T
twopekinguys
Guest
If it doesn’t make a distinction, then it must be all inclusive right?
By the way, did you all miss my post at #149. Check it out.
- Status
By the way, did you all miss my post at #149. Check it out.
P
PaulDupre
Guest
“many Mormons”??? We’re talking about the Prophets, Seers and Revelators, not the average Mormon.
If the Prophets, Seers and Revelators who are supposed to be receiving divine revelation from God to guide the church can misunderstand the scriptures to such an extent and teach that race-hatred is God’s will, then they are not prophets, seers or revelators at all. They are just common religious con-men, like those TV preachers we see on CBN.
It seems you are admitting just that - that the LDS General Authorities are no different than the ordinary mormons in the pews. They have no more spiritual insight, no deeper communication with God and no better religious teaching than any other Mormon.
So why should anyone follow them? They may as well follow Benny Hinn.
A
aquabatix
Guest
So let me get this straight then. The ENTIRE church, starting with the First Presidency on down, from the origins of the church til 1978 ALL misunderstood their own scriptures because each quote relating to the priesthood ban mentions “negroes”?!?
It seems to me that YOU are the only one relating this curse/mark/ban to everyone EXCEPT West African Blacks. That is too much mental hurdles for me. Just as any TBM will tell you, they follow their prophet and what he says. Whether this be JS, BY or Monson. If they said it was from god, it was. When god changed his mind, he did. Stop pretending otherwise, it is simply childish.
It seems to me that YOU are the only one relating this curse/mark/ban to everyone EXCEPT West African Blacks. That is too much mental hurdles for me. Just as any TBM will tell you, they follow their prophet and what he says. Whether this be JS, BY or Monson. If they said it was from god, it was. When god changed his mind, he did. Stop pretending otherwise, it is simply childish.
A
Ahimsa
Guest
I say “many” because it’s not true that “all” Mormons have taught or practiced the “African priesthood ban”. For instance, Joseph Smith, Jr., ordained or allowed the ordination of a few African-Americans.
Starting in the Brigham Young years up to 1978, the African priesthood ban (APB) was adopted, but in the post-1978 era, one can no longer speak of “all” or “most” or even “hardly any” Prophets/Presidents or Average Joe Mormons who support the APB.
So, in a hundred years, how many Mormons in total will have supported APB and how many will have rejected APB? I wager a guess that as Mormons continues to exist in the future, the numbers of those who reject APB will vastly outnumber those (from 1840s to 1978) who supported APB.
In fact, it may be the case that as of now (2010) the numbers of the rejecters probably outnumbers the numbers of the supporters; so that one can no longer say that “most” Mormons have supported the APB.
A
Ahimsa
Guest
Joseph Smith didn’t adopt the ban.
In fact, one could speak of a “mini-apostasy”, in which the generation subsequent to Smith, up to 1978, mis-interpreted scripture in such a way that an African priest ban was adopted as policy.
A
Ahimsa
Guest
I’m simply asking for information:I don’t mean to be rude here, but if you really look at Ahimsa’s posts, you will see that you are chasing your tail.
Multiple attempts at deflection, along with ignoring information presented, then asking for it again.
Either they don’t understand, or they are enjoying the chase.
You decide.
Show me where the Mormon scriptures specifically mentions “Africans in general” or “West Africans” or “sub-Saharan Africans” in connection to a priesthood ban.
The texts that talk about a Cain/Ham curse is one thing. To extrapolate that curse, in order to make it apply to all Africans (or all “Black Africans”) is an unscripturally supported extrapolation, just like when Southern Confederates extrapolated from the Noah curse to the justification of enslaving Africans.
S
SirThomasMore
Guest
You can take it however makes you feel all warm and fuzzy. Since I was LDS and I know what it means when a prophet speaks (remember, it took a revelation to undo the ban) I know it was doctrine. Since the LDS Church does not just rely on Scriptures, your demand for scriptures is notrhing but a red herring that either shows your ignorance on this topic, or simply that you wish to debate a an issue that is nothing more than a deflectionI’ll take that to mean that you don’t have any quotes from Mormon scripture that specifically refers to West Africans (e.g., Yoruba) and the priesthood ban.
P
PaulDupre
Guest
This is a stupid argument, even for you. We are not talking about the rank-and-file. We are talking about the prophets and apostles. By that reckoning, the vast majority of prophets and apostles (from Brigham Young to Spencer W. Kimball) supported the ban on blacks in the priesthood. It is only since 1978 that some have supported lifting the ban, due to the imminent threat of losing their tax-exempt status.
Due to your continued dishonesty and non-sensical arguments, I will waste no more time on you. You are going on my ignore list.
P
PaulDupre
Guest
I didn’t miss it, but I should have heeded it sooner. She is now on ignore along with why me and the others.
T
twopekinguys
Guest
- I already addressed this. Numerous times in fact. Ultimately, if their scripture doesn’t make a distinct difference, then it is all inclusive. It really isn’t that hard to understand now is it?
- You say you want information? It has been provided multiple times. Also, it has been suggested that you do your own research. Which you have obviously not done.
- You continually try to deflect and bring up non-sensical issues, which only reinforce that you are not in this for any kind of learning experience.
- I agree with Paul, "Due to your continued dishonesty and non-sensical arguments, I will waste no more time on you. You are going on my ignore list.
A
aquabatix
Guest
Wow. This is amazing. The church that’s entire authority (and existence) relies upon the concept of a “great apostasy” of the Catholic Church, had an apostasy of its own for the first 130 years of its 170 year existence?!?!?!
Ha, I have to say, that one made me laugh out loud. BTW, just because the BoM doesn’t mention a specific people by name or place by name does not limit what the lds church declares as true. Where are the Nephite and Lamanite cities? Where is the hill Cummorah? Doesn’t say does it? But that doesn’t stop majority of the TBM from gathering in New York for the pagent every year does it?
Ha, I have to say, that one made me laugh out loud. BTW, just because the BoM doesn’t mention a specific people by name or place by name does not limit what the lds church declares as true. Where are the Nephite and Lamanite cities? Where is the hill Cummorah? Doesn’t say does it? But that doesn’t stop majority of the TBM from gathering in New York for the pagent every year does it?
A
Ahimsa
Guest
True, the LDS does not rely solely on Scripture, but is it not also true that whatever Prophetic revelations are received, are somehow noted or recorded in D&C?
If so, do you have any D&C documentation of the “African priesthood ban”? I suspect so, since the revocation of the APB in the D&C’s “Official Declarations”.
A
Ahimsa
Guest
Well, of course, I was being a bit facetious when I mentioned a “mini-apostasy”. But my main point is that, even if we do assume the African priesthood ban was – from the Mormon perspective – from God, that does not mean that God intended the ban to be forever. In fact, Mormons leaders had made it pretty clear that it wouldn’t be forever.
S
SirThomasMore
Guest
A
Ahimsa
Guest
Stephen168
New member
I have to wonder what other “mini-apostasies” are going on in the Mormon Church right now and they don’t even know it.
S
SirThomasMore
Guest
M
MelanieAnne
Guest
I actually find it remarkable that after numerous “prophets” and “apostles” of the LDS sect have testified, over decades, to the fact that the discrimination against blacks was doctrine and commanded by the Mormon god, that we now are presented with the excuse that it was all a big misunderstanding, that even the prophets of the sect got it wrong.
I realize that the racist roots of Mormonism may make 21st Century members uncomfortable, but whitewashing (pardon the pun) history serves no useful purpose and comes at a tremendous theological cost. Embedded in the “misunderstanding” theory is the fact that the “prophets, seers and revelators” of Mormonism have, in fact, NOT been “prophets, seers and revelators” for over 100 years, which, in turn, calls the entire Mormon construct into question.
I realize that the racist roots of Mormonism may make 21st Century members uncomfortable, but whitewashing (pardon the pun) history serves no useful purpose and comes at a tremendous theological cost. Embedded in the “misunderstanding” theory is the fact that the “prophets, seers and revelators” of Mormonism have, in fact, NOT been “prophets, seers and revelators” for over 100 years, which, in turn, calls the entire Mormon construct into question.
A
aquabatix
Guest
So now you admit the APB was from god, making it a doctrine which you tried to deny earlier, and are now saying that an apostacy is only temporary. GREAT! That means the “great apostacy” is not total and lasting. Apostacy over, Catholicism is the true faith, no need for Mormonism. You solved an even bigger issue then we were discussing! Thanks!!
A
Ahimsa
Guest
Ahimsa;6790413:
So, I take you would not disagree with the quote below?
B. H. Roberts, a General Authority of the LDS church, summarized the issue perhaps as well as anyone has:
The Church has confined the sources of doctrine by which it is willing to be bound before the world to the things that God has revealed, and which the Church has officially accepted, and those alone. These would include the Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, the Pearl of Great Price; these have been repeatedly accepted and endorsed by the Church in general conference assembled, and are the only sources of absolute appeal for our doctrine.
Since the African Priest Ban (APB) revocation is in the D&C, and since I haven’t seen anyone here quote from Mormon core scripture (which includes Prophet revelation) in support of the specifically African Priest Ban, then it seems clear that B. H. Roberts accurately describes the sources of LDS doctrine.
If that is true, then the APB is not part of core Mormon scripture/revelation – unless someone can show me otherwise.
- Status