What do LDS Church leaders have to say about the reliability and accuracy of their own scriptures?
According to LDS leaders, Mormon scriptures are “utterly reliable” and “pure truth.” The current prophet, President Monson, declared on the official church website lds.org (underline added):
“The words of truth and inspiration found in our four standard works are prized possessions to me…These holy words of truth and love give guidance to my life and point the way to eternal perfection.”
In 2011, Apostle Richard G. Scott taught,
“Because scriptures are generated from inspired communication through the Holy Ghost, they are pure truth. We need not be concerned about the validity of concepts contained in the standard works since the Holy Ghost has been the instrument which has motivated and inspired those individuals who have recorded the scriptures.”
And D. Todd Christofferson in 2010,
“The scriptures are the touchstone for measuring correctness and truth…Where scriptural truths are ignored or abandoned, the essential moral core of society disintegrates and decay is close behind.”
Apostle Robert D. Hales in 2006,
“So essential are these truths that Heavenly Father gave both Lehi and Nephi visions vividly representing the word of God as a rod of iron. Both father and son learned that holding to this strong, unbending, utterly reliable guide is the only way to stay on that strait and narrow path that leads to our Savior.”
These men, considered prophets, seers, and revelators, all describe Mormon scripture as words of truth and inspiration, strong, unbending, an utterly reliable guide, pure truth, and the touchstone for measuring correctness. If LDS scripture is reliable as pure truth from God yet the racist scriptures still exist, the only logical analysis is that the God of Mormonism was at the time the Book of Mormon was birthed and still is, according to the Merriam and Webster Dictionary—racist (i.e., he is biased against dark skin).
While at BYU teaching multiculturalism, I was LDS and needed to trust Mormon scriptures as “strong, unbending, utterly reliable,” but I could not wrap my head around scriptures that suggest God cursed a people in the Book of Mormon with a mark of dark skin for their transgression. Exchanging my students’ scripture-driven, dark-skin prejudices into impartial attitudes became my passion. I thought perhaps I could help fix the racism problem in the next generation of LDS students. But, how could I when the scriptures taught that black skin was a curse? Find the narrative of my experience with the issue of racism in Mormonism and at BYU in the book, Unveiling Grace: The Story of How We Found Our Way Out of the Mormon Church (Zondervan, 2013).
In opposition, the God of the Bible made His stance crystal clear. He created humans in beautiful variability and is in relationship with people from every nation, tongue, and skin color— all members of the same human race. Skin color is never, ever a determiner of value. He teaches not to judge by appearances (John 7:24). He is no respecter of persons (Acts 10:34-35). The biblical God instructs individuals to show no partiality, meaning not to pay special attention to or honor someone because of skin color, wealth, social standing, position, authority, popularity, looks, or influence. If we do, it is so serious it is considered sin (James 2:9). Believers are charged to love other people as God loves them and treat them how we want to be treated.
Although the Book of Mormon states, “all are alike unto God,” as long as racist scriptures still exist, are read, taught, believed, and made part of the culture, one may question the consistency of the Race and the Priesthood statement with the racist Mormon scriptures. The LDS Church is in a difficult position that is irrational, inconsistent, and illogical since the new Race and the Priesthood statement and its own “utterly reliable” and “pure truth” scriptures collide.
___________________________
Find Part 1 of Lynn’s article here.
___________________________
“The LDS Church is in a difficult position that is irrational, inconsistent, and illogical since the new Race and the Priesthood statement and its own “utterly reliable” and “pure truth” scriptures collide.”
This is precisely the problem for LDS concerning this issue, as I see it. There is no question the doctrine/policy/whatever-they-call-it-now was racist. By the very definition of racism, the policy qualifies.
In the previous thread, Jaxi (I think it was) suggested that the “I don’t know” attitude is all they have. Perhaps she is right. They can deny the doctrine as racist, or they can say that it was wrong, perhaps a few other options, but these options deny the perfection of the church.
I happen to think Mormons can still be Mormons in every sense of the word while suggesting this practice was racist. It does not destroy their faith. It only destroys the church’s perfection. But that raises the question: what, precisely, is their faith in?
The consistency and perfection of the LDS church is something they pride themselves in, yet I have to ask at what cost do they hold it so high?
Lynn,
I explained how your representation of our canon was narrow and unfair in your last thread. Do you have a response to my comments?
In the Book of Mormon, the dark-skinned Lamanites were more highly favored, preserved, and blessed than their light-skinned brothers and sisters. While the Nephites were destroyed, the Lamanites survived and had great blessings extended to them by God. The text clearly states that the apostasy and sins of the descendants of Laman and Lemuel who were cursed with that dark skin would be placed upon the heads of their fathers who led them astray- Laman and Lemuel. The prophet Jacob and other prophets told the white-skinned Nephites that the Lamanites were more righteous than the Nephites. And the text does indeed state that “all are alike to God” with no regard to skin color.
Do you have any response to these points? I do not think you know the Book of Mormon very well or have a reasonable understanding of its message and context. You seem to be “cherry-picking” verses to support your very narrow representation.
And at the same time, you seem to be ignoring the elements in the Bible that most people interpret as showing a clear racist nature of God.
Again, do you care to respond?
I speak from personal experience as a born-in-the-Church, life-long Mormon, who left it in his mid-50s. The Mormon “take” on things is very malleable. What Mormon officialdom says becomes the way it is. As I read the responses by FOF, one could get the idea that, prior to 1978, the current (2014) espoused view regarding the priesthood ban (that no one really knows where it came from, that it was Brigham Young’s cultural bias showing up, etc.) was a valid and acceptable viewpoint, equal with the speculation that the ban was a curse based on skin color and the result of some sort of pre-existence misbehavior; that pre-1978 Mormons were equally exposed to these two viewpoints regarding the ban; that both the speculative view (pre-existence issues) and the culture-of-the-times bias held equal sway, and now the Church is taking a stand as to which viewpoint is the correct one is really no big deal.
I know Mormonism inside and out–believe me. I’m confident that one would be very hard pressed to find ANY documentation, mention, belief, statement, general conference talk, book–anything that would even hint at the current explanation. The current take on the ban is post-1978, not pre-1978. I really doubt if FOF is old enough to remember the pre-1978 world of Mormonism regarding the whys and wherefores of the ban. The ban was a doctrine, the ban originated with Joseph Smith, the notion of cursing and withholding priesthood blessings based on race and God-favoritism, the link with the pre-existence, all of it, was firmly held as truth and was based on the Spirit-inspired teachings of the modern prophets, seers, and revelators and on the revealed Book of Mormon and Pearl of Great Price.
The current “official” statement does not hold water. It cannot. So, to a Mormon, how could Brigham Young be a true prophet in light of this obvious reversal? Try this on for size: In spite of being wrong, in spite of teaching false doctrine, in spite of leading the flock astray, Brigham Young and, by implication because they propagated his false teachings, his successors remain God’s chosen merely because they rightfully held/hold the fullness of priesthood keys. Noah was a drunk. No biggie because he held the keys. Abraham was a liar. No biggie because he held the keys. Joseph Smith was a lech. No biggie because he rightfully held the keys. Thomas Monson doesn’t say anything of theological substance at all (never has, in my opinion). No biggie because he holds the priesthood keys. They are prophets, in the eyes of Mormons, not because of what they say, or what they do, or what they do not do, or based on anything that even remotely resembles Biblical prophets. They are prophets because Mormons firmly believe they hold the keys to the dispensation of the fullness of times as restored through Joseph Smith. They hold the keys to the gathering of Israel. They hold the keys to presidency. They hold the keys to the sealing powers. Because of this, the rest of what they do and of what they are is operationally irrelevant.
Not long ago I was having a discussion with my Mom about this issue. She told me that the reason Blacks were born with dark skin is because Satan needed representation on the earth. I had never heard this before so I researched it a little and found that this idea comes from LDS prophet John Taylor, he said:
“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, Vol. 22, p. 304, 1881)
My Mom wasn’t alive in 1881, she had to have learned this somewhere. All one really has to do is read LDS church publications to see that all of this was clearly taught to members. Mormon Doctrine by Bruce R, McConkie is full of these teachings about Blacks. How many millions of members over the years bought this book and counted it as truth from an apostle? I don’t care if the LDS leaders claim they don’t know where this came from and that the Journal of Discourses or Mormon Doctrine aren’t “official”, these beliefs have been taught to millions. These beliefs were taught by LDS prophets, from LDS scripture, until the ban in 1978. The Book of Mormon clearly states that dark skin is a curse of the Mormon god. That is racist and is still in the BoM and the BoA today.
FOF,
“And at the same time, you seem to be ignoring the elements in the Bible that most people interpret as showing a clear racist nature of God.”
Could you please show proof of this? Where are you getting this information from? Who are the “most people” that you are referring to? I’m pretty sure this is just your opinion.
Tom,
I do remember the “pre-1978” church and the big deal the lifting of the ban was to the members. I personally believe that the ban was the will of God. I fully expect the opportunists to claim I am racist along with the church. And I interpret the recent statement from the church as a declaration that the basis and events that led to the ban are not clear. I think that there needs to be a distinction between the policy or the ban and the reasons. I don’t think we know the reasons. But plenty of people have had their theories and ideas. Even some prophets and leaders.
Your comments about the keys of the Priesthood are not without validity. Holding those keys and being the chosen servant of the Lord is very important to church members. That being said, that by no means that a prophet can do whatever he wants and it is “no biggie.” Prophets are human. Always have been. Always will be. I firmly believe that following the prophet will never lead a person away from God. In other words, it is always better to error on the side of faith in the prophet than sitting back and arm-chair quarterbacking the decisions and statements from the prophet. The prophet is in the proverbial driver’s seat of the kingdom of God on the earth, and is directed by God. The expectation that a prophet must introduce new doctrine or provide sensational new prophecy is very unreasonable in my opinion. If and when God wants something done on a church-wide scale (or world wide scale), it will come through the prophet.
I think it is not completely accurate to say that a prophet is a prophet only because of the keys and not because of what they say or do. Of course that is not a complete or accurate perspective. We are to follow them and their example and teachings. But we all understand the human element in any person who is authorized by God to do anything.
FOF, are you kidding me ? i was a missionary from 1977-79, i have a book written by two church called men James B Allen and Glen M. Leonard both wrote the book called The Story of the Latter Day Saints, on page 620 it says” It had been church policy since the early days of the church not to ordain blacks too the priesthood”
Now Allen and Leonard never mentioned in the book Elijah Abel or Walker Lewis.
Hard core doctrine keep blacks out from 1856 till Sep 1978, now that time frame was a theory !, You can just swallow that and say ok , everything the prophets say is ok ?
The BOM IS NOT TRUE, because Joseph Smith who came BEFORE the BOM was not as true prophet.
Mormonism always has to be defended , starting with Smith, BOM, and all that follows it with rationalization of every single bit of there history and doctrine, but now its a church built on theories advanced in the past, what theories today are being advanced only to be disavowed down the road ?
Wake up , open your heart and mind FOF , was closed mined as yourself in the mormon church for 36 years, read the BOM EVERY SINGLE YEAR FROM 1975 TILL 2010 .
FoF,
I understand your desire to not come to too quick of a conclusion concerning actions by your leaders. To be honest, that’s often a wise choice. There’s often far too much going on to know everything necessary to come to an informed decision. I don’t fault you for that.
However, it is fair question to ask what will cause you to doubt your leaders and the doctrines they espouse? You say leaders are human and prone to human errors. Fair enough, again no argument from me on that one. But what distinguishes human error from error that leads to error in doctrine? Stated another way and bringing the question to the topic at hand: is it possible that early error in human thinking led to the doctrine of the curse that kept your church from allowing a very specific people from joining the priesthood for over 100 years?
Associated with this line of questioning is what I mentioned above: what is your faith in, truly? Is allowing for an error of this sort that problematic to your church that it cannot be done without admitting something more drastic?
I don’t know the answer to that question, ultimately. Only you can answer that, and how you answer it gives clues as to where your place your true faith: in an unerring and perfect and glorious God, or in an institution run by fallible men.
FoF said: “That being said, that by no means that a prophet can do whatever he wants and it is “no biggie.” Prophets are human. Always have been. Always will be.”
I’ll stand by my statement. I don’t remember exactly when I found out that Joseph married women who were currently married. Probably in the late 70s or early 80s. I could have just labeled such information as things taken out of context or an outright lie. Well, the context was that he married women who were currently married. Out of what context does one take such information such that putting it back into its context makes it no longer problematic? It wasn’t a lie because it was LDS documented. I chose to follow the path that God commanded it, thus it was okay because we don’t understand God’s calculus in such things. In effect, I chose to believe that God commanded it, thus it was okay and, thus, it could not be a “biggie.” God commanded Joshua to wipe out whole communities-men, women, children, animals. God commanded Nephi to kill a passed out drunk in cold blood. Wait, it wasn’t cold blood because God commanded it. Not a biggie. And the very fact that Nephi was so open about it showed that it was okay. If it weren’t okay, he would have hidden the fact, or something like that. I always had a work-around.
But what if God didn’t command Joseph to marry married women? I don’t see a work-around to that. With the God-driven work-around, it was, in effect no biggie. If that God-driven work-around that God commanded it for real, Joseph’s polyandry becomes very problematic.
Brigham Young taught the Adam God doctrine as doctrine. He taught the curse of Cain on those of African descent as doctrine. I grew up with the work-around, similar to Josephs polyandry, that God commanded the ban, thus it had to be ok. Now the church is telling us, in effect, God DID NOT command Brigham to teach such things (or as you imply, did He?), it was just the racism of the times. To my way of thinking, there is no more God-driven work around, and the LDS church–my church from boyhood up–had it all wrong, false, astray-leading until 1978. There is no longer a viable work-around and it is suddenly very problematic. Why? Because of Brigham Young false doctrine swirled around Mormonism for some 134 years, causing a breach between what the New Testament taught concerning race (and gender and social status) and salvation.
If Brigham was wrong about one of his most central doctrinal themes, which was taught in conference, why should I listen to anything he had to say about anything? and by extension, why should I take too seriously current teachings from LDS officialdom? If LDS leaders can remain valid prophets regardless of what they actually taught or teach, what are we to trust. All we’re left with is follow the prophet, even if he’s wrong and you’ll be blessed. Not very spiritually reassuring nor soul soothing. Indeed, my soul ached for years until I realized all of it went away when one sees that Mormonism and all it’s claims are not true.
I should edit better
If that God-driven work-around that God commanded it for real (should have) IS TAKEN AWAY, Joseph’s polyandry becomes very problematic.
MJP,
Thanks for the response.
I think we are guilty as a people and generation of looking down our noses at other generations. It is called chronocentrism. It is so easy to judge and dismiss people who lived in circumstances we can’t really understand. And I think we are all guilty of it at times.
I will answer your last question first, because I think it is necessary for you to understand my answer to the first question. My faith is in Jesus Christ. And the Book of Mormon was the genesis of my faith in Christ. My life story is one that is as dramatic as one seen in the scriptures- like Alma for instance. The comparison of my life before discovering the Book of Mormon to my life after that discovery is an illustration of the magnitude of change that is only possible in a human being with the involvement of God. And in addition to the magnitude of change in my life (for the extreme good), I think mine is also a case where the variable of interest was quite well isolated (for those familiar with research methodology). When I read the Book of Mormon at age 18, I approached it with essentially no pre-conceived beliefs or biases. I isolated my reading and told absolutely nobody else of my reading or interest. There was no family, friend, social, political, monetary, or any other influence. I have a knowledge that the book is what it claims to be. Of all the things I have learned, experienced, and know, my knowledge that the Book of Mormon is true is most sure. In my opinion, there can be no other fruit or evidence that is more meaningful and lasting that what I experienced and continue to experience. The Book of Mormon softened my heart, convinced me of my need for the Savior, and led me to His feet. My life before and after could not be more different. And because I know the Book of Mormon is true, I know God is real and that He lives. I know Christ is His Son and the only means of salvation. And because I know the Book of Mormon is true, I know the Bible is true. And on and on.
Since my conversion, I have studied the canon of the church consistently and pretty intensely. I have studied positions against and for the faith claims of the church as far as I think is possible. And I feel extremely comfortable with the conclusions that my research and study has afforded. I don’t know all the answers. But I have the answers that I have sought. And I think very few of those answers would be in my reach had I not experienced the spiritual conversion first.
The “Lamanites” were not “more highly favored, preserved, and blessed”. I’ve already explained all this in the Part I comments here, so Lynn need not respond to this obviously desperate invention by you. It is you that does not know what the BOM says. Lynn does not have any kind of “narrow” representation, but you have a fancifully imaginative one, that’s for sure. The more you comment the more it becomes clear that you haven’t read it with any kind of real comprehension.
FoF,
you said, “I know Christ is His Son and the only means of salvation.”
Salvation but not the only means of life with God. Salvation to Christians means to be saved from sin and ALL it’s consequences. So if Salvation to you means Christ is the only way to be in a nice place but not necessarily mean that you can have life with God, then it’s not salvation from ALL consequences and you are really talking about something very different.
I believe reading a book that heavily plagiarizes the Bible could turn someone’s life around. Just because something works doesn’t mean its true. That’s a very Mormon conception of life. I stopped drinking alcohol and my life got better, it works, Mormonism must be true. Non religious example: I let my baby cry themselves to sleep every night until they stopped and now my baby goes to sleep by themselves. It works, it must be the right way to do it. It works so it must be true would not be a good way to go about life. The end and the means aren’t always morally compatible. Then when things don’t work in Mormonism, it’s the persons fault. They didn’t read the BOM enough, they didn’t pray enough, they didn’t have this or that or whatever. It’s always a win win for Mormonism. Nothing is ever in the wrong and if it is there needs to be a away to make it seem right, because it’s true, because the leaders say so, because I feel good, because something in it worked…. It’s all indoctrination, mind control, and emotional manipulation.
Once again, FOF does not disappoint us with his blather. It was not “theories and ideas”, it was declared COMMANDMENT AND REVELATION AND DOCTRINE. Follow the blind leaders who now deny this FOF, even into a ditch so deep you can’t get yourself out. Notice also folks, that FOF’s explanation exactly mimics the new “explanation” posted at lds.org, given the “unofficial” treatment. LOL. So how can he get a spiritual witness that what he says is true, if his own leaders can’t even step up and declare it, but have to hide behind disclaimers and lowly apologists?
Of course the Priesthood Ban was doctrine. Joseph said so himself in 1836,
Then, in 1842:
Cursed with a black skin, (the slaves) and cursed as to the Priesthood, both of which Brigham Young would affirm.
And here is Brigham confirming and saying it “in the name of the Lord”.
Here are more “prophets” confirming Brigham Young
And Brigham Young CONFIRMS that Mormon Doctrine NEVER came from tradition or was influenced by it:
But of course, none of this is “doctrine”, (to the blind led by the blind), and there is “no explanation” (to the blind), and not racist (to the blind), or perhaps the mentally challenged?
FoF,
That’s a nice story, sincerely. I think it is always wonderful when people turn from one direction to another. I do not mean to belittle your experience in what follows, though I do wish to be honest in how to address your experiences.
Do not think Mormonism is the only place that happens. You say you have a knowledge of the veracity of the Book of Mormon. “Knowledge” is a very interesting word to use in this context. It would infer some verifiable way to share the information and is different from an opinion or a feeling, so would you please share your knowledge? See, I can give my story, and the stories of countless others who found Christ and turned from their backward ways. My “knowledge” of the veracity of the Bible is just as strong as yours.
Where does that leave us? Absolutely nowhere constructive in a discussion about where faith is or should be. So, while I appreciate your story, it does not answer my questions. All I learned was that the Book of Mormon is true, and that it convinced you of your need for a savior. This is your quote: “Of all the things I have learned, experienced, and know, my knowledge that the Book of Mormon is true is most sure.” Though you earlier and later state you need a savior, ultimately I am a bit confused about where your faith lies.
So, while you do not address all of my questions, I am still not sure what it is you find most important. To provide some context to my confusion, understand that a Christian would answer that our knowledge that Christ is our savior is that which they know most assuredly, before and above the Bible.
Now, returning to my earlier questions, if your faith is in Christ and the Book of Mormon, why can’t you admit the possibility that the per-1978 doctrine/policy was racist and that the leaders who created it and forced were racist on this point? I am not suggesting you state they were racist, admitting a possibility is something different. Clearly, by definition, the practice was racist, which, by the way, I must state is in itself a neutral term. We put the meaning into it, which therefore means that I am opening the possibility for a positive answer on why the racist policy.
The above question stems from the rationale that if your faith is in something apart from the leadership of your church, which you state is apart from the Mormon leadership, then it seems possible to separate wrongs of your leaders from Christ and the Book of Mormon. This is precisely what I do in my faith, since my faith is in Christ, and not in my leadership, so I can call my leadership out when they are wrong. Can you do the same?
So, FOF, were you struck dumb by an angel who appeared to you and spoke “like thunder”, and did you fall into an unconscious state where for three days and three nights you lay unable to move until you felt within yourself that you had been forgiven of your sins? Did you actively persecute the Mormons and almost destroy the church, prompting the appearance of this angel?
Just curious, cause Alma’s story is pretty dramatic. Almost like Paul’s… almost.
I have a question, maybe you can help Grindael? If the LDS church isn’t and has never been racist, why couldn’t Black people enter the temple? Why couldn’t they receive their endowments? Sister missionaries have always received their endowments before going on missions and they don’t hold the priesthood. White women and children have always been allowed to enter the temple. Kids as young as 12 have been going in groups for years and years to do baptisms for the dead. Why were Blacks not allowed inside the temple even though they couldn’t receive the priesthood? Why couldn’t they receive their endowments without holding the priesthood? I have to assume it was because of the color of their skin.
grindael,
Book of Mormon passages regarding the Nephites and Lamanites:
“But, wo, wo, unto you [Nephites] that are not pure in heart, that are filthy this day before God; for except ye repent the land is cursed for your sakes; and the Lamanites, which are not filthy like unto you, nevertheless they are cursed with a sore cursing, shall scourge you even unto destruction. And the time speedily cometh, that except ye repent they shall possess the land of your inheritance, and the Lord God will lead away the righteous out from among you. Behold, the Lamanites your brethren, whom ye hate because of their filthiness and the cursing which hath come upon their skins, are more righteous than you; for they have not forgotten the commandment of the Lord, which was given unto our father — that they should have save it were one wife, and concubines they should have none, and there should not be whoredoms committed among them. Jacob 3:3-6
“Wherefore, a commandment I give unto you, which is the word of God, that ye revile no more against them because of the darkness of their skins; neither shall ye revile against them because of their filthiness; but ye shall remember your own filthiness, and remember that their filthiness came because of their fathers.” Jacob 3:9
“And now behold, this was the desire which I desired of him — that if it should so be, that my people, the Nephites, should fall into transgression, and by any means be destroyed, and the Lamanites should not be destroyed, that the Lord God would preserve a record of my people, the Nephites; even if it so be by the power of his holy arm, that it might be brought forth at some future day unto the Lamanites, that, perhaps, they might be brought unto salvation…….And I had faith, and I did cry unto God that he would preserve the records; and he covenanted with me that he would bring them forth unto the Lamanites in his own due time..” Enos 1:13,16
“And these are the words: Behold, I perceive that this very people, the Nephites, according to the spirit of revelation which is in me, in four hundred years from the time that Jesus Christ shall manifest himself unto them, shall dwindle in unbelief. Yea, and then shall they see wars and pestilences, yea, famines and bloodshed, even until the people of Nephi shall become extinct –” Alma 45:10-11
” For behold, thus saith the Lord: I will not show unto the wicked of my strength, to one more than the other, save it be unto those that repent of their sins, and hearken unto my words. Now therefore, I would that ye should behold, my brethren, that it shall be better for the Lamanites than for you except ye shall repent. For behold, they are more righteous than you, for they have not sinned against that great knowledge which ye have received; therefore the Lord will be merciful unto them; yea, he will lengthen out their days and increase their seed, even when thou shalt be utterly destroyed except thou shalt repent.” Helaman 7:24-25
Which group became extinct? Nephites
Which group was preserved by the Lord? Lamanites
Which group was promised that they would return to the Lord after their apostasy? Lamanites
You word searches do not provide you with any degree of understanding of the text. It has been a long time since you really knew the book, if you ever did.
MJP,
Christ is the focus of my faith. No question. The Book of Mormon was the vehicle by which I was brought to Christ.
You will notice on my post that I did not exclude any experiences from other people. Anything that brings people to Christ is good. I do not think that the LDS church is the only place people experience conversion. One of my favorite quotations is, “the perfect form of open mindedness is a testimony of the gospel of Jesus Christ. The disagreements are between you and me, not between the Book of Mormon and the Bible. I see nothing contradictory between them. I believe it is simply the sophistry of men that has caused your perception to be what it is about LDS and the Book of Mormon. If you look at history, it is almost always the case that people reject prophets and even Christ Himself while claiming to accept previous prophets. Those people always find contradictions between the present and past representatives of God. It is almost a rule of history.
Regarding my use of the word “know”- I would choose no other word. I have spent 14 years in post high school training and school and have learned a lot (and forgotten a lot). Yet, in all of that, the one thing I am most convinced of is that Jesus of Nazareth rose from the grave 3 days after His crucifixion (as measured by the Jews). Of all the perceived knowledge that has resulted from my senses and perceptions throughout my life, that is first and foremost. I know that more deeply than I know the objects sitting in front of me on my desk are real.
So when people start claiming they know X,Y,Z happened 180 years ago because of what they have read or watched from fourth, fifth, and sixth hand sources and that shows I am blinded and wrong, understand that I am not likely to “take their word for it” when I have studied the very same sources myself and have made sense of it on my own.
As far as the race issue, I do not believe the early brethren were wrong in the policy of the church. I do not know precisely or surely why the policy was desired by the Lord. I do not see the requirement that I know the reason, even if other people have their own theories or reasoning. And I think the recent statement is consistent with that. In other words, the policy (which I believe was the Lord’s will) cannot be attached to any particular causal factor in confidence. People have naturally read racist statements from early leaders about blacks and concluded, well that is the reason for the ban. And from an objective view, that is jumping the gun and assigning a causal relationship that does not necessarily exist.
Were some of the early members and leaders of the church racist? I am not their judge. I don’t know their hearts and the circumstances in which they lived. Do I agree with everything ever uttered by every leader of the church? No. Am I required to? No.
You ask about separating my faith from my leaders. I believe and claim to “know” that Thomas Monson is the authorized representative of Christ on the earth for our day and is as much so as was Moses or Isaiah. That requires my loyalty, but not the insistence that he is perfect.
This is a very good issue. And I have recently come to the conclusion that God intends for us to accept His representative(s) on the earth. And there is a reason for this. It is a part of our salvation, a part of our having faith. You can say that you only have faith in Christ, not in any man. But I suggest to you that having faith in a mortal on earth, chosen by God, and who is imperfect, is precisely having faith in Christ. It is a reflection of our own faith that Christ can save us, personally. Does it seem contradictory to you for me to insist that Christ can save me, a fallen and extremely flawed individual, yet Christ cannot provide leadership, direction, light, knowledge, and prophetic guidance through another mortal, flawed person? It seems contradictory to me. And I believe that is why so many say throughout history that they accept past prophets, yet reject prophets of their own day (or even Christ Himself).
Trusting and following a true prophet in one’s own day actually strengthens a person’s faith and trust in God. Not trusting that prophet erodes faith.
FoF, I really feel sorry for you.
You claim the BoM is real, but the lake of fire that awaits you is real as well as your false prophets.
You believe the BoM yet their is zero evidence for it, while tossing the Bible under the bus despite all the evidence. Like I said, I have been to Israel twice. I just got back from a 16 day trip this past Nov/Dec 2013.
I have read the BoM, and it mentions people being and living in Jersulam 600 years BC. Yet I have pictures on my phone and saw the sites and people that existed 600 years and farther back from the BC era. Yet no Jew alive has ever found any evidence for these BoM people, they dont know of them, never meet them, nothing.
How is it possible No evidence exists for the BoM, yet you believe it? As Falcon says, where is Mormonism in the Bible? I could go on, but you will simply believe what you want, until it is to late.
“Anything that brings people to Christ is good. I do not think that the LDS church is the only place people experience conversion.”
At the risk of diverting an otherwise productive discussion, I have to ask which Christ? I then have to ask if my conversion is as good as yours? Will my belief in Christ get me to the same place as your belief in Christ?
Now, back to the topic at hand: you said this about your leaders and having faith in Christ (all of this is relevant because ultimately at issue is whether the racist policies (you don’t deny they were racist) are the result of flawed men leading an infallible church): “But I suggest to you that having faith in a mortal on earth, chosen by God, and who is imperfect, is precisely having faith in Christ.” I have simply one question from your assertion that having faith in a mortal, imperfect man on earth, chosen by God, is having faith in Christ: is it possible that this idea is merely a result of your leadership telling you so and your resulting desire to ‘succeed’ within the framework of the church? Stated another way: is it possible your conclusion that faith in a mortal man equals having faith in Christ a result of the framework of your beliefs within the context of a larger organization rather than truth?
The answer is that yes, it is possible. If it is possible, then what is gained from believing in this man that is not gained from believing solely in Christ? You can answer that it shows discipline, obedience, faithfulness. Yet, following Christ alone also shows discipline, obedience, faithfulness. You could answer that the Prophet speaks for Christ, but why not allow Christ to speak for himself? You can answer that following the prophet provides all sorts of benefits, but what can he provide that God himself cannot?
The question of whether belief in a living prophet in the manner LDS follow a prophet becomes really quite interesting, then. It is compounded when the possibility that the prophets might have led the perfect church into an indefensible position. Either they were wrong, or they were not wrong. If they were wrong, what else have they been wrong about? Remember, we are not talking about merely personal glitches here: we are talking about doctrine, which the prophets state come from God directly and are therefore infallible.
You continue to state you don’t know why the doctrine existed. Fair enough. You don’t have to. However, before you accuse us of cognitive dissonance, consider what it is we are saying. We are saying that your leaders may indeed have been racist. It is true enough that many Christians were also racist at the time. However, we can call our previous leaders racist and that they may have erred. Doing so does not destroy our faith in Christ. Stating your leaders erred on this doctrine does damage your church far more than it does ours. You’ve said nothing to alter that conclusion. You must understand at least this, even if you do not agree. Otherwise, you will continue to miss so much of our discussions and knowledge and understanding that comes with them.
Knowledge there means verifiable knowledge, not just the strong feeling one gets that something is true. I know my Christ died for me, and that He is all I need to live my life in heaven surrounded by His glory. I know that as sure as I know the sun rises in the east and sets in the west. But that specific knowledge can only experienced, but not verified. However, the knowledge we share is knowledge about our understanding of God can be verified and considered. You would do well to learn it, and you’ve never shown to really have an understanding of our faith.
Why go through a paragraph on knowledge in a post about leadership as it relates to previous racist dogma? Because true knowledge requires looking at everything, not just that which supports your leadership and your faith in that leadership. Remember that it is very possible that God provides everything you think you might receive from your leadership directly to you. Remember that it is a very real possibility your leaders were in fact flawed men who started flawed doctrine. Remember that it is a very real possibility your understanding of your leadership comes from your leadership, who is out to preserve itself. Further, understand your “knowledge” of God can be equaled by mine, and there is nothing you can do to prove I am wrong.
All of that to say that it is a very real possibility that your faith in your leadership is flawed, despite your “knowledge”. I say this understanding a hesitancy to question leadership. I say all of that understanding that there is often far more going on than meets the eye. Wouldn’t you agree with that premise?
MJP said,
Remember that it is very possible that God provides everything you think you might receive from your leadership directly to you.
I say,
This is the root of so much of the difference between Christians and Mormons.
We Christians live in the New Covenant in which the benefits of the covenant are mediated by the perfect blood of Christ our only living Prophet Priest and King and showered freely on us his subjects.
Mormons on the other seek to live in the old covenant in which the benefits are metered out by fallen earthly “prophets and priests” who can and do err.
How very sad
Peace
FoF said,
“In the Book of Mormon, the dark-skinned Lamanites were more highly favored, preserved, and blessed than their light-skinned brothers and sisters … Do you have any response to these points?”
This following is a repeat of my previous post under part 1 that you have yet to address:
——————————–
FoF, you said,
“And there have not been any reasonable, informed, or effective responses to my points. The Book of Mormon is not racist. Those with dark skin in the BOM were more blessed than those with white skin.”
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, that 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.”
Jacob 3.5: “Behold, the Lamanites your brethren, whom ye hate because of their FILTHINESS and the CURSING which hath come upon their skins, are more righteous than you; for they have not forgotten the commandment of the Lord, which was given unto our father — that they should have save it were one wife, and concubines they should have none, and there should not be whoredoms committed among them.”
Jacob 3.9: “Wherefore, a commandment I give unto you, which is the word of God, that ye revile no more against them because of the DARKNESS of their SKINS; neither shall ye revile against them because of their FILTHINESS; but ye shall remember your own filthiness, and remember that their FILTHINESS CAME BECAUSE OF THEIR FATHERS.”
3 Nephi 2.14-16: “And it came to pass that those 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; And their young men and their daughters BECAME EXCEEDINGLY FAIR, and they were numbered among the Nephites, and were called Nephites. And thus ended the thirteenth year.”
The skin of blackness was not only a curse, it was a *sore* curse, which made all the Lamanites filthy and unenticing to the fair and white Nephites. The only time the Lamanites are in God’s favor is when they become white and fair.
“Fair” is only used regarding white skin (1Ne 13.15; 2Ne 5.21; 3Ne 2.15-16; 4Ne 1.10; Morm 9.6), and in particular their daughters (Jac 2.32; Mos 19.13; 3Ne 8.25; 9.2; Morm 6.19) and even Mary (1Ne 11.13, 15) who just so happens to be white in the text, but never for the skin of blackness. And to make the argument that *white* is to be understood in a spiritual sense, the text simply won’t allow for it (2Ne 5.21, 3Ne 2.14-16, etc.).
Filthiness is the only adjective I see attached to the skin of blackness. And how does someone’s ethnicity make them unenticing, exactly? Socially or sexually? Contrast the blatant racism in the BoM with the Bible, Acts 17.26. Where are the attached curses and blessings of ethnicity? The only time dark skin in the BoM is blessed is when it becomes white first.
FoF said,
“The prophet Jacob and other prophets told the white-skinned Nephites that the Lamanites were more righteous than the Nephites.”
Jacob 3.5,8: “Behold, the Lamanites your brethren, whom ye hate because of their filthiness and the cursing which hath come upon their skins, are more righteous than you; for they have not forgotten the commandment of the Lord, which was given unto our father — that they should have save it were one wife, and concubines they should have none, and there should not be whoredoms committed among them … O my brethren, I fear that unless ye shall repent of your sins that their skins will be whiter than yours, when ye shall be brought with them before the throne of God.”
So the Lamanites are not sinning at one point in the same way that the Nephites are regarding one doctrine, polygamy (oh, the irony!). What Jacob is saying is that if this pattern continues into other areas then the Nephites in the end will receive the sore curse of filthiness and unenticing skin of blackness and the Lamanites with become white and fair and delightsome, just as happened in 2Ne 5.21 (And he had caused the CURSING to come upon them, yea, even a SORE CURSING, because of their iniquity … Lord God did cause a skin of BLACKNESS to come upon them) and 3Ne 2.14,15 (And it came to pass that those 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). The black skins were not more righteous than the white skins over all, only regarding polygamy, for if it had been in general then the curse would have been removed, hence Jacob’s warning.
Funny how the BoM has to be twisted to make it not racist, and the Bible has to be twisted to make it racist.
FoF said,
“In the Book of Mormon, the dark-skinned Lamanites were more highly favored, preserved, and blessed than their light-skinned brothers and sisters. While the Nephites were destroyed, the Lamanites survived and had great blessings extended to them by God.”
This is what Mormon and Moroni had to say regarding the Lamanites as they watched the genocide unfold:
Mormon 4.11: And it is impossible for the tongue to describe, or for man to write a perfect description of the horrible scene of the blood and carnage which was among the people, both of the Nephites and of the Lamanites; and every heart was hardened, so that they delighted in the shedding of blood continually.
Mormon 5.15: And also that the seed of this people may more fully believe his gospel, which shall go forth unto them from the Gentiles; for this people shall be scattered, and shall become a dark, a filthy, and a loathsome people, beyond the description of that which ever hath been amongst us, yea, even that which hath been among the Lamanites, and this because of their unbelief and idolatry.
Ether 4.3: And now, after that, they have all dwindled in unbelief; and there is none save it be the Lamanites, and they have rejected the gospel of Christ; therefore I am commanded that I should hide them up again in the earth.
Ether 8.20: And now I, Moroni, do not write the manner of their oaths and combinations, for it hath been made known unto me that they are had among all people, and they are had among the Lamanites.
Moroni 1.2: For behold, their wars are exceedingly fierce among themselves; and because of their hatred they put to death every Nephite that will not deny the Christ.
Note that the Lord had not removed the filthy loathsome sore curse of a skin of blackness because of their iniquity from the Native American when Europeans arrived.
Well I’ve been busy for the past day and a half and just dropped in and I must say the board has also been very busy.
What’s interesting to me is that FOF is arguing with former Mormons, for the most part, including Lynn, the author of the two part article.
This is a fascinating thing to be hold and sort of entertaining.
So you former Mormons (this is a rhetorical question) what do you think the FOF thinks of you? I mean you all figured it out. You packed your bags and bugged-out not because you wanted to sin, or someone offended you or because you stopped reading the BoM.
No your integrity wouldn’t allow you to stay once you figured out that the whole program is false.
As long as FOF keeps coming here, there is hope. Its happened to countless other Mormons.
FOF, very open and honest and sincere, yet it still sounds like myself in 1975 at age 17, this part “I have a knowledge that the book is what it claims to be ” FOF, what claims ? what knowledge, and I can ask myself that when i was 17 back when I trusted every single leader with not one single deep question from me .
I knew , based on what ? reading it and praying about it.
I was told in my lifetime the book would be proved true through findings , artifacts .
Yet nothing has ever been found.
The cities in the BOM, zero, names nothing.
Mormonism has to be defended daily because it is not true.
How many time did I hear this ” the church is perfect but the people are not”
It has not , will not, can not ever be perfect , especially in its doctrine, lol, whoops , theories .
I agree that there is hope for FOF as long as he keeps coming here – but nothing any of us says will ever convince him (though I think he should especially and prayerfully consider what MJP has had to say throughout all of this). The fact is, unless God Almighty drops the scales from his eyes like he did so mercifully for me and so many of you who probably, at one time, swore you would never leave Mormonism – he will remain in darkness. It’s tricky, because he truly believes he is in the light just like I and so many of you did. You can only see the darkness of Mormonism AFTER you have received “the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit whom He poured out on us richly through our Savior Jesus Christ” (Titus 3:5-6). The Apostle Paul was sure of a lot of things too, before he headed for Damascus. He thought that Jesus was the greatest blasphemer that ever lived; he thought that Christianity was a misguided and terrible sect that ought to be destroyed. Then he had an encounter with the Resurrected Christ and EVERYTHING changed. Now he knew that Jesus was God in the flesh and that the Christians were the very people of God; the very Israel of God; and he spent the rest of his life defending the faith he once persecuted – ultimately giving his very life as a TRUE martyr. I believed with all of my heart that Mormonism was true for the first 40 years of my life. I now know that it is a dead and fruitless tree – a broken cistern that can hold no living water. I now know that Jesus is God in the flesh (not a created being) – that there has never been a time when He wasn’t God and that there never has been, nor will there ever be, any God besides HIM. I now know that it is ONLY through His perfect, FINISHED work on the cross and not by “works done by me in righteousness” that I will be saved and dwell in His presence forever – that I will never have a “righteousness” of my own that would qualify me to live in His presence – but that my righteous comes from HIM ALONE. FOF, you may say that you believe these things too, yet you continue to trust in men who teach just the opposite. Once you have an encounter with the living, Resurrected, Biblical Christ (not with the BOM or living “prophets” etc.) EVERYTHING changes – including what you thought was true about God, man, eternity…EVERYTHING. Only God can do that for FOF. We should continue in loving dialogue with the FOF’s of the world, but what we really need to do is pray that God will do for them what He promised in Isaiah 42:16:
“I will lead the blind in a way that they do not know, in paths that they have not known I will guide them. I will turn the darkness before them into light”
That’s what He did for me and my family and I praise Him continually for it. Until that happens for FOF, he and others like him will remain in their idolatry. FOF, the fact that your leaders got it wrong regarding blacks and the priesthood should trouble you; the fact that they are now spinning it and absolutely lying about it should greatly disturb you; but more than all of that, the fact that they continue to teach falsely regarding vital and eternal truths should terrify you. I say this in absolute sincerity and not to be insulting. In the same way I would scream “get out of the road!!!” to my young child about to get hit by a car I say to you: Your leaders are NOT true shepherds; “they have entered by another way”. In the words of Jesus in John 10: “Run from them!” Run for your life!
So FOF………………….
We’re back to the old “I have knowledge” argument. It usually comes about this time when the faithful Mormon has exhausted all possible arguments, has been painted into a corner and now must rely on some super secret, hyper-spiritual evidence from “knowing”.
Sorry pal, that’s not going to make it for several reasons least of which all of us here have “knowledge” and a “testimony”. That testimony is that Jesus is the Christ, God incarnate, who died, was buried, resurrected and will come again to establish His Kingdom. Faith in Him and what He has done for us secures our relationship with the Father and seals us by the Holy Spirit.
You can “know” the BoM is true all you want but the fact is that any feeling you might have regarding Smith’s tome is swept aside by the evidence.
My advice to you is to put your faith in the Lord Jesus Christ and not some leaders, who it has been shown, are flawed beyond hope. Trusting a religious system to make you a god will not end well.
Please keep coming here though because God will lift the cloud of confusion that encompasses you.
Faithoffathers has an interesting point of view. I honestly do see how he sees what he sees. I don’t get the logic, but I get why he see it. I’ve never been LDS, but it makes sense to me for him to want to protect that which he holds dear, and it certainly makes sense for him not to rush to conclusions.
I fear, though, that in his hesitancy to reach conclusions too quickly he is also hesitant to find answers. This I suppose I understand to a degree, too: he is comfortable and believes he is in the truth now. Why would anything else be better, and how can the church be wrong, if he has all he thinks he needs now? (The former LDS here can speak to this tendency better than I can.)
May I just say this (running the risk of boring everyone with my ex) I talked to her many times over the years about the obvious deception practised by the LDS I remember telling her many years ago about Joe Smiths polygamy, that’s rubbish she said, an ti mormon lies. I spoke to her years ago about the way the church lied about charitable donations only to be met with screams of “I don’t want to hear it” If I said to her that Mormons know a different God to the one I find in the Bible I would be met with, “don’t talk rubbish, we believe in the God of the Bible”
Anyway, as most of you will be aware, she is in the very difficult process of leaving the LDS, (those of you who have been down that road will know what I mean) At the moment she is being ‘love bombed’ but it won’t be long before that turns into some kind of emotional blackmail. So what’s the point of this little tale? Well, it’s simply to confirm what wilburson & others have said, it needs Gods touch to take away the blindness & this is exactly what happened with my ex. It was nothing of my doing, nothing at all, she came to me one day & said she didn’t know why but she was having doubts about the church, she ‘felt’ that something wasn’t right. I said to her “God has opened your eyes” & it snowballed from there.
Ps. I hope you read this FofF
OM,
It really does come down to the emotional pull of Mormonism and the idea within the sect that emotions equate with spirituality, knowledge and truth.
So FOF is just higher than a kite on Mormonism. It’s an emotional buzz when coupled with what a person desires to believe that makes it so hard to break through the shell of deceit. It can be intoxicating to some. Then when you figure that a person’s whole life is centered on “the one true church”, how does a true believer ever leave? Outside of the Utah Mormon bubble it’s relatively easier however the whole deal is a total bummer as we’d say in the 60s.
Let’s just examine what’s been going on here in response to Lynn’s two part article. We’ve given enough evidence to support what Lynn has written to paper the whole inside walls of the LDS temple in SLC. We read what FOF writes to defend the one true church and God’s appointed leaders and the disconnect with reality is stunning. It’s the equivalent of him saying that the sun is shinning when there’s a down pour of rain outside. But he thinks the rain IS sunshine. It’s what he’s been taught.
Why did you leave out these verses FOF? VVVVVVVVV
Funny how the Book of Mormon read in context shows us that their skins WOULD turn whiter if the obeyed God. This also proves you wrong, because the Nephites WERE MORE WICKED than the LAMANITES, because they had MORE KNOWLEDGE, which you somehow forgot to address, because the Nephites had started practicing polygamy, which the BOM forbade. The God of the BOM (whoever it might be) even says that “how much better are you than they”, which also proves you wrong. The BOM God looked at them the same, IF THEY REPENTED. That is the whole point that you seem unable to grasp. The “Lamanites” would turn white, if they did and become just like the Nephites, as they did when they accepted Jesus during his supposed visit.
You quote,
Again, you only make my point. IF the NEPHITES should fall into transgression… If they did NOT, then the LAMANITES would not be “more righteous”, they still had the curse of the dark skin. They did not lose this when they killed off all of the Nephites, so they were not on the same par as the righteous Nephites. Your faulty exegis falls apart.
Again, you deceptively left off the very verses that make my point: VVVVVVVV
Wow, FOF, you have to deceive people, to make your point. It must be you doing those word searches you keep mentioning (feeling guilty?), because you are making a fool of yourself by not quoting the entire context (verses you must not have seen in your searches). Bad boy, FOF. Bad boy.
Already quoted that, and it doesn’t help you at all.
Because they sinned with greater knowledge and fell from their high place.
To kill the Nephites who had sinned a greater sin.
7 And now I write somewhat concerning the sufferings of this people. For according to the knowledge which I have received from Amoron, behold, the Lamanites have many prisoners, which they took from the tower of Sherrizah; and there were men, women, and children.8 And the husbands and fathers of those women and children they have slain; and they feed the women upon the aflesh of their husbands, and the children upon the flesh of their fathers; and no water, save a little, do they give unto them. 9 And notwithstanding this great abomination of the Lamanites, it doth not exceed that of our people in Moriantum. For behold, many of the daughters of the Lamanites have they taken prisoners; and after depriving them of that which was most dear and precious above all things, which is chastity and virtue— 10 And after they had done this thing, they did murder them in a most cruel manner, torturing their bodies even unto death; and after they have done this, they devour their flesh like unto wild beasts, because of the hardness of their hearts; and they do it for a token of bravery. 11 O my beloved son, how can a people like this, that are without civilization—12 (And only a few years have passed away, and they were a civil and a delightsome people)13 But O my son, how can a people like this, whose delight is in so much abomination—14 How can we expect that God will stay his hand in judgment against us?
Have they? NO. And they never will. And genius, how could the descendants of the Nephites have that promise, when they were all killed? You are so silly.
Your ignorance of the Book of Mormon shows that it is you that have never read it. I’ve caught you in so many mistakes and lies, that you should be embarrassed to even come here and post again. But you keep doing it and I keep showing how ignorant you are. You answer nothing, prove nothing. Such, I guess, is life in the Mormon Bubble of Denial and Ignorance.
This is why racism still lives on in America and shows the very real danger of Religious Cults. Follow the profit, even if he tells you that God is a Racist, and that you should be one too.
grindael,
Of course the brethren weren’t wrong in FOF’s eyes. I addressed that about fifty posts ago and three or four times since.
It is imperative that the LDS church be true and that the prophet (is it profit?) is true blue and absolutely right. If they’re aren’t then it blows the whole program up.
What ever the LDS church and the prophets do is right and true; even if it appears to all the world that it isn’t. They have a higher calling remember.
That’s why Joseph Smith could hop into bed with every women in town, regardless of her marital status and it’s A-OK. It’s right if he does it. That’s why when he said there were people living on the moon and BY said there were people living on the sun, it’s true. See that’s the TBM. At some point FOF will shift over and get into the “opinion” and “folk doctrine” defense of the church and the leaders.
FOF might get there eventually, but he’s so deep into the fantasy that it may take a Damascus experience to jolt him out of his Mormon stupor.
Hay, I think it would be very helpful if all of our former Mormons give their testimony at least once a month. Cut and paste three or four versions because like talk radio, we get knew lurkers showing up here all the time.
Falcon, you say: “What ever the LDS church and the prophets do is right and true; even if it appears to all the world that it isn’t.” Not only that, but its apparently true even when there is no logical or appropriate explanation.
FoF,
I seriously wonder why you and the vast majority of LDS are not really atheist? You and all the other LDS that have posted over the years here have always attcaked the Bible and keep throwing it under the bus.
In part one of this topic, You attacked the Bible and kept point out what you felt was problems. In part two, your leaders and prophets talk about trusting the Bible and using it and counting it as part of scripture.
Most of what you said in part one was adressed and as usual you ignored what was said. But I wanted to point something out, what I want to point out is something you tend to do and so do athiests.
You said
When ever an Atheist mentions God destroying the earth with a flood, they never tell people that before God did that, God showed great kindness and mercy by giving the entrie earth time to repent.
God gave them 120 years and if they wanted, they could have entered the Ark and they would be saved. Sadly Atheists Awalys leave that out and lead people to believe God simply killed off everyone with no chance to be saved. Sadly You never mentioned that either, and that tells me you either never read the Bible, and were not aware of that fact, or you read the account and left out that information on purpose.
If you purposly left it out, then thats dectiful and leading people to believe something that did not happen. And you wonder why we feel you have no clue.
Fof, first let me say, I really do pray your eyes are opended to the truth and that you come to know the true and real God, Jesus Christ, not the false christ of the book of Mormon.
With that said, I notice you really don’t reply much to what we say, why is that? Please don’t say it’s because there are so many replys that you cannot. I notice many questions you avoid, like people asking why it appears you leave out verses, or things along that line.
I really believe you know deep down in your heart that mormonism is false, but pride keeps you from admitting if your wrong, then that not only means you will face eternal judgement, but you will have to face all the people you knowingly lead to eternal destruction also. So I’m praying for you.
This is a case of a person creating their own reality or accepting a reality that’s been created for them. Go back to Joseph Smith’s first vision testimony as an example. The guy gave something like eight versions. It’s a spiritual fish story. The fish just keeps getting bigger with the retelling. The deal is, however, that this fish got away. So a person is left with whether or not they are going to accept that new and improved version of the story.
That’s the thing with guys like Joseph Smith. They have the ability to get people caught-up in their fantasy. They are unusually good liars. Those who believe them, can bend their own thinking, suspend credulity, do whatever it takes to keep the fantasy going.
This is what’s happening with the LDS church and the ban its leaders promoted on blacks in the priesthood. The faithful member now must offer some explanation that supports what they want to believe. That’s the way it is with anything in Mormonism. We address various topics on this blog and when the Mormons show-up they reveal how a person in a cult thinks and how they protect what they want to believe in.
What we do by presenting information is challenge the Mormon narrative and the thinking that lies behind the individual members created fantasy. There comes a point where a thoughtful Mormon will have to give it up.
Good morning , Falcon I wanted to bear my testimony that i know that the Bible is real, that Jesus was who he said, with so many miracles he performed to help so many , and there were eyewitness accounts of them to help us really know who is was and is.
What more do I need ? I am free in my heart and soul to be me .
To have faith in God and his Son is a simple joy, not like the 1975 -2011 task of being in a church where I trusted the so called leaders .
I know that church is not the only true church, I was told in my lifetime the BOM would be proved true by artifacts. Which none have been found.
My life is simple and filled with a deep inner peace and joy, my sons who are 20 and 23 have been crippled by that false church and my heart aches for them, yet also having two beautiful daughters many years later who have not been baptized and pulled in gives me such joy .
My heart truly aches for those who are still in the church defending it , the longer one stays in and is dug in deep the greater there pain with be at first when they leave, and over time they will go from bitter to better, is my testimony to all here in our loving Son’s name Amen
Ironman said,
“I know that church is not the only true church, I was told in my lifetime the BOM would be proved true by artifacts. Which none have been found.”
And now all that’s left is testimony.
FoF said,
“(crickets chirping…)”
FoF, is your testimony tight like unto a dish? Is all evidence against the church like water off a ducks back to your testimony? The is no smoking gun against your testimony, we can’t rationalize someone out of something they did not rationalize themself into.
*there is no smoking gun*
Ironman,
Thank you for contributing your testimony of your faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.
Isn’t that a lot better than all those years you had to rote spew the “I know……..” canned testimony in the LDS church? Because that’s really what the LDS testimony is; a testimony of a religious system that claims to be able to turn a male follower into a god.
This is not found in the Bible because what the LDS church teaches would be totally foreign to first century Christians. There is no “restoration” of the first century Christian belief system within the LDS gospel. I can see why the BoM story would captivate some folks because Smith copied a good share of it from the KJV of the Bible. There’s enough of the Bible in the BoM to fool people who don’t know any better.
But the point has been made many times here and that is that even the original BoM and the original “restored” Mormon gospel has been lost. What is left of what Smith started is a patch work quilt of a lot of bizarre ideas that could appeal only to those who don’t know any better.
It’s sort of fun to look at all of the different sects of Mormonism and the conclusion that each has the real deal Mormonism. Specifically, how many of those sects refused dark skin people from the priesthood?
I like what you wrote about the simplicity of your faith in Christ.
I think it’s important for those looking into the claims of Mormonism to take time to
available themselves of the information on Negroes /Black skin and the Mormon
church . Upon an examination of relevant material on what Mormon leaders have
done and taught about Negroes /Black skin , a picture begins to emerge and it’s one
of confusion . It’s so thick that it only points to one verdict : Mormon leaders are
religious men who ” teach for doctrine the commandments of men ” , on many vital
doctrines , and their teachings about Negroes are at the top of the list .
Mormons talk about the gospel of Jesus Christ , how their Missionaries take the
same gospel to the world that church officers in the original church Jesus established
in the New Testament time —Rom 1:16 . Jesus’ true messengers went to all peoples,
races : that they could receive the fullest of blessings and privileges from God when
they accepted the gospel of Jesus Christ .
But men like Brigham Young succumbed to apostasy by drifting from the true gospel .
He influenced many church leaders after him to carry on his false gospel message .
Unfortunately , church leaders today still refuse to admit he taught false doctrine
and so they can’t trusted to follow as reliable consistent guides in teaching gospel
truth . Conscientious Mormons are wondering why this issue about Blacks won’t go
away , and some black Mormons still feel some racism /discrimination resides in
their church . The buck stops with their leadership , until these men actually admit
false doctrine was taught about blacks instead of resorting to words that deflect
away from that fact , many of their flock will still not be able to put this issue
behind them and feel more confident in answering questions about it from potential
converts .
Mormons today who like to quote 2Nephi 26:33 to remind investigators of their
church’s position on races / skin color , are not telling them ” the rest of the story ”
namely , that their recent past leaders already knew of that verse yet they still
introduced to their flock teachings on black skin curses / Negroes they claimed
were God’s law .
Mormonism is not the answer.
The truth about Jesus and who and how to receive eternal life and the fullest blessings
thereof are in the New Testament . Lynn discovered that life changing truth because
she took the time to read it . May other Mormons make time in their busy lives to
look into the New Testament and read about Jesus and the truth which He sent His
apostles out with to reach all peoples — the glorious salvation message Rom 1:16 ;
Col 1:20-23
My dad taught me all that racist bull-shite growing up in the church during the 80’s. I ate it up like candy. I’m embarrassed I believed it for so many years. It’s so messed up. FOF sounds like one of those mormons (like my dad) who think the black skin doctrine is correct, but it’s just that “we’re not ready to accept it yet” mentality that most mormons think about the wacky tobacky “deep doctrine”. The swine aren’t ready for the pearls… just like polygamy.
FOF,
I totally get your dedication to the church. I have been there. I had a lot of good experiences in the church. As a member of the LDS church I absolutely felt God in my life, leading me and answering my prayers, but that’s because he was loving me where I was at. Thankfully he didn’t stop short of “finishing the work he began in me.” I know it sounds like utter rebellion to you for someone to actually leave the “one true church,” and turn their back on all of those “experiences.” I was the YW president just 5 years ago and would never imagine being outside of the church. It’s hard to explain, but maybe the doubts you feel are from God and not something else. I think you are probably questioning things even a little to even be on this site which would be pretty shaky ground for a “TBM.” All I can tell you is that there is a difference and it is life altering. When I finally let go and trusted alone in the finished work of Christ it became crystal clear.
As far as the BOM is concerned, I think there are some great things in there about Jesus. It can be faith promoting in some verses. However, The Lord of the Rings is faith promoting too – it’s just not real. The BOM was the hardest thing to give up for me, but as others have said – we don’t need it because everything about Jesus and salvation is in the Bible – and it is real. If you truly read it with trusting eyes (get something without all the distracting JST’s) you will be amazed! Don’t read it with a “gospel doctrine” lens; read it again like a first time reader. I personally love Galatians. You don’t have to trust anyone here, (not dissing anyone’s posts by the way) just trust the Bible and the Lord. He might be taking you somewhere you could never even imagine.
Merrick–. No worries, I always tell people to check things out on their own and to test everything.
I like your emphasis on trusting God alone. No one can do any better.
The two part article that Lynn has written gives us insight not only into her discoveries of the LDS ban on blacks in the priesthood, but also the steps she went through in leaving the LDS church. This particular issue was one of many on her road out of the “one true church”.
Once the possibility that the LDS church is not true and perfect is broached by a true believer, it’s pretty difficult to go back (to the original mind set). In her testimony Lynn talks about a gold cross she had that she started to wear but had to hide under her clothing. Being on the BYU campus, the wearing of a cross was a real no-no.
In Mormonism, the rejection of the cross is not just a fashion statement, it’s the denial of where our redemption was secured. The apostle Paul said that he was not ashamed of the cross of Christ. Mormons are not only ashamed of it but it appears that they are terrified by it. They see it as a sign of an execution. They don’t seem to be able to make the connection between what happened on the cross and God’s redemptive work through Jesus Christ. Seeing the atonement in the Garden, they shift the place of our redemption. This is no small matter.
The denial of the LDS church of blacks in the priesthood is one thing. I wouldn’t call it trivial by any means because it’s couched in bigotry and wrong thinking. However when compared to the denial of the cross of Jesus Christ where the redemption of mankind took place……………………………
What Lynn’s article does is allow those who are trapped in the maze of Mormonism to see just one more example of how the Mormon people are poorly served by those they call prophets and apostles.
But the real purpose here is that by bringing up these issues, Mormons will see the falseness of the religious system that they belong to and in discovering this be led into a saving relationship with Jesus Christ.
FOF,
Please let us know if you still believe that your points have not been addressed.
When you have discussions like this there is a tendency to talk past one another. I for one hope that is not what is happening. So I will overview just to make sure
I understand your points to be that….
1) The “dark skin equals curse” passages in the BOM must be taken out of context to be construed as racist.
2) The Bible has passages that can also be seen to be racist.
As far as your first point goes I think we showed that both the internal context of the BOM and the larger external context of early Mormon attitudes concerning race demonstrate that the “dark skin equals curse” passages are indeed what they seem to be……. ie racist.
When we look at your second point, It is clear that the passages in Bible that you mentioned are concerned about religion and not race or skin color.
Once your two points were addressed you defaulted once again to your own subjective testimony that you like Mormonism and find it personally fulfilling.
I think that sums it up. Am I missing something?
peace
5th
Very good job of being specific but you and I know well that TBMs like our buddy FOF is not really interested in specific information and evidence that support a premise and answer his questions.
He believes that the LDS church and its prophets, past and present, are true blue, the real deal, incapable of mis-leading the faithful members of the church.
So these folks are thinking in a way that is totally foreign to those of us who study Mormonism and know the truth about the religion. For the true believer there’s always a perfectly Mormon logic answer. They are used to talking with people who believe and think the same as they do i.e. the Mormon bubble. That’s why the Mormon posters will take off on nefarious journeys driven by their faith in the LDS church, divorced of rational thought.
Again, if the church is true, if the prophet is true, if the BoM is true; all the evidence to the contrary is false. A Mormon dare not question in any reasonable manner.
I think this is a pretty good summary regarding our topic.
“Critics maintain that today’s church leaders hedge and equivocate on the issue, at times making contradictory and misleading statements that belie Church history. For example, historians have identified hundreds of blatantly racist statements made by past Church prophets and leaders, including Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, Wilford Woodruff, and John Taylor. In many cases, statements were grounded in scripture. Taken together, critics maintain the historical record reveals a systematic, intentional, deeply entrenched policy of racial discrimination that was based in scripture and endorsed at the highest levels. These observations leave critics grappling with two fundamental questions: What moral authority does Mormon scripture have concerning other matters if it contains oppositional ideas about race? Upon what moral authority does our current prophet speak if revelations made by past prophets are no longer valid?”
http://mormonthink.com/blackweb.htm
It is a quandary, isn’t it? Mormon leaders could flip this and have enough support from previous “prophets” and leaders within the LDS church to justify the ban on blacks in the priesthood. It’s a little more difficult, to say the least, to find anything in the writings of these former prophets and leaders to support allowing blacks to hold the priesthood. But that’s the way with polygamy too. These are two practices that were very much fundamental to the structure of the Mormon church and the restored gospel. Just dismissing it all with some lame excuse might be enough to keep the fragile believer in the fold but it will never satisfy anyone with an ounce of integrity or a modicum of curiosity.