Notice how the lead caution of marring within your race is never covered in later discussion points. Nope no further discussion it’s just a given that marrying outside your race is not good.