I Will Not Get A Answer From A Mormon But I Will Ask

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bill_Pick
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

Bill_Pick

Guest
If Brigham Young was a true prophet, how come one of your later prophets overturned his declaration which stated that the black man could never hold the priesthood in the LDS Church until after the resurrection of all other races (Journal of Discourses (1854) 2:142-143)
 
BILL PICK said:
If Brigham Young was a true prophet, how come one of your later prophets overturned his declaration which stated that the black man could never hold the priesthood in the LDS Church until after the resurrection of all other races (Journal of Discourses (1854) 2:142-143)
Click to expand...
🙂 You might add;
  1. The book of Mormon tries to tell us, that the native Indians of NA, are descendants of the lost tribes of Israel. The knowledge of iron-making goes back to about 4000 B.C. The ‘lost tribes’ go back to around 800 B.C. Why didn’t the Indians know about iron? It appears, that no natives in the Americas knew of iron.
  2. Numbers 12:6 is given unto us, in order to differentiate between a true prophet and a false one. Does Joseph Smith satisfy this scripture? 🙂
 
Thorwald said:
🙂 You might add;
  1. The book of Mormon tries to tell us, that the native Indians of NA, are descendants of the lost tribes of Israel. The knowledge of iron-making goes back to about 4000 B.C. The ‘lost tribes’ go back to around 800 B.C. Why didn’t the Indians know about iron? It appears, that no natives in the Americas knew of iron.
  2. Numbers 12:6 is given unto us, in order to differentiate between a true prophet and a false one. Does Joseph Smith satisfy this scripture? 🙂
Click to expand...
thank you for your answer but like i said no asnwers from the mormons,why
 
If Pope John Paul II was the real pope of the Catholic Church when he excommunicated the SSPX “Bishops” then how come Pope Pope Benedict XVI lifted the excommunications on Richard Williamson and the other SSPX’ers?

Does the knife cut both ways or do only Mormon feet get held to the fire?
 
Among_Strangers said:
If Pope John Paul II was the real pope of the Catholic Church when he excommunicated the SSPX “Bishops” then how come Pope Pope Benedict XVI lifted the excommunications on Richard Williamson and the other SSPX’ers?

Does the knife cut both ways or do only Mormon feet get held to the fire?
Click to expand...
thats a question you need to ask the pope,our popes have a mind of their own
 
Among_Strangers said:
If Pope John Paul II was the real pope of the Catholic Church when he excommunicated the SSPX “Bishops” then how come Pope Pope Benedict XVI lifted the excommunications on Richard Williamson and the other SSPX’ers?

Does the knife cut both ways or do only Mormon feet get held to the fire?
Click to expand...
How come? Because the Holy Father is hoping that this is the beginning of bringing these Bishop’s back into full communion with the Church.

Anything wrong with that? It’s a start, thats all.
 
truthsilence said:
How come? Because the Holy Father is hoping that this is the beginning of bringing these Bishop’s back into full communion with the Church.

Anything wrong with that? It’s a start, thats all.
Click to expand...
In light of the OP:
BILL PICK said:
If Brigham Young was a true prophet, how come one of your later prophets overturned his declaration which stated that the black man could never hold the priesthood in the LDS Church until after the resurrection of all other races (Journal of Discourses (1854) 2:142-143)
Click to expand...
There should be. Good for the goose and all that.
 
Among_Strangers said:
If Pope John Paul II was the real pope of the Catholic Church when he excommunicated the SSPX “Bishops” then how come Pope Pope Benedict XVI lifted the excommunications on Richard Williamson and the other SSPX’ers?

Does the knife cut both ways or do only Mormon feet get held to the fire?
Click to expand...
Unrelated things. Excommunication is an act taken to move the person toward penance and back into union with the Church. It is intended by its nature to be lifted at some time. One pope excommunicates someone, that person is sorry and moves to make amends, the pope lifts it.

How is this like the black issue with the Mormons?
 
ralphinal said:
Unrelated things. Excommunication is an act taken to move the person toward penance and back into union with the Church. It is intended by its nature to be lifted at some time. One pope excommunicates someone, that person is sorry and moves to make amends, the pope lifts it.

How is this like the black issue with the Mormons?
Click to expand...
If you open a thread directed at calling into question an ecclesial communities actions based upon a change in situations (allowing black men to be priests as in the case with the OP) when at the same time your own ecclesial community is undergoing a change in situations (the SSPX) I feel the need to point out that hypocrisy.

If the LDS are somehow wrong in declaring their change, and by that change this “proves” themselves to be false (which is exactly what the OP does in his threads and is doing in this one), then the very same rules apply to the ecclesial community that the OP belongs to. It would only be fair to have the same standard for both sides, would it not?
 
Among_Strangers said:
If you open a thread directed at calling into question an ecclesial communities actions based upon a change in situations (allowing black men to be priests as in the case with the OP) when at the same time your own ecclesial community is undergoing a change in situations (the SSPX) I feel the need to point out that hypocrisy.

If the LDS are somehow wrong in declaring their change, and by that change this “proves” themselves to be false (which is exactly what the OP does in his threads and is doing in this one), then the very same rules apply to the ecclesial community that the OP belongs to. It would only be fair to have the same standard for both sides, would it not?
Click to expand...
You are not compairing apples to apples. The reason that these men were excommunicated was because they ordained priests without permission and they publically stated that the NO form of the mass was invalid. Again, the excommunication was intended to get them to repent. They did, and so it is lifted. IT does not mean that they were right about anything and it certainly does not mean that the CHurch changed her mind.

A better example would be if the CHurch suddenly said that women can be ordained.

Do not forget that there are writtings by BY and others that say that dark skin represents an unholy soul and that minorities are denied the priesthood because they are inferior and inherently not as holy.

The change was a radical departure from classic LDS thought.
 
Among_Strangers said:
If Pope John Paul II was the real pope of the Catholic Church when he excommunicated the SSPX “Bishops” then how come Pope Pope Benedict XVI lifted the excommunications on Richard Williamson and the other SSPX’ers?

Does the knife cut both ways or do only Mormon feet get held to the fire?
Click to expand...
Hence the title of this thread. A.S. actually believes the two examples are similar. What would be similar is if the Holy Father suddenly said that women could be ordained or the Eucahrist is not the Boddy & Blood of Jesus Christ.

Don’t hold your breath Bill, I don’t believe you will get an answer either.

Peace!
 
Brigham Young second President and Prophet:

You see some classes of the human family that are black, uncouth, uncomely, disagreeable and low in their habits, wild and seemingly deprived of nearly all the blessings of the intelligence that is generally bestowed upon mankind. . . . Cain slew his brother. Cain might have been killed, and that would put a termination to that line of human beings. This was not to be, and the Lord put a mark upon him, which was the flat nose and black skin. Trace mankind down to after the flood, and then another cursed is pronounced upon the same race–that they should be the “servants of servants;” and they will be until that curse is removed; and the Abolitionists cannot help it, nor in the least alter that decree (Journal of Discourses, 7:290; emphasis added)

Shall I tell you the law of God in regard to the African race? If the white man who belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the law of God, is death on the spot. This will always be (ibid., 10:110; emphasis added)

Brigham Young stated that his sermons (as cited above) are Scripture:

I have never yet preached a sermon and sent it out to the children of man, that they may not call Scripture (ibid., 13:95).

Does the Mormon church allow one prophet to overturn the teachings of another? And if so, then how can you trust or believe in the teachings of any of your prophets if they may change their teachings?
 
This is probably why you won’t get an answer:

Other Mormons will simply “avoid” speaking about it altogether. They say, “I have to go, I have a meeting to attend!” or some other thing as that. They ignorantly believe that “Blacks and the Priesthood Questions” (“BPQs”) will simply “pass away” and be forgotten if they simply don’t “deal” with it.
 
This subject is clearly a thorn in the Mormon church. Because of their teaching for 150 years that the black man was cursed and all of their well kept documents, this is one item they cannot explain away. This clearly shows to any discerning man that the Mormon church is not the true church established by Christ.
 
BILL PICK said:
If Brigham Young was a true prophet, how come one of your later prophets overturned his declaration which stated that the black man could never hold the priesthood in the LDS Church until after the resurrection of all other races (Journal of Discourses (1854) 2:142-143)
Click to expand...
There was a time when Rome accepted Black seminarians that were not accepted in the U.S. Catholic seminaries.
 
mark_a said:
There was a time when Rome accepted Black seminarians that were not accepted in the U.S. Catholic seminaries.
Click to expand...
Correct.

I have a cousin who grew up with me here in Alabama. When he joined the Army, he was shocked to learn that there are black Catholics. Here in Alabama, there are some, but not as many as there are in other parts of the Country. In ALabama, non-Catholic Churches are the last great bastion of segregation. No, it is not intentional or forced, but we do not worship as a people.

The fact is that Mormons kept a segregation rule in effect long after it was made illeagle in America and a majority of people were publically against it.
 
When the Mormon missionaries came knocking on my door, I had a conversation with them, and one of the things I asked them was how their church could have discriminated against blacks for so many years, and I quoted the verse that says that in Christ there is neither Jew nor Greek.

The missionary said something to the effect of “Ah, neither Jew nor Greek; it doesn’t say anything about blacks!” Then he gave me the spiel about the mark of Cain, &c.,

I was a little bit shocked.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top