Where can I find the Mormon teaching on Africans being fallen Angels?

[estesbob]

Parker:

Your argument, “For the revelation about the “timing being right” to be received, the twelve apostles needed to be absolutely united about this timing, with absolutely no lingering hesitation,” is not compatible with the strong racist comments of early Mormon Prophets and Apostles.

For the “timing” argument to work; one would have to believe that God gives false prophecies, until the people are ready to receive true prophecies. This is not a principle I can accept.

Which is a prblam with every Christian denomionation . The Catholic Church is the only one who can trace its doctrines back to the Apostles.

 

[amontoya]

That is how the quorum of the Twelve works–it must be united on a vote, and that unity must be from the heart and soul of each of those men voting. It had been discussed many times, and when the prophet could sense that there was a unified feeling, then he would feel the time was right to ask Heavenly Father for the revelation that would be unitedly received by both the Twelve and the membership of the church. That came in 1978.

ParkerD,
So, everybody agrees about the right decision, and then the prophet asks God to reveal the truth?

 

[Anna_Scott]

Your argument, “For the revelation about the “timing being right” to be received, the twelve apostles needed to be absolutely united about this timing, with absolutely no lingering hesitation,” is not compatible with the strong racist comments of early Mormon Prophets and Apostles.

For the “timing” argument to work; one would have to believe that God gives false prophecies, until the people are ready to receive true prophecies. This is not a principle I can accept.

Which is a prblam with every Christian denomionation . The Catholic Church is the only one who can trace its doctrines back to the Apostles.

I agree that this is an issue beyond Mormonism. The following are quotes from the Thread entitled, “In 1835 Mormons taught that Father was a spirit.”

Link: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=390713

. . .I really don’t care what the mormons said in the past. I have no concern about it. Likewise, I have no concern about what past popes said and they said much too. I am only concerned with the now and the with the future.

. . . All can play that game since the past contains skeletons within every religion because religion is made up of living human beings who were not or are not perfect.

why me:

I think it is critical to understand the origins of our religions. I am a Christian in the Protestant Sector; but I am not a fan of Luther or Calvin–I think many of their teachings were very wrong and led many astray. I speak of this often on the Forums.

So, that, in addition to a long list of other reasons (including my experience with the Mormon Church) causes me to question what I have been taught in the Protestant Sector–and it should. I struggle with this every day and continue to pray and study.

So, our origins do matter. One of the main issues with Mormonism is the claim that your Church Presidents are “Prophets.”

When one claims to be a prophet and teaches the church according to “revelations” from God; his words must be absolutely true. Otherwise, he fails the test of a true prophet.

If your founder and 1st Mormon Prophet, Joseph Smith; and the 2nd Mormon Prophet, Brigham Young, proclaimed revelations from God that turned out to be false; what basis do you have for the Mormon religion? False prophecies = false prophets = Mormonism crumbles.

I keep posting this Scripture, because it is so important:

Deuteronomy Chapter 18:

20 But the prophet who presumes to speak a word in my name that I have not commanded him to speak, or who speaks in the name of other gods, that same prophet shall die.’

21 And if you say in your heart, ‘How may we know the word that the LORD has not spoken?’

— 22 when a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the word does not come to pass or come true, that is a word that the LORD has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously. You need not be afraid of him.

If your founding “Prophets” cannot pass this test; you are burying your head in the sand, every time you say, “I really don’t care what the Mormons said in the past.”

Somehow, we must find the courage to investigate and test the origins of our “indoctrination.” I am not saying this is easy. If it were, I would not be somewhere between Protestantism and Catholicism. I understand “holding on.”

I pray that God will give us both the courage to find His truth, Anna

 

[ParkerD]

So…all other peoples were ready for this except those of African descent?

TheosisM,
No. There are different ways whereby God opens the door for the people who are “ready” as a group to make such covenants. There are countries where the gospel door is unopened. Such an opening would have partly to do with the people being ready to accept the kind of covenants discussed as to temple and priesthood covenants. Also, “the first (meaning the Jews) shall be last,” meaning as a group they have not been considered “ready” by the Lord, and it is His timetable we are talking about. There is a difference in that individual Jews and individual people from certain “closed door” countries have made those covenants and that will help to open the door in the future, but those of African descent are not “last” and those making such covenants are flourishing.

 

[dianaiad]

Where can I find the Mormon teaching on Africans being fallen Angels? and the

I dunno.

I’ve never heard of it.

Diana

 

[dianaiad]

ParkerD:

I will ask you the same question, I asked on another thread this morning: How did you obtain the authority to reject the beliefs of your early Prophets and Apostles?

If the teachings of early Prophets are wrong, then doesn’t that make them false Prophets?

Anna

No, it simply makes them human. Moses was wrong about bats being birds…does that make him a false prophet?

The problem we have here is that with the early prophets and apostles, we have no real idea of what their opinions were; what we have of them is the stuff they were right about.

For the most recent batch of prophets/apostles, we have far more than the stuff that ends up as scripture. Now Catholics have this doctrine of Papal infallibility; but does that mean you believe that every word that comes out of the man’s mouth is equal to scripture? Doesn’t there have to be something else going on, too?

Finally, the idea that one revelation can’t come along and alter an earlier one is pretty silly, when you have Jesus doing precisely that. For instance, at first His gospel was to be preached only to Jews. After awhile, that instruction was expanded to include gentiles. Does that mean, then, that Jesus is false because he said something different now than He did a bit ago?

No?

Well, here’s another example: When Jesus first sent His desciples out, He told them to take a sword with them to defend themselves, and provisions. Later He sent them out without 'purse or scrip…" (though I don’t remember anything about leaving the sword at home, come to think of it…) Does that mean that He was wrong the FIRST time?

Let us look at Jonah, he of the big mouth and the rebellious spirit: he prophecied to the folks at Nineveh that if they didn’t repent, that their city would be raized to the ground and they would be destroyed. It wasn’t. Does that make Jonah a false prophet–(he was certainly upset enough about it…)? Or does it mean that something else happened to change things…like Nineveh repenting?

Finally…the reason we have modern prophets who recieve revelation when needed is to A; keep us from going off the doctrinal rails, and B; to bring us sharply back when we’ve gone too far down an inaccurate sidepath. That is, after all, what we claim to have happened in the very early church; there WERE no more prophets recieving revelation to jerk the dogma and doctrine back on the trail, so everybody wandered off…

 

[ParkerD]

ParkerD,
So, everybody agrees about the right decision, and then the prophet asks God to reveal the truth?

Amontoya,
The way God “reveals the truth” by the power of the Holy Spirit is most often by the kind of “burning in the bosom” that the two disciples experienced on the road to Emmaus. That burning in the bosom comes as questions are asked of God, but also as those who have the Spirit in their lives discuss a doctrine and “feel” that a teaching or a decision is right as they do that.

The revelation being discussed here is a revelation about timing, not about doctrine. The doctrine was in place, that through Abraham’s seed “all the nations of the earth” would be blessed with the full blessings of the gospel. When the gospel first was taken to the Gentiles as noted in Acts, then that was a revelation about timing also. The apostles discussed the matter, and Peter was voice for the unified decision that was reached.

These things are not one time events, either. The apostles had discussed this issue many, many times, and the prophet and they had prayed for inspiration many, many times, to carry out the will of the Lord. When the timing was right, the Holy Spirit confirmed that it was right and the prayers that had been offered many, many times were answered with the burning in the bosom and a clarity of thought and a unanimity of feeling within their hearts that confirmed to each one that God had answered the prayers and the longing, and this was the precise time for the priesthood and temple blessings to be made available to all.

 

[zaffiroborant]

TheosisM,
No. There are different ways whereby God opens the door for the people who are “ready” as a group to make such covenants. There are countries where the gospel door is unopened. Such an opening would have partly to do with the people being ready to accept the kind of covenants discussed as to temple and priesthood covenants. Also, “the first (meaning the Jews) shall be last,” meaning as a group they have not been considered “ready” by the Lord, and it is His timetable we are talking about. There is a difference in that individual Jews and individual people from certain “closed door” countries have made those covenants and that will help to open the door in the future, but those of African descent are not “last” and those making such covenants are flourishing.

This whole paragraph seems to be saying just what TheosisM said. Especially in light of the fact that all the other “not ready” groups got to send in those to “help open the door” perhaps it was this denial of forerunners that made the LDS hearts so hard against the blacks.

So…all other peoples were ready for this except those of African descent?

 

[Anna_Scott]

No, it simply makes them human. Moses was wrong about bats being birds…does that make him a false prophet?

The problem we have here is that with the early prophets and apostles, we have no real idea of what their opinions were; what we have of them is the stuff they were right about.

For the most recent batch of prophets/apostles, we have far more than the stuff that ends up as scripture. Now Catholics have this doctrine of Papal infallibility; but does that mean you believe that every word that comes out of the man’s mouth is equal to scripture? Doesn’t there have to be something else going on, too?

Finally, the idea that one revelation can’t come along and alter an earlier one is pretty silly, when you have Jesus doing precisely that. For instance, at first His gospel was to be preached only to Jews. After awhile, that instruction was expanded to include gentiles. Does that mean, then, that Jesus is false because he said something different now than He did a bit ago?

No?

Well, here’s another example: When Jesus first sent His desciples out, He told them to take a sword with them to defend themselves, and provisions. Later He sent them out without 'purse or scrip…" (though I don’t remember anything about leaving the sword at home, come to think of it…) Does that mean that He was wrong the FIRST time?

Let us look at Jonah, he of the big mouth and the rebellious spirit: he prophecied to the folks at Nineveh that if they didn’t repent, that their city would be raized to the ground and they would be destroyed. It wasn’t. Does that make Jonah a false prophet–(he was certainly upset enough about it…)? Or does it mean that something else happened to change things…like Nineveh repenting?

Finally…the reason we have modern prophets who recieve revelation when needed is to A; keep us from going off the doctrinal rails, and B; to bring us sharply back when we’ve gone too far down an inaccurate sidepath. That is, after all, what we claim to have happened in the very early church; there WERE no more prophets recieving revelation to jerk the dogma and doctrine back on the trail, so everybody wandered off…

A true Prophet of God does not make even one false prophecy.

It doesn’t matter how you try to justify the false prophecies of Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, and others: false prophecy = false prophets = false religion = Mormonism crumbles.

Either the Prophet meets the requirements of Deuteronomy Chapter 18, or the Prophet does not.

Deuteronomy Chapter 18:

20 But the prophet who presumes to speak a word in my name that I have not commanded him to speak, or who speaks in the name of other gods, that same prophet shall die.’

21 And if you say in your heart, ‘How may we know the word that the LORD has not spoken?’

— 22 when a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the word does not come to pass or come true, that is a word that the LORD has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously. You need not be afraid of him.

 

[ParkerD]

This whole paragraph seems to be saying just what TheosisM said. Especially in light of the fact that all the other “not ready” groups got to send in those to “help open the door” perhaps it was this denial of forerunners that made the LDS hearts so hard against the blacks.

Zaffiroborant,
The Blacks in a few countries in Africa had their “forerunners” in terms of key leaders and whole groups of people who had learned about the Book of Mormon and Joseph Smith, and who felt the Spirit and wanted the full blessings of the gospel, but were waiting for the Lord’s timing. There are documented accounts of their experiences. They certainly did help “open the door,” and provided consistent examples to those around them of having patience and faith. They didn’t give up, nor did they protest. They could be baptized and receive the wonderful gift of the Holy Ghost. They still studied the doctrines of the gospel, and were fed by the Spirit and by a personal relationship with the Savior.

 

[PaulDupre]

No, it simply makes them human. Moses was wrong about bats being birds…does that make him a false prophet?

So you are equating

a) mistaking a bat for a bird

to

b) claiming that God told you that the mark of Cain was a black skin and black skin is a curse due to sin, and black people are born black because they sided with Satan in the war in heaven so God made them black so that white people would not interbreed with them and if a white person does interbreed with a black person they are to be put to death on the spot and and so the seed of Cain are black and have no place among white folks and are not worthy to be priests.

Yeah, those two things are about the same…we get that, don’t we guys?

 

[maryjk]

Why would god wait for 150 or so years to correct this false teaching? Are all Mormon doctrines subject to change at the whim of the current president?

Good question,

Does that mean that in the future, when Utah isn’t trying to gain statehood, plural marriages will come back? Or are they already testing the waters for that change?

 

[zaffiroborant]

Zaffiroborant,
The Blacks in a few countries in Africa had their “forerunners” in terms of key leaders and whole groups of people who had learned about the Book of Mormon and Joseph Smith, and who felt the Spirit and wanted the full blessings of the gospel, but were waiting for the Lord’s timing. There are documented accounts of their experiences. They certainly did help “open the door,” and provided consistent examples to those around them of having patience and faith. They didn’t give up, nor did they protest. They could be baptized and receive the wonderful gift of the Holy Ghost. They still studied the doctrines of the gospel, and were fed by the Spirit and by a personal relationship with the Savior.

But unlike other not ready groups they could not hold the priesthood, something given to every worthy LDS boy except black boys. There is no leadership in the LDS church that doesn’t require priesthood. So no there were no true leaders in Africa just black men who had to ask white men to baptize their children, give a blessing to their wives and children, bless the sacrament. What kind of leadership can’t even give a healing blessing to their own kids, who has to say (because he’s black) please my wife is sick would you bless her? And this was until 1978 how repugnant.

And just curious, can an LDS woman be sealed to a man who does not hold the priesthood?

 

[PaulDupre]

And just curious, can an LDS woman be sealed to a man who does not hold the priesthood?

No.

 

[zaffiroborant]

No.

So up until 1978 no forever black families? Or did the black people just have to trust that someone would do the work for them? How can LDS say nothing was held back from black members???

It just gets uglier and uglier.

 

[PaulDupre]

So up until 1978 no forever black families? Or did the black people just have to trust that someone would do the work for them? How can LDS say nothing was held back from black members???

Joseph Fielding Smith, tenth president of the LDS church, taught that black people were denied the full blessings of the gospel:

Not only was Cain called upon to suffer, but because of his wickedness he became the father of an inferior race. A curse was place upon him and that curse has been continued through his lineage and must do so while time endures. Millions of souls have come into this world cursed with black skin and have been denied the privilege of Priesthood and the fullness of the blessings of the Gospel. (The Way to Perfection, 101; emphasis added).

 

[ParkerD]

So up until 1978 no forever black families? Or did the black people just have to trust that someone would do the work for them? How can LDS say nothing was held back from black members???

It just gets uglier and uglier.

Zaffiroborant,
I agree that on the surface, such policies do not make sense from the perspective of one thinking that God should be fair in His dealings with His children. Nor does it make sense that one who had studied scripture all his life such as Joseph Fielding Smith, would write a book long before becoming president of the LDS church in which he wrote what Paul noted that he wrote. It was wrong. His son-in-law, Bruce R McConkie, later said it was wrong doctrine, and was not a correct teaching at all.

If we look at human history and some of the dealings written up in the Bible about what God inspired the prophets to do with regard to people living around them, and think about it objectively, then I think a person will come to the conclusion that God has not seemed fair more than once in the history of the world. I think we do not have His perspective. I think the point at which we will be able to say “God has been fair” is when we see as He sees, and when all the temple work for everyone who wants temple blessings has been done. But up until that time, I don’t think very many people if anyone are going to be able to honestly and objectively say that God has been fair in how human history has played out.

 

[maryjk]

What people have to remember here is that Mormons believe in continuous revelation. They believe that whoever is in charge TODAY has the power to change everything they believe in. It has happened in the past, it could happen today.

Once Polygamy was required for salvation. Now if you follow that teaching you are excommunicated.
Once abortion was a no-no. Now, not so much.
Once Adam was God. Now he isn’t
And, once blacks were not allowed to enter the priesthood. Now they are.

God changes his mind on important matters of faith, if you are Mormon.

 

[ParkerD]

What people have to remember here is that Mormons believe in continuous revelation. They believe that whoever is in charge TODAY has the power to change everything they believe in. It has happened in the past, it could happen today.

Once Polygamy was required for salvation. Now if you follow that teaching you are excommunicated.
Once abortion was a no-no. Now, not so much.
Once Adam was God. Now he isn’t
And, once blacks were not allowed to enter the priesthood. Now they are.

God changes his mind on important matters of faith, if you are Mormon.

Maryjk,
Anyone who believes the words you wrote in your post above (which have been discussed many times and are not as you wrote at all), will believe just about anything about anyone they happen to disagree with.

 

[Anna_Scott]

What people have to remember here is that Mormons believe in continuous revelation. They believe that whoever is in charge TODAY has the power to change everything they believe in. It has happened in the past, it could happen today.

Once Polygamy was required for salvation. Now if you follow that teaching you are excommunicated.
Once abortion was a no-no. Now, not so much.
Once Adam was God. Now he isn’t
And, once blacks were not allowed to enter the priesthood. Now they are.

God changes his mind on important matters of faith, if you are Mormon.

Maryjk,
Anyone who believes the words you wrote in your post above (which have been discussed many times and are not as you wrote at all), will believe just about anything about anyone they happen to disagree with.

Parker:

Which of his statements are false and which are true?

Anna