Jason Horowitz of The Washington Post explored “The Genesis of a church’s stand on race” on Tuesday (2/28/12). Looking at the long-standing Mormon Church’s “ban on blacks in the priesthood,” which came to an end via revelation in 1978, Mr. Horowitz investigated the origins of the ban. He writes:
“More than three decades later [after the lifting of the ban], the church says it still doesn’t know where the ban came from.
“‘Though the origins of the priesthood restriction are unclear, it was understood that a change would require revelation,’ said church spokesman Michael Purdy, who called the lifting of the ban ‘a day of great rejoicing’ that led to ‘robust growth in Africa and racially diverse areas of the United States and Latin America.’”
Though the origins of the priesthood ban may be “unclear,” Mr. Horowitz spoke with someone who offered a suggestion:
“In his office, religion professor Randy Bott explains a possible theological underpinning of the ban. According to Mormon scriptures, the descendants of Cain, who slew his brother Abel, ‘were black.’ One of Cain’s descendants was Egyptus, a woman Mormons believe was the namesake of Egypt. She married Ham, whose descendants were themselves cursed and, in the view of many Mormons, barred from the priesthood by his father, Noah. Bott points to the Mormon holy text, the Book of Abraham, as suggesting that all of the descendents of Ham and Egyptus were thus black and barred from the priesthood.”
But Professor Bott does not believe withholding the priesthood from this race of people was “discrimination.”
“’God has always been discriminatory’ when it comes to whom he grants the authority of the priesthood, argues Bott, the BYU theologian. He quotes Mormon scripture which argues that the Lord gives to people ‘all that he seeth fit.’ Bott compares blacks to a young child prematurely asking for the keys to her father’s car, and explains that similarly until 1978, the Lord determined that blacks were not yet ready for the priesthood.
“’What is discrimination?’ Bott asks. ‘I think that is keeping something from somebody that would be a benefit for them, right? But what if it wouldn’t have been a benefit to them?’ Bott argues that the denial of the priesthood to blacks on earth — though not in the afterlife — protected them from the lowest rungs of hell reserved for people who abuse their priesthood powers. ‘You couldn’t fall off the top of the ladder because you weren’t on the top of the ladder. So, in reality the blacks not having the priesthood was the greatest blessing God could give them.’”
This leaves me speechless. I hereby relinquish the floor to you, readers.
“Woe to those who call evil good and good evil,
who put darkness for light and light for darkness,
who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!”
-Isaiah 5:20-
ADDENDUM: The LDS Church has responded to Professor Bott’s remarks. Find the LDS Newsroom Statement here.
I am shocked (though in reality I probably shouldn’t be after all my dealings with mormons) that they would state that they don’t know where the origins of the ban or where it came from. Lets start with the words of the “living prophets” at the time – they’re teachings are in abundance. Lets start with their scriptures – book of abraham for instance – speakst to it. Lets even go to their endowment play describing the events in their pre-existance and the origins of ‘dark and loathsome’. The more they seek to deny it – the more people will research and discover the truth they seek to obfuscate.
Botts’ comments are straight out of the Jim Crow South I grew up in. At least the South has taken responsibility for it’s past; something Mormons refuse to do.
I’m holding back here. That final quote just infuriates me. It is just more of the Mormon flim-flam, con job, crooked language that the religion is known for. The sad thing is that these people believe their own explanations and in turn make themselves out to be virtuous, righteous and all around wonderful in the process. Talk about distorted thinking. It makes you wonder if there isn’t some sort of psychological pathology inherent in this religion?
So they discriminate against blacks and then say, “Well it’s for their own good.” Project that to the attitudes of slave holders prior to abolishion and we can see that Mormonism was no better than a bunch of slave holders (in their attitudes). We always circle back to the mindset of the true believing Mormon which is “the church is true”. Because the LDS church is “true” then there must be an explanation to justify whatever it is the church does that is truly unacceptable.
I was at an LDS family member’s house when this came on the News yesterday. She was appalled that the Mormons just can’t say anything without people criticizing! After I picked my jaw up off the floor, we had a discussion about this and where this teaching came from. She was clueless and I don’t think she believed me either. She tried to compare it to a story she heard at church about an African couple who came here and attended a Presbyterian church and had to enter through the back door. I explained how racism in ANY form is wrong and not of God, yet there is a difference in someone being racist because of the culture and the times and saying that God commanded it. I don’t think I made a dent. I was shown yesterday just how deep the mind control can be with some LDS members. I say some now because I have seen that not all LDS are the way my friends and family are.
“It is not known precisely why, how, or when this restriction began in the Church but what is clear is that it ended decades ago.”
This floors me. I don’t know why the LDS church doesn’t just come out with their religion and beliefs. What’s even more crazy is when a member (such as this BYU professor) comes out publicly and tells Mormon truth, the church is quick to throw them under the bus by saying it isn’t “official” LOL! Racism still exists in the LDS church. It’s in their Standard Works.
Stanley2 says: March 1, 2012 at 8:09 am – (Botts’ comments are straight out of the Jim Crow South I grew up in)
Ya, I was a Protestant in the Jim Crow south. We were taught to respect white women, the blacks were open game and there was no responsibility if you had a mixed race kid. Them poor Mormon boys had to respect all women, including the women who had to use the other restroom and drinking fountain.
(At least the South has taken responsibility for it’s past )
Last time I visited my folks I stopped by my old high school. When I went there it was brand new and we had four token blacks. Today it looks as rundown as the black schools of my day and the whole of the student body was black. I could find no whites in the year book. I did see some improvement in the stores, more blacks in higher positions, but for the most part there is still a big divide between what the whites and blacks have.
A very poor example of how it should be done right.
fred
Sharon,
Have you ever noticed how your groups “forget” to talk about the “Christian” past actions toward blacks. Even Brigham Young spoke as to the greatness a black could achieve if the “Christians” of the day would stop treating them so badly. He also spoke against the bad conditions the blacks were forced to live and work in. And don’t forget that many people of the mobs that drove the Latter-Day Saints from the east were folks who did not want people who could not condone American slave practices to control a state.
fred
(Did the Mormon Church ever discriminate against black people?)
Have you ever read “Uncle Tom Cabin”? Read it and compare what you read about the normal treatment of blacks to how Mormons treated blacks. Then talk to me about discrimination.
fred
Grindael, our friend here at Mormon Coffee, has written a great blog on this topic. Take a look at Mormonite Musings.
Kate says: March 1, 2012 at 8:51 am (What’s even more crazy is when a member (such as this BYU professor) comes out publicly and tells Mormon truth, the church is quick to throw them under the bus by saying it isn’t “official”)
One of the problems in the LDS Church is and has always been that some, if not many; members never learn the difference between Mormon folklore and real doctrine. Even Bruce R. McConkie finally understood the difference. “We spoke with a limited understanding and without the light and knowledge that now has come into the world. We get our truth and our light line upon line and precept upon precept. We have now had added a new flood of intelligence and light on this particular subject, and it erases all the darkness and all the views and all the thoughts of the past. They don’t matter any more.”
http://speeches.byu.edu/reader/reader.php?id=11017
One of the advantages of God talking to His Prophets.
fred
Fred, your rationale baffles me. It seems that you feel the Mormon Church is the one
true Church with the only true gospel largely because of your experiences in the South
relative to how Blacks were treated by some “Protestants ” etc. That reasoning is so
lacking in being objective . Living in the South amid it’s discrimination and racism
is how you arrived at the Mormon gospel being the true gospel ? Sorry, but that type
of evaluation does’nt go near far enough because I live up North and I saw next to
nothing . Look into the New Testament and evaluate the Mormon gospel by what
Jesus’ apostles taught therein . Start here : Acts 10:34-48 .
fred,
This man is a BYU professor. He has shown what has been taught in the LDS church and what past leaders have said, this is not folklore. Are you claiming that the Book of Abraham is folklore? Why is it still a part of the LDS Standard Works? The family member I talked to yesterday about this was of the same thinking as this guy. I know the LDS throw all of the past under the bus claiming “continuing revelation” THIS is the advantage the LDS church leaders have used for years to deceive people. God isn’t talking to LDS prophets. Why would he give conflicting information? He says himself that he is not a man that he should lie and he also says he is not a God of confusion. Continue in the confusion fred. Call it whatever you want. Don’t even get me started on Bruce McConkie! His beliefs and teachings were/are so trustworthy that the LDS church is now throwing him and his stuff under the bus.
What Mormons don’t think about is this…..Yes, there is racism in the world. There always has been and it’s not just against the Blacks. Look at how the Irish and the Scots were treated by England. This is from ignorance, culture, the times, crazy zealots, BUT this is completely different than saying GOD COMMANDED IT AND IT CAME FROM GOD. It’s completely different than writing it in your scriptures. I was told yesterday that the Blacks have the mark of Cain (which is NOT folklore in Mormonism) and the Bible even says so. I asked her to show me where it says so. We know what Cain’s curse was Genisis 4:10-12 but the mark on Cain was never said to be dark skin.
OK fred,
The LDS is off the hook if you can find enough examples of Christian racism, is that how it works.
You are doing the typical Mormon thing of not dealing directly with the overt racism embedded in the Mormon religion.
Don’t forget, that it was Christian abolitionists who led the fight to end slavery.
It’s amazing how you Mormons won’t own anything but rather settle for inane and repulsive explanations for institutionalized racism of the worst sort.
The LDS church is “true” and that’s the bottom line isn’t fred.
Yea fred,
God talking to his prophets. What a joke! Now we have the great explanation for all of the dumb stuff the Mormon prophets have proclaimed. It is now called “folklore”. The problem is that this is what Mormons themselves assign to things they can’t explain or accept. Notice your so called modern day prophets don’t say anything of consequence on any of these topics preferring it all just to hang out there.
Say fred, wasn’t it one of your prophets that proclaimed that the American Indians were getting more white when they accepted the restored gospel of the one true church? Give it up fred. You’re following a bunch of ignorant guys that have never heard from God but are truly delighted with prophesying out of their own imaginations.
I had to post this from grindael’s fine article that Sharon linked to above:
The doctrine of the Curse of Cain was not “folklore” of the Mormon Church, it was stated by Brigham Young to be true, and “Any man having one drop of the seed of Cane in him Cannot hold the priesthood & if no other Prophet ever spake it Before I will say it now in the name of Jesus Christ. I know it is true & they know it.”
Why would a current member of the Mormon Quroum of the Twelve, F.A.I.R, and the First Presidency all lie that this is “folklore”, when former “prophets” emphatically declared that it was a doctrine of the church and a “commandment of God”? Why would they lie and say that they “do not know why, how or when this restriction began in the Church,” when former “prophets” issued official statements explaining it in detail?
Though there is no restriction on blacks being ordained in the Mormon Church today, this doctrine was founded in racism, perpetuated by Mormon “prophets” as a “commandment from God”, and was an integral part of the church for over a hundred years. Professor Bott was being honest and forthright about the history of the church concerning this doctrine, someone that the church hierarchy, and the apologetic arms of the church could learn a thing or two from.
Thanks to grindael for all of his hard work and for keeping the “freds” of the world that apparently reside at FAIR and FARMS, feet to the fire. “Folklore”, what a joke these people are. They have no integrity what-so-ever.
Amen to Kate!!!!!
Fred, I can’t believe you’re quoting Bruce McConkie as a defense. Isn’t that just “all his opinion?” Whenever I mention him or his writings, that’s the excuse I get from Mormons.
Not to mention that Brigham Young taught from the pulpit that blacks were cursed, but modern day Mormons say “that was just his opinion.”
The BOA says blacks are cursed. Is that “just the Lord’s opinion?”
Everything apologists say is “just their opinion” and not official church doctrine either.
Sometimes when I read posts like yours I feel like I’m going crazy. You can bring evidence to Mormons, but you can’t make them think.
If they don’t like it, they try to give you vertigo. Sometimes talking to Mormons makes me want to vomit from all the spin on facts.
Why can LDS people never just admit they are wrong?
I think that maybe instead of humiliating this BYU Professor by trying to discredit what he said, the LDS church should be standing in the truth with him. The leaders of the LDS church know exactly when, where, and why this was doctrine and practiced. If they don’t…..well then they aren’t very inspired are they? It’s in their scriptures. Even I knew this as a practicing Mormon and I was the “naive true believer” type. 🙂 I’m wondering why the LDS church didn’t take this opportunity to explain why this is? It was the perfect chance for Thomas Monson to stand up and tell the truth about what is believed. Maybe they should use Google to figure out where it all came from, that’s where I found these:
“The negroes are not equal with other races where the receipt of certain spiritual blessings are concerned, particularly the priesthood and the temple blessings that flow therefrom, but this inequality is not of man’s origin. It is the Lord’s doing.” ( Bruce R. McKonkie 1966 edition of Mormon Doctrine.)
“According to the doctrine of the church, the negro because of some condition of unfaithfulness in the spirit — or pre-existence, was not valiant and hence was not denied the mortal probation, but was denied the blessing of the priesthood.” (Joseph Fielding Smith)
“And 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 22:304)
It’s necessary for the devil to have representation on earth? And they’re Blacks? I don’t think so.
(Why can LDS people never just admit they are wrong?)
When we are, we do!
fred
OK fred,
Tell us something you’re wrong about. I’m waiting…..tick, tick, tick, tick…..
Dale,
That’s about the most perfect characterization I’ve ever read concerning Mormons and their spin machine; individual and corporate. You are absolutely right. We can’t make them think.
It needs repeating:
“Sometimes when I read posts like yours I feel like I’m going crazy. You can bring evidence to Mormons, but you can’t make them think.”
“If they don’t like it, they try to give you vertigo. Sometimes talking to Mormons makes me want to vomit from all the spin on facts.”
“Why can LDS people never just admit they are wrong?”
We have some great posters here, but I’m voting you an award today for capturing my sentiments and emotions.
Falcon, thank you! I appreciate it because I sometimes feel like my posts don’t get much attention.
There are so many times when Mormonism just doesn’t add up historically. It’s just plain sad, but I am continually amazed at the depths LDS will sink to justify their ways and belittle their own history and prophets–their OWN prophets– when it suits them.
The worst part is that most of the “anti-Mormon” stuff that members say is fake is almost always the truth. I can’t tell you how many Mormons I know personally who deny the rock in the hat or that Joseph Smith married other men’s wives or that blacks were never treated differently than white people or that the Book of Mormon has undergone numerous revisions …..the list goes on and on.
Mormons want to control all discussions about their church, but they hide half the facts. They like to say you can recognize a prophet by his fruit, but they have the audacity to select, hide and re-arrange what fruit investigators see.
Ooops…sorry, I don’t know why but the word I typed (what Mormons commonly call people who question them) was edited as a slur.
Falcon said
Let me answer for Fred, Fred thought he knew what the true was/is, But he was wrong.
Fred cannot answer questions, he refuses, still waiting for answers to many questions. And Fred if your going to play the, I gave you answers game, You have yet to tell me How it is that I have read and studied all the same books you have and maybe even hen more than you, yet I dont see the truth in them and see many major problems in them, and you can tell me that it is due to lack of study. How is that possible. Then you have the chance to tell me what I am missing and show the love of Christ to me by sharing the Gospel with me, yet you wont. So How is that being Christ like? Those are two things you dodge like the plague.
How does saying that they don’t know where this belief/teaching came from help the LDS church?
The only way this answer helps is by being a “don’t look here (cover with one hand). Look over here! (flourish with other hand) Look over here!(continue covering first, and flourishing second) Look over here!(flourish, cover, flourish)” tactic.
Think about it. They are basically saying that they have no idea why the church practiced something for over a century! And this is something that God changed or corrected later. How is this not “astray”?
What do they gain by saying they don’t know where one of their main beliefs came from? Is it just so they don’t have to say that their prophet(s) taught it? But, then, what does that say – that the church had a major doctrine and policy for over a century that came from someone other than a prophet?! Surely ALL doctrine and policy comes from the Prophet or the Prophet and Apostles? If not…
Then how can this be anything other than teaching “The Doctrines of Men”??????????????????
But I’ll try to be charitable and say they mean they don’t know EXACTLY where it came about (and they just don’t want to say anything about all the prophet/apostle statements that supported it for a century +).
Then we have the LDS church practicing something (to the detriment of its members) for which they cannot give an accounting. Let’s see… so Joseph Smith was known to give the priesthood to at least 1 if not 2 black people, but then by the time Brigham Young is prophet, they are banned. Reminds me of LDS saying “they… which are baptized for the dead” and “surely the Lord God will do nothing but he revealeth His secret unto His servants the prophets” are in the Bible/part of the Original Church of Christ, but since its not in Christianity anymore – evidence of the Great Apostasy.
But, you know, the stark change of once practicing priesthood ordination of black and then not, is a much clearer Divergence from Restoration then trying to interpret “they” as “we” or “nothing (of a future judgment)” as “everything only to a Prophet” and claiming Christianity has fallen.
Maybe we can call it the Great Divergence or more accurately The Great Tangent. They didn’t refuse to accept the LDS Gospel like the 2nd century people rejected the Gospel of Christ, they just tweeked it enough to spin off the Restoration’s trajectory. Oh, wait, that’s Great Apostasy. No way around it.
Or maybe it would just be better for the LDS church to say “we believe everyone who is/was born black was less valiant in the 1st Estate than all other people and so they were banned by God from the priesthood.”
One last tidbit.
If the priesthood has been legalized for blacks, then why are they still black?
I would leave it at that for literary power, but wasn’t the mark of Cain (according to LDS) to keep from intermarriage and priesthood? Neither of these are still recognized by the LDS church, and assumedly God who controls it, so why are they still black? Why, even more, are those black men and women who are now “full” members of God’s church still black? What purpose does their black skin have now???
Add in claims of the prophets/apostles about miraculous skin whitening of believers and you have a conundrum.
falcon says: – March 1, 2012 at 12:49 pm – (OK fred, The LDS is off the hook if you can find enough examples of Christian racism, is that how it works.)
No, I am just showing the difference between REAL RACISM and the stuff you folks pump up way out of any relation to the truth.
fred
Mike R says: – March 1, 2012 at 10:49 am – (Fred, your rationale baffles me. It seems that you feel the Mormon Church is the one true Church with the only true gospel largely because of your experiences in the South relative to how Blacks were treated by some “Protestants ” etc.)
Since you got that false conclusion from what I have said I can understand why you are deceived by those who want the LDS Church to be wrong.
fred
fred,
I think you should be nicknamed the “one liner”. You are so over your head here. rick is absolutely right in saying that you avoid answering questions and just do your version of the Mormon drive-by shooter. BTW I’m still waiting for you to tell me where Mormonism gets it wrong. You’ve picked-up on the new Mormon buzz word “folk lore”. This serves you well because you don’t have to actually think or formulate a meaningful response.
So was your prophet “wrong” when he said that the American Indians who converted to Mormonism were becoming “whiter”. I’m waiting fred. Were the Indians getting whiter as a result of accepting the “restored gospel” or was the prophet wrong?
fred the reason you can’t supply any sort of cogent response to our questions or statements is that you are emotionally invested in Mormonism and haven’t taken the time to do any independent research or thinking.
tick…..tick…..tick……tick……I’m still waiting for you to tell me the “folk lore” that indicates that Mormonism with its prophets were wrong about something.
I got this from a secondary source which I feel is accurate regarding Quinn’s work. So to our friend fred………………….was the one true church and her prophets “wrong”?
Historian D. Michael Quinn on LDS church racism:
“[A]s both church president & governor, [Brigham Young] . . . instructed the Utah legislature to legalize the slavery of African-Americans.” “Even after federal emancipation of America’s slaves . . . , [he] referred to African-American slavery as a religious necessity.”
“[T]he 1st Presidency wrote that ‘the intermarriage of the Negro & White races, [is] a concept which has heretofore been most repugnant to most normal-minded people from the ancient patriarchs til now.’”
“[It] repeatedly affirmed that no African-American could stay at the LDS church-owned Hotel Utah. . . . America’s beloved contralto . . . Marian Anderson ‘was allowed to stay . . . on condition that she use the freight elevator.’ . . . Nobel Peace Prize recipient Ralph Bunche was allowed to stay . . . only after [he] agreed to use the freight elevator, ‘have his meals in his room & not come to the dining room.’”
“[W]hile criticizing the legislative efforts in AZ to ‘guarantee rights of Negroes,’ LDS presidency counselor David O. McKay said, ‘The South knows how to handle them & they do not have any trouble & the colored people are better off down there–in CA they are becoming very progressive & insolent in many cases.’”
“[A] 1st Presidency secretary informed a white Mormon that ‘The LDS Hospital here in Salt Lake City has a blood bank which does not contain any colored blood.’ According to [counselor] J. Reuben Clark, this policy of segregating African-American blood from the blood donated by so-called ‘white people’ was intended ‘to protect the purity of the blood streams of the people of this church.”
Racism is racism. There is no “real racism”. In most of the Mormon rebuttals we find them pointing the finger at Protestants, and saying that Mormons used a Protestant argument to defend their own racism. But I’m not aware of any Protestants that said that it was “a commandment from God” (as the Mormon First Presidency did in 1949). Regardless, wherever they got the idea from, it was wrong. And many Protestants and Catholics knew this and spoke out against it. Did any of the Mormon Hierarchy in the 19th Century do so, when it would have been the hardest to call Young to task? Nope. Instead they wrote pieces for their youth, like in the Juvenile Instructor in 1868 which said,
“The pure Negro, as represented by the people of Guinea and its neighboring countries, is generally regarded as the unmixed descendant of Ham. . . . Their skin is quite black, their hair woolly and black, their intelligence stunted, and they appear never to have arisen from the most savage state of barbarism” (Juvenile Instructor, October 15, 1868, p. 157)
The November 15, 1868, Juvenile Instructor looked forward to the day
“when all men capable of receiving the priesthood, enlightened by the spirit of God and guided by its whisperings, will lose their extravagances of character and appearance, and become “a white and delightsome people” physically as well as morally” (Juvenile Instructor, vol. 3, no. 22, Nov. 15, 1868, p. 173).
Protestants were always divided over this issue. We fought a Civil War over it. Mormons sat back and prophesied about America’s destruction, all the while gleefully gobbling up the racism, and the other twin relic of barbarism, polygamy. They have never apologized nor denounced Young as a false prophet, nor any of the others, who so obviously were.
grindael,
There’s a two fold problem here. One is the racism itself the other is the inability of Mormons, at any level, to own it, admit it, renounce it. Mormons like our buddy fred can’t conceive of the idea that the Mormon church could do or say anything “wrong” because then we get right to the nub of the problem and that is the prophets are not prophets and the LDS church is not “true”.
Anytime you have a religion who has a motto that goes, “Once the leaders speak, the thinking has been done.” is in major trouble. If Mormons begin to question their church, it all begins to fall apart. I remember Sandra Tanner talking about her and Gerald’s trip out of Mormonism. They got to the point where they said, “OK, we’ll just stick with the BoM.” It didn’t take long before that plan went down the drain as they walked away from the entire deal.
It is not in the religious DNA of Mormons to admit error. Mormonism can’t stand-up to scrutiny. That’s why we get all of this stone-walling, excuse making and down right lying.
Thankfully most Mormons figure it out.
Falcon,
Fred is what we would call in music, a one hit wonder.
Well I thought I would share this with everyone, Their is an atheist I have been sharing the gospel with now for going on maybe 4 years. No matter what questions she asks, for the most part I have answers. I have admitted I don’t have all the answers, but the vast majority. I am trying to show the Love of Christ to this lost soul and share how she can be saved, and know that the Bible is true.
Sadly the LDS do not do the same for anyone, all they can do is say, I have the true church and if you dont believe me then to bad, That is the mentality of LDS. We have seen many LDS here as an example of that. The one hit, drive by Mormons, they claim to have all the answers yet they judge us and say, we really dont want to hear.
So anyway, this Atheist who I call a friend and really like, had me watch some videos and it was from this website, http://www.atheist-experience.com/
The “founder” if you want to call him that is clearly a God hat-ing, christian hat-ing bitter man, who claims at one time he was a believer and now he is an atheist running this TV show on line. They only takes phone calls on Sunday for one hour and thats it. I wrote them and told them I thought all the Christians they had call in were staged, These Christians could not answers questions to save their lives and they stumbled and sounded like they had no clue. So I wrote these guys and said I would call them up, answer the questions and take them on. “Cont”
“Cont”
So I will be calling This Sunday, which happens to be my Birthday, well happy Birthday to me, I am going to give some Atheists some hard truth and a serious dose of reality and the Hammer will fall. These guys wrote me back and said, If your a theist say so and you will get top priority, I told them I was not a theist, but a bible believing Christian that is not afraid of them, wont stumble and fumble trying to give answers and they wrote me back and were mad and said, if you believe in God or gods you are a theist. So they did not like that reply, then they said they are waiting for great anticipation for my call. So if you guys want to listen in as I share the gospel and do what LDS wont do, and show the Love of Christ to some lost and dying souls, and contend for the faith, please tune in.
Also I am guessing they will either hang up on me and claim I could not handle them and hung up, or they will keep interrupting me and not allow me to finish what I am trying to say, and make it look like I cannot answer them. I suspect they will do this from the video’s I watched. But watch out world here I come.
falcon says: – March 2, 2012 at 7:15 am – (I got this from a secondary source which I feel is accurate regarding Quinn’s work.)
Given how poor Quinn’s conclusions are I will have a hard time not seeing this as more of the same, but please post your source so I can see what is really written.
fred
Jesus’ warning about false prophets is so appropriate here . Brigham Young was
a false prophet/teacher this is nothing new : ” Thus saith the Lord concerning
the prophets that make my people err ….” [ Micah 5:3] . Why do decent , honest
people follow such prophets ? Amist the excuses that McConkie offers as to why
he shoul’nt be viewed as a false teacher because of the doctrinal flip flop on Blacks ,
since his spiritual witness confirmed for a long time to him that he was correct on
the timing of when the curse would be removed ( after the Second Coming of Jesus),
there is his answer to those who question his teachings . He warns them :
“…all I can say to that is that it is time disbelieving people repented and got in
line and believed in a living modern prophet. ” Repent ? Of what ? Answer: repent
of calling into question their leaders teachings and counsel. Mormon leaders have
issued veiled threats in order to keep those that follow them in submission . They’ve
gone as far as to teach that for any rank and file LDS to call their spiritual guidance
into question is to be influenced by Satan . Thus the threat of being judged by God
ever looms over their heads . Hence, McConkie reminds them to shut up and ” get in
line ” . Submit or else ! He is telling them ” who cares” what I did teach ; and like
successful false apostles do he captures a phrase like “line upon line” and uses it to
his advantage
Falcon,
Do what you want with Fred, but he asked you to post sources for him, I would say that you do not.
Reasons why I say that? He never answers us, we do provide quotes of the prophets, presidents, LDS Scripture, and it is all there in black and white, and even then Fred claims it is wrong and we some how just cannot seem to understand it, while not telling us what we are missing.
Rick B says: – March 2, 2012 at 11:31 am – (Falcon, Do what you want with Fred, but he asked you to post sources for him, I would say that you do not.)
How standard for you folks, first you say something is bad when a Mormon does it, then you say it is good for you folks to do it.
Telling others to find it themselves will not work for ya’ll; it only works for those of us who want people to think for themselves and not for you who need to have people think just like you do.
fred
Fred said
Seriously Fred, How long must I spoon feed you, change your pants and burp you? I have told you over and over and over, I have read many of the same LDS books as you, most likely even more than you have, I have done the research, yet you claim with OUT EVIDENCE that I have not studied and that is why I have not found the truth of Mormonism. Please do explain to me why I can read what you read and study as you claim you have and yet I cannot find this simply truth?
Yup rick, that was my conclusion also.
fred gets nothing……period. He is a Mormon poser with limited knowledge of Mormonism as well as Christianity.
I guess I’ll use his tactic OK. Hay fred, you need to study to find the truth.
No sources for you. You go find it yourself. You go chase around the mulberry bush for a change.
Besides fred, you just use a shotgun approach to cause confusion.
rick,
That was kind of fun…..and easy.
Say I’m going to have to come over some time and get together with you. You haven’t given us the update as to whether you finished school and are working in the food industry.
BTW, I’m teaching a class at a local university and all of my students are in foods related majors. The class has nothing to do with their majors but they take it to fulfill an outside requirement.
Hey Falcon,
I would love to have you over. I have been done with school now for clo part tose to a year, I am working me jobs, one is fine dining and the other is not. LOL. I applied for a new job and will be going in on this Wed to work a shift so they can see how I am. It’s a working interview and if it goes well, I will still have to wait and see as the other people that applied will have to do the same. Rick
I don’t think this is a topic that the Mormon church wants people delving into. To outsiders, this puts the church in a bad PR light and to those Mormons who have begun to question the religion it’s just one more straw on the back of the camel. An “anonymous” author offered this opinion:
“The fact that Blacks were being punished for something they couldn’t even remember doing makes this doctrine even more offensive. However, while lifting the ban may have put the LDS Church in a more positive light socially, it demonstrated once more the instability of its doctrines and the fickleness of its God. The decision made in 1978 also demonstrates that the LDS people will accept just about anything their leaders tell them. When it comes to accountability, the leadership of the LDS Church answers to no one. Latter-day Saints may respond by saying their leaders are accountable to God, but what does this really mean when they are allowed to make decisions that contradict what Mormons have historically considered to be God’s unchanging will?”
Mormon doctrine is unstable and its prophets unreliable. This whole idea of “progressive revelation” may have a soothing effect on the minds of TBM and Naive Mormons, but to the objective and/or questioning Mormon, it’s just more flim-flam coming from the leadership. The idea that they just don’t know where this doctrine came from is a flat out lie. Why do people follow men who claim to be “prophets” but who have a consistent pattern of evasiveness, inconsistency, and outright lying. That may well be the mystery of Mormonism and false religions in general.
I found a review of the following book by a (reviewer) named “Darth”.
Review of John L. Lund, “The Church and the Negro: A Discussion of Mormons, Negroes and the Priesthood.” Salt Lake City: John Lewis Lund, 1967 (6th Printing, 1972). 129 pages (including bibliography).
It’s a rather lengthy review and his conclusion is spot-on.
“Considering that Brother Lund was a church education employee and the agonizing detail he provides for his sources, claiming that he was shooting from the hip or not representative of mainstream LDS thinking prior to the ending of the priesthood ban is simply not sufficient. Indeed, despite the revisionist history now trumpeted by the Church and its cheerleaders about what the Church used to teach and the “we don’t know” cop-out of 148 years of ecclesiastical apartheid, The Church and the Negro delivers a spectacular psychic donkey punch to those who have gone along with this revisionism. I highly recommend finding a copy of this gospel classic for a view of where Mormon thinking was before the spin machine took over in the wake of the 1978 revelation Spencer W. Kimball had that everything was going to be better now, and the ensuing McConkie Mulligan that amounted to, “Never mind.” The Church and the Negro has, I think, pretty much killed, buried, and nailed the coffin shut on the idea that “we don’t know” why the priesthood ban was in place for nearly a century and a half, and then thrown the coffin into Mount Doom, before dropping Mt Doom under the continental plates.”
The cover-up and revisionist attempts by the Mormon hierarchy and its lackeys just doesn’t stand up to the light of truth when it is shone on a topic like this. The “folklore” explanation will only work for the blind followers.
The book you mention is it out of print? I remember seeing it but never getting the chance to read it.
I remember reading about the ban having to do with masonic lodge stuff but I don’t remember where I read it , it might have been an internet article somewhere.
One thing that is quite interesting is why blacks join the church. On the documentary channel there was a show about blacks and the priesthood. One of the comments made by one of the interviewees was very interesting.
The Salt Lake Tribune a few years ago ( 2008) contained an article on this issue.
It interviewed some Mormons who were Black , on their experiences . The article
stated : ” Black Latter-day Saints say they have grown accustomed to defending
their faith to other blacks , but they will never understand why they must defend
their race to other Mormons. Racism is alive , they say, in their congregations ….”
This would be greatly alleviated , according to the article , if the Mormon heirarchy
would face up to it’s racist history . In my opinion this issue would be greatly subdued
if the Mormon leadership would admit that Mormon prophets/apostles have taught
false doctrine on this issue . This admission must be direct and clear , no skirting the
seriousness of it by using terms that down-play or dilute it as anything but false
teaching, period. But will this happen ? Considering that the promise to never teach
false doctrine has been promoted by those who lead the Mormon Church , this will
probably not happen . If we’re looking for those apostles who were faithful to Jesus’
command ( Acts 10 ) unto whom they should spread the saving truths of His gospel ,
we should stick with them and not follow those who , 1700 years later , came and
announced that they represent the same Jesus with His “restored gospel ” , these
“apostles” names are well known — Brigham Young, John Taylor, and their colleagues .
Matt . 24:24; Rev 2:2
The source of one of the quotes is a letter from the First Presidency to Lowry Nelson. The complete letter is as follows,
“Dear Brother Nelson:
“We might make this initial remark: The social side of the Restored Gospel is only an incident of it; it is not the end thereof.
The basic element of your ideas and concepts seems to be that all God’s children stand in equal positions before Him in all things. Your knowledge of the Gospel will indicate to you that this is contrary to the very fundamentals of God’s dealings with Israel dating from the time of His promise to Abraham regarding Abraham’s seed and their position vis-a-vis God Himself. Indeed, some of God’s children were assinged to superior positions before the world was formed.
“We are aware that some Higher Critics do not accept this, but the Church does. Your position seems to lose sight of the revelations of the Lord touching the pre-existence of our spirits, the rebellion in heaven, and the doctrines that our birth into this life and the advantages under which we may be born, have a religionship in the life heretofore. From the days of the Prophet Joseph Smith even until now, it is has been the doctrine of the Church, never questioned by any of the Church leaders, that the Negroes are not entitled to the full blessings of the Gospel.
“Furthermore, your ideas, as we understand them, appear to contemplate the intermarriage of the Negro and White races, a concept which has heretofore been most repugnant to most normal-minded people from the ancient partiarchs till now. God’s rule for Israel, His Chosen People, has been endogamous [meaning ‘marriage within a specific tribe or similar social unit’]. Modern Israel has been similarly directed. We are not unmindful of the fact that there is
a growing tendency, particularly among some educators, as it manifests itself in this are, toward the breaking down of race barriers in the matter of intermarriage between whites and blacks, but it does not have the sanction of the Church and is contrary to Church doctrine.
“Faithfully yours,
George Albert Smith
J. Reuben Clark, Jr.
David O. McKay”
John J. Stewart and William E. Bennett, Mormonism and the Negro,” [Orem, Utah: Community Press, 1960], pp. 46-47
Lowry understood perfectly what “the brethren” were saying, and responded on 8 October:
“The attitude of the Church in regard to the Negro makes me very sad. I do not believe God is a racist.“
The First Presidency answered:
“We feel very sure that you are aware of the doctrines of the Church. They are either true or not true. Our testimony is that they are true. Under these circumstances we may not permit ourselves to be too much impressed by the reasonings of men, however well founded they may seem to be. We should like to say this to you in all sincerity, that you are too fine a man to permit yourself to be led off from the principles of the Gospel by worldly learning.
“You have too much of a potentiality for doing good and we therefore prayerfully hope that you can re-orient your thinking and bring it in line with the revealed Word of God.”
This was not folklore from the Mormon past, this was absolutely Mormon doctrine, and officially declared by a Mormon First Presidency to be “a commandment from God”. http://mormonitemusings.wordpress.com/2012/03/01/playing-f-a-i-r-the-curse-of-cain/
“I would not want you to believe that we bear any animosity toward the Negro. ‘Darkies’ are wonderful people, and they have their place in our church.” (~Fielding Smith, Look magazine, October 22, 1963, 79)
The Ralph Bunche quote is from – David H. Oliver, A Negro on Mormonism (Salt Lake City: By author, 1963), 23).
The article by Quinn, with all of the references, (in the footnotes below) can be found here: http://www.affirmation.org/against_marriage_equality/prelude.shtml
Steve Benson, (where Falcon got the quotes from – his second hand source) has always been accurate with his sources. He has had much to say relating his experiences with Mormonism, being a grandson of Ezra Taft Benson, and has had many intimate conversations with Mormon Hierarchy. One can say many things about D. Michael Quinn, but his being “conclusions being poor”, is hardly one of them.
I have a first edition of “Mormonism and the Negro” by John J. Stewart with Supplement by William E. Berrett, if anyone needs or wants photocopies, which has much of the same material as the book mentioned by Falcon.
Mike R.,
Gordon B. Hinckley told audiences over and over he was not a prophet. Here are some examples:
“I do not know what the future holds.” – The “Prophet” Gordon B. Hinckley, “The Times in Which We Live,” October 2001 General Conference (Ensign, Nov. 2001, Page 72)
AGAIN:
None of us knows what lies ahead. We may speculate, BUT WE DO NOT KNOW.” ~October 2001 General Conference “Till We Meet Again,” (Ensign, Nov. 2001, Page 89)
AGAIN:
During an CNN interview after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, Larry King asked Hinckley if God could have prevented the attacks:
KING: President Hinckley, though, couldn’t He (God) have prevented this?
HINCKLEY: Oh, I suppose so. I believe He’s all powerful, yes. I DON’T KNOW HIS WILL. I don’t know how He operates. ~Larry King Live CNN Interview, September 14, 2001, http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0109/14/lkl.00.html
Grindael, thanks for the quotes . It never ceases to amaze me how people can follow the
so-called modern -day apostles of the Mormon church after what these men taught about
Negroes and then promoted it as trustworthy spiritual counsel . These Men have
claimed to be apostles , but have only been apostles in their own minds, they are nothing
new: 2 Cor. 11:13; Rev.2:2 . The Mormon people deserve a different set of apostles to
follow : the ones in the New Testament , they are the ones who actually were directed
to preach the gospel after Jesus’ resurrection .
grindael,
I can see the minds of the Mormon freds just churning with excuses, alibis, and fantastic explanations to try and make the “LDS church is true, the Mormon prophet is true” paradigm fit with the information presented here. We know the routine starting with denial and moving through the hierarchy of emotional stages in order to preserve their faith in what is not true.
The “it’s just an opinion” hasn’t shown up yet as it seems the freds prefer the newly minted “folklore” strategy. Maybe they’ll move on from that to maybe calling all of these things “Mormon urban legends”.
The last thing is for the Mormons holding on by their finger-tips to haul out the, “Yea, but the church does a lot of good!” argument. So in other-words they acknowledge that what is being charged is true but so what, there’s a lot to like in Mormonism.
As one of our former Mormon posters wrote once, “I left Mormonism because I just got sick of defending (Mormonism)” He figured out that the Mormon church isn’t true. It’s happening everyday, thank the Lord.