Mothers Day: Report from a Mormon ward (parish)

[PaulDupre]

You are confusing details (KFD being a service for a man who died).

Wrong. The King Follett Discourse was given in General Conference. Joseph was moved to give this conference talk by the death of his friend King Follett, but it was no off-the-cuff graveside sermon. The intro to the sermon says:

A Discourse, by President Joseph Smith, delivered at the Conference held near the Temple, in Nauvoo, April 6, 1844. Reported by W. Richards, W. Woodruff, T. Bullock, and W. Clayton

When the prophet gives a talk in general conference, it is official church doctrine. Besides, the prophet himself in the text of the talk declares it to be doctrine.

Paul

 

[majick275]

you know I keep hearing that people know all about LDS beliefs and than I read this stuff and I’m reminded that people have a hard time keeping the simple stuff straight.

I’ve NEVER seen anyone teach the dark skin was a curse.

then you need to read the BoM (2 nephi 5) you obviously never listened to or read any of mark e petersen’s talks on the subject. Brigham young cetainly taught it.

It has at times been an indicator of a persons linage (duh),

like Cain

but dark skin was never a curse.

once again read 2nephi 5

It God’s church he gets to pick who get s the Priesthood and when.

yet yo seem to ignoer what jesus taught the sanhedrin on this very subject (matthew 3)

Linage is a big deal to us yes, but it is not as big as keeping Gods commandments.

funny way of keeping them in the ealry LDs days at least

Your view in Christ’s commandments on marriage is that your view.

uhh it’s jesus view expressed in the bible.

The Father Son and Holy Ghost are One God just not the same person.

you veer from the slippery slope of "godhead."your sentence here is catholic. that’s exactly what we believe.

You are confusing details (KFD being a service for a man who died).

no it is you who seem to be in error here. the funeral sermon fro elder follett was given by JS at general conference on april 7, 1844. you can easily verify that at byu.

The “Adam-God” theory is one of the most abused probable slips of the tongue in history. Adam’s high standing in the premortal realm is well taught, but the nonsense that Adam was God the Father is just that nonsense.

yet Brigham young is on record as saying just that (general conference april 9 1852, emphasized again in 1861 and 1873, and the 1877 temple ceremony during the lecture at the veil) there was the 1856 LDS hymn “we beleive in our God” and hinkley admitted that BY taught that. (interview with the new yorker january 2002) not so wild if you believe in an infinite progression of exalted mortal men. some LDs apologists have even used a two adams theory to show the cycle of doing what has been done other worlds

 

[teancum79]

Wrong. The King Follett Discourse was given in General Conference. Joseph was moved to give this conference talk by the death of his friend King Follett, but it was no off-the-cuff graveside sermon. The intro to the sermon says:

When the prophet gives a talk in general conference, it is official church doctrine. Besides, the prophet himself in the text of the talk declares it to be doctrine.

Paul

I’ll have to look into the “conference status” the one I read said it was a service for King. That God looks like we do and is a man made perfect etc. is still taught today. Granted it is not taught as often as faith and repentance, but it is still taught.

 

[teancum79]

then you need to read the BoM (2 nephi 5) you obviously never listened to or read any of mark e petersen’s talks on the subject. Brigham young cetainly taught it.

like Cain

once again read 2nephi 5

yet yo seem to ignoer what jesus taught the sanhedrin on this very subject (matthew 3)

funny way of keeping them in the ealry LDs days at least
uhh it’s jesus view expressed in the bible.

you veer from the slippery slope of "godhead."your sentence here is catholic. that’s exactly what we believe.
no it is you who seem to be in error here. the funeral sermon fro elder follett was given by JS at general conference on april 7, 1844. you can easily verify that at byu.
yet Brigham young is on record as saying just that (general conference april 9 1852, emphasized again in 1861 and 1873, and the 1877 temple ceremony during the lecture at the veil) there was the 1856 LDS hymn “we beleive in our God” and hinkley admitted that BY taught that. (interview with the new yorker january 2002) not so wild if you believe in an infinite progression of exalted mortal men. some LDs apologists have even used a two adams theory to show the cycle of doing what has been done other worlds

If the CC has changed it mind on the nature of God I would be interested to here it. Because all the Catholics I’ve talked to have a very different view.

I’m starting to wonder what passes for “reading” around here did you read 2 nephi 5? You know its posts like yours that make me really wonder if I should take serious anything that gets posted.
Come on at least try to pay attention to what is said. I know in some cases we have limited availability of resources, but the official LDS web page has the scriptures you could at least check them before mis misrepresenting them.

Matt 3 was dealing with those who felt to justify their sins beacuse of their linage. Such where in error.

As to the nature of God before he was God there is so little scripture on the subject I’m going to stay away from that one.
That our Adam is not the same guy as God the Father is clear.

 

[PaulDupre]

I’ve NEVER seen anyone teach the dark skin was a curse. It has at times been an indicator of a persons linage (duh), but dark skin was never a curse.

Dark skin was never a curse? You should read the Book of Mormon sometime.

2 Nephi 5:21:

“And he had caused the cursing to come upon them, yea, even a sore cursing, because of their iniquity. For behold, they had hardened their hearts against him, and they had become like unto a flint; 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.”

Then there’s another reference to a change in skin color:

3 Nephi 2:15:

“And their curse was taken from them, and their skin became white like unto the Nephites.”

Paul

 

[ibkc]

I’ve NEVER seen anyone teach the dark skin was a curse. It has at times been an indicator of a persons linage (duh), but dark skin was never a curse.

So the phrase “white and delightsome” means nothing to you?

 

[ibkc]

I’ve NEVER seen anyone teach the dark skin was a curse. It has at times been an indicator of a persons linage (duh), but dark skin was never a curse.

Forgive me but I am having a hard time letting this one pass.

1. 
   *]1 Nephi 11:13 (Mary) “. . . she was exceedingly fair and white.”
   *]1 Nephi 12:23 (Prophecy of Lamanites after Christ) “. . . became a dark, and loathsome, and a filthy people, full of idleness and all manner of abominations.”
   *]1 Nephi 13:15 (Gentiles) “. . . they were white, and exceedingly fair and beautiful, like unto my people [Nephites] before they were slain.”
   *]2 Nephi 5:21 “. . . a sore cursing . . . 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.”
   *]2 Nephi 30:6 (Prophecy to Lamanites) “. . . scales of darkness shall begin to fall . . . they shall be a white and delightsome people.” (Changed to pure and delightsome in 1981)
   *]Jacob 3:5 (Lamanites cursed) “. . .whom ye hate because of their filthiness and the cursing which hath come upon their skins. . .”
   *]Jacob 3:8-9 “. . .their skins will be whiter than yours . . . revile no more against them because of the darkness of their skins . . .”
   *]Alma 3:6 “. . . 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. . .”
   *]Alma 3:8 (Cursed) “. . .that their seed might be distinguished from the seed of their brethren . . .that they might not mix . . .”
   *]Alma 3:9 “. . . whosoever did mingle his seed with that of the Lamanites did bring the same curse upon his seed.”
   *]Alma 3:14 (Lamanites cursed) “. . . set a mark on them that they and their seed may be separated from thee and thy seed. . .”
   *]Alma 3:19 (Amlicites cursed) “. . . brought upon themselves the curse …”
   *]Alma 23:18 “. . . [Lamanites] did open a correspondence with them [Nephites] and the curse of God did no more follow them.”
   *]3 Nephi 2:14-16 “. . . Lamanites who had united with the Nephites were numbered among the Nephites; And their curse was taken from them, and their skin became white like unto the Nephites . . . became exceedingly fair . . .”
   *]3 Nephi 19:25, 30 (Disciples) “. . . they were as white as the countenance and also the garments of Jesus; and behold the whiteness thereof did exceed all the whiteness . . . nothing upon earth so white as the whiteness thereof . . . they were white, even as Jesus.”
   *]Mormon 5:15 (Prophecy about Lamanites) “. . .shall become a dark, a filthy, and a loathsome people, beyond the description of that which ever hath been amongst us . . .”
   *]Mormon 5:17 “They were once a delightsome people . . .”
   **
   **

 

[teancum79]

Forgive me but I am having a hard time letting this one pass.

1. 
   *]1 Nephi 11:13 (Mary) “. . . she was exceedingly fair and white.”
   *]1 Nephi 12:23 (Prophecy of Lamanites after Christ) “. . . became a dark, and loathsome, and a filthy people, full of idleness and all manner of abominations.”
   *]1 Nephi 13:15 (Gentiles) “. . . they were white, and exceedingly fair and beautiful, like unto my people [Nephites] before they were slain.”
   *]2 Nephi 5:21 “. . . a sore cursing . . . 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.”
   *]2 Nephi 30:6 (Prophecy to Lamanites) “. . . scales of darkness shall begin to fall . . . they shall be a white and delightsome people.” (Changed to pure and delightsome in 1981)
   *]Jacob 3:5 (Lamanites cursed) “. . .whom ye hate because of their filthiness and the cursing which hath come upon their skins. . .”
   *]Jacob 3:8-9 “. . .their skins will be whiter than yours . . . revile no more against them because of the darkness of their skins . . .”
   *]Alma 3:6 “. . . 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. . .”
   *]Alma 3:8 (Cursed) “. . .that their seed might be distinguished from the seed of their brethren . . .that they might not mix . . .”
   *]Alma 3:9 “. . . whosoever did mingle his seed with that of the Lamanites did bring the same curse upon his seed.”
   *]Alma 3:14 (Lamanites cursed) “. . . set a mark on them that they and their seed may be separated from thee and thy seed. . .”
   *]Alma 3:19 (Amlicites cursed) “. . . brought upon themselves the curse …”
   *]Alma 23:18 “. . . [Lamanites] did open a correspondence with them [Nephites] and the curse of God did no more follow them.”
   *]3 Nephi 2:14-16 “. . . Lamanites who had united with the Nephites were numbered among the Nephites; And their curse was taken from them, and their skin became white like unto the Nephites . . . became exceedingly fair . . .”
   *]3 Nephi 19:25, 30 (Disciples) “. . . they were as white as the countenance and also the garments of Jesus; and behold the whiteness thereof did exceed all the whiteness . . . nothing upon earth so white as the whiteness thereof . . . they were white, even as Jesus.”
   *]Mormon 5:15 (Prophecy about Lamanites) “. . .shall become a dark, a filthy, and a loathsome people, beyond the description of that which ever hath been amongst us . . .”
   *]Mormon 5:17 “They were once a delightsome people . . .”
   **
   **

1. 
   Wow.
   the “fair and white” was referring to the gentiles from Europe I think the description is accurate.
   
   Your little … tick is low and misleading.
   
   2 ne 5 makes it clear that the people where cursed beacuse of their sins and that they where also given dark skin. when you … the vital details of a sentence you destroy the meaning.
   
   Why won’t you be honest in this discussion?
   
   If your so stinking right you would not have to misrepresent the BoM’s teachings
   
   Grow up a little. I starting to see why a catholic friend said this was not good representation of the catholic fatih pulling dirty tricks like that is uncalled for immature dishonest and just plan rude.
   

 

[PaulDupre]

Dark skin was never a curse? You should read your prophets sometime.

Blacks are born black due to their disobedience in the pre-existence:

There is a reason why one man is born black and with other disadvantages, while another is born white with great advantages. The reason is that we once had an estate before we came here, and were obedient; more or less, to the laws that were given us there. Those who were faithful in all things there [pre-existence] received greater blessings here, and those who were not faithful received less. . . . There were no neutrals in the war in Heaven. All took sides either with Christ or with Satan. Every man had his agency there, and men receive rewards here based upon their actions there, just as they will receive rewards hereafter for deeds done in the body. The Negro, evidently, is receiving the reward he merits (Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, 1:61, 65-66)

Those who were less valiant in pre-existence and who thereby had certain spiritual restrictions impose on them during mortality are known to us as the negroes. Such spirits are sent to earth through the lineage of Cain, the mark put upon him for his rebellion against God, and his murder of Able being a black skin. . . . Noah’s son married Egyptus, a descendant of Cain, thus preserving the negro lineage through the flood. . . . the negro are not equal with other races where the receipt of certain spiritual blessings are concern. . . . " (Mormon Doctrine, 527-28; 1966 orig. ed., changed in the current ed.; emphasis added)

The curse of Cain was black skin and a flat nose:

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 (President Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses,  7:290)

**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)

Continued…

 

[teancum79]

“Mormon Doctrine” had several errors (not that it has ever been official) and the JOD is as reliable as the weather predictions.

 

[ibkc]

2 ne 5 makes it clear that the people where cursed beacuse of their sins and that they where also given dark skin.

You very clearly stated that dark skin was never said to be a curse, when it very clearly has always been taught that dark skin is a curse. The BoM is full of that kind of racism, and there is more of it in The Pearl of Great Price. The very premise is racist - deeply so, and in a way that is very specific to the attitudes of early 19th-century white Americans. This, to me, is the No. 1 way to know that Mormonism is an invention of man.

 

[PaulDupre]

John Taylor, third President and Prophet:

after the flood we are told that the curse that had been pronounced upon Cain was continued through Ham’s wife, as he had married a wife of that seed. And why did it pass through the flood? Because it was necessary that the devil should have a representation upon the earth as well as God. . . . (John Taylor, Journal of Discourses, 23:304).

Taylor goes on to teach:

When he [Satan] destroyed the inhabitants of the antediluvian worlds, he suffered a descendant of Cain to come through the flood in order that he might be properly represented upon the earth (ibid., 23:336).

Wilford Woodruff, who became the fourth President and Prophet of the LDS Church:

What was that mark? It was a mark of blackness. That mark rested upon Cain, and descended upon his posterity from that time until the present. To day there are millions of the descendants of Cain, through the lineage of Ham, in the world, and that mark of darkness still rest upon them (Millennial Star, 51:339).

This is just a small sample of the dozens of quotes about the curse of dark skin from LDS prophets and apostles. But you get the idea.

Paul

 

[teancum79]

well that makes lying so right. Come on your view on why some wording was used= its okay to lie about what others think and believe. Dang that sure make me think the CC is teaching honesty so well.

 

[PaulDupre]

“Mormon Doctrine” had several errors (not that it has ever been official) and the JOD is as reliable as the weather predictions.

You fail to see a consistent pattern in these teachings published by your own church?

 

[teancum79]

You fail to see a consistent pattern in these teachings published by your own church?

No. Mormon Doctrine and the DOJ are not published by the church. They are not considered to be authoritative. the DOJ in large part to its many errors. Anyone who pretends that these are authoritative needs to get some education. Yes they do have a lot in them that is right, but there are errors.

I’m not as familiar with the Doctirnes of salvation book and would be interested to see the entire context, but it looks like they where using the differing status of men to make a point. Not saying that dark skinned people are bad. That all men have the same divine potential is made clear time and time again.

 

[PaulDupre]

There is none so blind as he who will not see.

 

[ibkc]

well that makes lying so right. Come on your view on why some wording was used= its okay to lie about what others think and believe.

So you don’t believe that dark skin is a curse and white skin is a blessing?

utlm.org/images/curseofcain/curseofcain_p30.gif

“We understand that when God made man in his own image and pronounced him very good, he made him white. We have no record of any of God’s favored servants being of a black race.”

Wait! There’s more.

“Our engraving of a Negro is of this type. Their skin is quite black, their hair woolly and black, their intelligence stunted, and they appear to never have arisen from the most savage state of barbarism.”

 

[Stephen168]

What is JOD? Who wrote it?

 

[teancum79]

Oh I see you lie like a rug (sorry thats cheesy, but true) and than you think that finding “quotes” will somehow correct your sin or make me all of a sudden believe you.

 

[teancum79]

What is JOD? Who wrote it?

The JOD was a collection of talks given by LDS leaders. However it was never checked for accuracy before it was published. Even with todays high tech computers errors still get into written martial. Not to mention people mis speaking and being mis quoted.

Considering the books lake of validity (that what is written was said) It is not widely used by the church though it is quoted form time to time.