"The discussion on civil rights, especially over the last 20 years, has drawn some very sharp lines. It has blinded the thinking of some of our own people, I believe. They have allowed their political affiliations to color their thinking to some extent.I think I have read enough to give you an idea of what the Negro is after."
said, 
Good question...
Posted on 03/30/2012 8:12:30 PM PDT by Colofornian
Yesterday, Religion Dispatches contributor Max Mueller published a piece at Slate detailing posthumous marriage rites performed in LDS temples that have wed Mormon and non-Mormon slaveholders to their former slave concubines—including Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemmings.
The article sheds light on another form of posthumous religious rites performed in LDS temples. In addition to posthumous baptisms, LDS Church members routinely perform proxy temple marriages or “sealings” for their ancestors and other deceased couples. Church doctrine teaches that marriages performed within LDS temples “seal” husband and wife together not only for mortality but for eternity.
Mormonism uniquely emphasizes eternal marriage as a rite necessary to enter the highest levels of heaven. Viewed through this theological prism (and with a generous dose of romantic idealism about the quality of most human marriages), the practice of posthumous sealings has special warmth for LDS people.
But sealing deceased slaves to their slavemasters? Thomas Jefferson to Sally Hemmings? A relationship that emblematizes slavery’s most complicated and intimate forms of exploitation?
Because such relationships entailed coerced concubinage and, often, rape, Mueller writes, “Sealing a slave master to his slave is at least as troubling as the baptism of Holocaust victims, the practice of which the LDS Church has officially condemned.”
I’m not sure how to judge which is more troubling. But I do know that Mueller’s thoughtful, well-researched, carefully composed essay not only hits hot button issues like Mormons’ historic racial discrimination and contemporary racial insensitivity and the doctrinal persistence of polygamy—after all temple sealing policies permitted a polygamous sealing of Jefferson to Martha Jefferson and Sally Hemmings—but also gestures towards profound ethical and religious questions.
For their part, Mormons have tried to answer questions about posthumous baptisms and sealings by explaining that no posthumous rite is considered binding and that the efficacy of all rites depends on acceptance by the soul of the deceased.
But one element that has consistently gone missing from conversations I’ve witnessed in LDS circles is the acknowledgment that other religious traditions also have theological views of memory, the afterlife, and the connection between the dead and the living. From these non-Mormon perspectives, Mormon posthumous rites appear as a presumptuous claim on humanity’s dead.
Can one religion claim humanity’s dead? What if humanity’s dead are a sacred collective resource—a sacred public domain? There are norms of civility and respect that govern religious conduct in public domains, conditions absolutely necessary to the free exercise of religion without the fear of encroachment or imposition. Extraction of the names of strangers from public records for religious rites, as has been historical Mormon practice, may be viewed by non-Mormons as an uneasy fit with commonly held norms of religious freedom, interfaith deference, and cooperation.
What do Mormons owe to the other human beings with whom we share custody for humanity’s dead: human beings who may have similarly strong religious feelings about their ancestors, and who would like to see those ancestors rest in peace, without their names being said by strangers in unwelcome ceremonies? Or to those who would like to see their ancestors travel on, without being summoned by name back to traumatic relationships they did not choose?
To whom do the dead belong?
The LDS do a great job of hiding all their “jack-mormons”
- - - - -
Actually, what I learned living in Utah was the ‘jack Mormons’ were more decent and honest then the ‘active’ temple attending faithful Mormons.
There are reasons why Utah leads the nation in white collar crime.
Mormons have great PR, but the reality is vastly different.
Mormon theology is, I’ll say, fairly creative - to state it in a positive fashion. I’m sure that if Romney is the nominee it will be used against him. Might as well face it now.
Is “Slate” democrats?
(With who the Republicans are runnin' in the POTUS lead, can you as readily tell these days?)
How can anyone take this seriously?
Good question...
Watch this video on www.youtube.com| …and I'm a MormonWife, mother, and Mayor. My name is Mia Love, and I'm a Mormon. YouTube.com/Mormon |
"You see some classes of the human family that are black, uncouth, uncomely, disagreeable and low in their habits, wild, and seemingly deprived of nearly all the blessings of the intelligence that is generally bestowed upon mankind.
The first man that committed the odious crime of killing one of his brethren will be cursed the longest of any one of the children of Adam. Cain slew his brother. Cain might have been killed, and that would have put a termination to that line of human beings.
This was not to be, and the Lord put a mark upon him, which is the flat nose and black skin. Trace mankind down to after the flood, and then another curse is pronounced upon the same race--that they should be the 'servant of servants', and they will be, until that curse is removed."
Brigham Young-President and second 'Prophet' of the Mormon Church, 1844-1877- Extract from Journal of Discourses.
Here are two examples from their 'other testament', the Book of Mormon.
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.'
Alma 3: 6 'And the skins of the Lamanites were dark, according to the mark which was set upon their fathers, which was a curse upon them because of their transgression and their rebellion against their brethren, who consisted of Nephi, Jacob and Joseph, and Sam, who were just and holy men.'
|
August 27, 1954 in an address at Brigham Young University (BYU), Mormon Elder, Mark E Peterson, in speaking to a convention of teachers of religion at the college level, said:
(Rosa Parks would have probably told Petersen under which wheel of the bus he should go sit.)
1967, (then) Mormon President Ezra Taft Benson "The Communist program for revolution in America has been in progress for many years and is far advanced. First of all, we must not place the blame upon Negroes. They are merely the unfortunate group that has been selected by professional Communist agitators to be used as the primary source of cannon fodder."
We are told that on June 8, 1978, it was 'revealed' to the then president, Spencer Kimball, that people of color could now gain entry into the priesthood. According to the church, Kimball spent many long hours petitioning God, begging him to give worthy black people the priesthood. God finally relented. |
Sometime before the 'revelation' came to chief 'Prophet' Spencer Kimball in June 1978, General Authority, Bruce R McConkie had said:
"The Blacks are denied the Priesthood; under no circumstances can they hold this delegation of authority from the Almighty.
The Negroes are not equal with other races where the receipt of certain blessings are concerned, particularly the priesthood and the temple blessings that flow there from, but this inequality is not of man's origin, it is the Lord's doings."
(Mormon Doctrine, pp. 526-527).
When Mormon 'Apostle' Mark E Petersen spoke on 'Race Problems- As they affect the Church' at the BYU campus in 1954, the following was also said:
"...if the negro accepts the gospel with real, sincere faith, and is really converted, to give him the blessings of baptism and the gift of the Holy Ghost, he can and will enter the celestial kingdom. He will go there as a servant, but he will get celestial glory."
When Mormon 'Prophet' and second President of the Church, Brigham Young, spoke in 1863 the following was also said:
"Shall I tell you the law of God in regard to the African race? If the white man who belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the law of God is death on the spot. This will always be so."
(Journal of Discourses, Vo. 10, p. 110)
Yeah; Native Americans are althroughout the Book of MORMON; too.
“I saw a striking contrast in the progress of the Indian people today ... they are fast becoming a white and delightsome people.... For years they have been growing delightsome, and they are now becoming white and delightsome, as they were promised.... The children in the home placement program in Utah are often lighter than their brothers and sisters in the hogans on the reservation.
At one meeting a father and mother and their sixteen-year-old daughter were present, the little member girl-sixteen-sitting between the dark father and mother, and it was evident she was several shades lighter than her parents—on the same reservation, in the same hogan, subject to the same sun and wind and weather.... These young members of the Church are changing to whiteness and to delightsomeness.
One white elder jokingly said that he and his companion were donating blood regularly to the hospital in the hope that the process might be accelerated.
(Improvement Era, December 1960, pp.922-23). (p. 209)
??? what is the purpose of this?
It’s a little like Obama/Romneycare. You have to pass the bill, enter into the LDS faith before you know what’s in it.
- - - - - -
That is a great analogy and exactly right!
As their religious beliefs affect you, feel free criticize, but as to the beliefs themselves, who cares? It is just a weak indirect attack on Romney who has enough real liberal baggage to swing at. It invites scrutiny into everyone religion which is inappropriate and irrelevant.
And to this I say, BRING IT ON. Only the cult religions have something to hide and fear. The ones that keep changing their doctrines to fit an occasion.
Our GOD, the real "I AM" GOD and "His WORD", will never change, not one iota, not one word will change, EVER.
No human has or will ever have the power to do that, many have tried, as the LDS and failed miserably, which is why the LDS is being exposed for the anti christ cultism it is and it too will fail. For that we can thank MITTENS.
The "I AM" will not be mocked.
HE is the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow. We who believe that have nothing to fear by any scrutiny. Bring it on.
The cultist Jim Jones had to take his group out of the country in hiding, only to kill them by poison. Cultist do that as well, not with poison, but with lies that kill the soul, some to the degree they may never return to the truth of the Real GOD. Who will pay for that, we that know the truth and don't disclose it will be held responsible.
But, if only someone had told me. "Somebody had told me?"
That lame excuse will never work before the throne of GOD.
We have no excuse for stupidity. Please read label before using product. Mormonism is not fit for a souls comsumption, it is poison.
Christianity is better served by not attacking with other decent religions, instead aligning with atheists to attack Mormons. You are aligning yourself with the devil (figuratively).
You know, Jesus was a Jew...the chosen people of God...a pretty "decent" religion...
And the Pharisees and Teachers of the Law were part & parcel of that pretty "decent religion..."
In fact, Jesus even complimented them (Pharisees)...well...complimented them at least one time...well, at least He specifically complimented their outward behavior.
Here is Jesus giving a great compliment to the outward "assets" of legalistic Pharisees...telling people that unless their righteousness exceeded that of the Pharisees & the teachers of the law, "you will certainly NOT enter the kingdom of heaven." (Matt. 5:20).
So...did Jesus take your advice overall, MrShoop. Did He not "attack" the decent Jewish religion of the Pharisees?
Matthew 23, Jesus said:
25"Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You clean the outside of the cup and dish, but inside they are full of greed and self-indulgence. 26Blind Pharisee! First clean the inside of the cup and dish, and then the outside also will be clean. 27"Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You are like whitewashed tombs, which look beautiful on the outside but on the inside are full of dead men's bones and everything unclean. 28In the same way, on the outside you appear to people as righteous but on the inside you are full of hypocrisy and wickedness.
In fact, that whole 23rd chapter of Matthew is one long dissing of the Pharisees by Jesus.
You are aligning yourself with the devil (figuratively). [MrShoop]
Actually, your Biblical ignorance slip is showing.
In John 8, Jesus call the legalistic Pharisees "children of the devil."
Shall I go on with all of the other confrontations 'tween Jesus & the legalistic Pharisees, MrShoop.
Are you condemning Jesus for "attacking" a "decent religion?" Yes? No?
Are you trying to "outnice" Jesus, MrShoop?
Hey, if you want to be consistent -- just accuse Jesus of being an "attacker" or "basher" of the Pharisees/religious legalists of his day.
Onto the Question, then, of who's been attacking who for 180+ years:
The Lds "scriptures" reference ALL Christian sects...Catholicism, Protestantism, and Orthodox -- as being 100% filled with "corrupt professors" who believe 100% creeds which apparently are an "abomination" to the Mormon god.
It's all in the chart I sent you in post #12...What? You can't read charts, MrShoop?
What you have seemingly failed to consider in whatever (if any) reading of the Bible...is that Jesus comforted the afflicted...and He afflicted the legalistically comfortable.
And I frankly cannot think of a more legalistic religion today than the Mormon religion.
Mormons have aligned with the atheists to attack Christians for over 180 years!
Mormon teaching is that worldwide Christianity went 100% AWOL.
Here's a basic primer for you: That's called an "attack"...in fact, it's what I call "scorched earth religio-politics." Joseph Smith dug one HUGE figurative graveyard -- and attempted to stick worldwide Christianity in it.
It's foundational Mormon doctrine to believe in a "universal apostasy" -- and then for Mormons to see themselves as the 100% restoration.
So who started that attack? (Mormons)
Who continues that fight? That slander? (Mormons)
Again...address the facts...instead of resorting to your emotion-laden name-calling.
Snapshot of Joseph Smith’s Slanderous Invectives vs. Christian Sects |
Mormon Source[Note: Most of these are Mormon ‘scriptures'. In fact, First three rows below are Lds 'scripture' & therefore cannot be rug-swept any more than a Jew might try to take three commandments off of the very tablets of stone Moses brought down from the mountain] |
| “...which of all the sects was right… must join NONE of them, for they were ALL WRONG… those professors were ALL CORRUPT…” | Joseph Smith – History vv. 18-19. – Lds "scripture" Pearl of Great Price |
| ...“which of all the sects was right…ALL their CREEDS were an ABOMINATION in his sight…they teach for doctrines the commandments of MEN…” | Joseph Smith – History vv. 18-19. – Lds "scripture" Pearl of Great Price |
| Mormon church the only ‘Christ-sanctioned’ church on earth: “…the foundation of this [Mormon] church…the ONLY true and living church on the face of the whole earth” [Obvious ‘scorched earth’ implication: All other churches are false and dead] | Lds “scripture” Doctrines & Covenants 1:30 |
| Direct question asked of Joseph Smith: 'Will everybody be damned, but Mormons?" Answer from Lds "prophet" Joseph Smith: 'Yes, and a great portion of them, unless they repent, and work righteousness." | Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 119 [Not “scripture” – but still publicly spoken by the Mormon ‘living prophet’ and published by a later Mormon ‘living prophet,’ Joseph Fielding Smith – via a publisher owned by the Mormon church – Deseret News Press, 1938] |
| “In 1952…the first official proselyting plan was sent to missionaries throughout the world…It included seven missionary discussions that emphasized…[four topics, one of them being]…THE APOSTASY and Restoration…” [This makes it almost 60 years that Mormon church missionaries, now numbering 52,000, have formally emphasized in its training & door to door saturation a priority in bashing the worldwide Christian church as “apostates” (100% AWOL)] | Our Heritage: A Brief History of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints p. 116, 1996 |
We care. We are our brother's spiritual keeper. You may have opted out of being a spiritual neighbor to others; it doesn't mean we have to follow your lead.
You seem to be trying (feebly, IMA) to get some political alliance to "unite" behind an anti-Obama cause.
I've told others on other threads that I could probably guess that the folks who the apostle Paul warned the church @ Ephesus about had the bulk in common with the sheep there. Both groups were "religious."
So, did Paul play the "allies"-game-don't-divide-us-you're playing? (No)
As Paul was leaving the church of Ephesus, he warned them with this high-priority alert:
"I know that after I leave, savage wolves will come in among you and will not spare the flock. Even from your own number men will arise and distort the truth in order to draw away disciples after them. So be on your guard! Remember that for three years I never stopped warning each of you night and day with tears." (Acts 20:29-31)
Paul's cultural priority? (Defend against the false disciples who will proselytize the flock and draw away men unto themselves!)
Tell me something, MrShoop: If you did something tearfully night and day for three years, do you think it's rather important? So what? We're just to conclude, "Oh, the man who contributed a good chunk to the New Testament -- what does he know about cultural priorities?"
I'll take Paul's already-revealed priorities to your guesswork based upon bashing others as "attackers" & of the devil. I'll take those willing to contend for the faith once delivered to the saints (Jude 3) vs. your apparent ignorance of the Bible.
If in speaking the truth and some choose to turn their backs on it, not our problem any longer. They have been told TRUTH and its their choice to reject it.
You see someone attempting to commit suicide by jumping from a bridge. What do you do? Sit back and watch their death, or try to change their minds? Same thing with the soul, cults are poison to the soul and spiritual suicide.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.