Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Are Racist LDS Scriptures Still Deemed “Utterly Reliable” and “Pure Truth”? Part 1
Mormon Coffee (Mormonism Research Ministry) ^ | Jan. 6, 2014 | Lynn K. Wilder

Posted on 01/06/2014 3:53:42 PM PST by Colofornian

In the recently released statement on lds.org on Race and the Priesthood, the modern Mormon Church disavows “that blacks or people of any other race or ethnicity are inferior in any way to anyone else…” This unequivocal truth, that no race or ethnicity is superior to another, is something that Spain (1542), Quakers (1600s), Pennsylvania (1790), England (1807), Abraham Lincoln (1865), and Christians of any era who believe the Bible, know. According to the Bible, God shows no favoritism—never by skin color—and commands his people to do the same.

Lincoln, who often quoted the biblical God, was displeased with the Utah Territory for its stance as a slave territory (and for its polygamy). Finally in 1978, 113 years after Lincoln and 24 years after Brown vs. Board of Education, the Mormon Church gave black members of African ancestry (why not restrict Native Americans—they were the unrighteous dark-skinned Lamanites of the Book of Mormon?) equal access to the priesthood, ergo its Celestial kingdom, eternal life, and the potential for godhood.

As a professor at Brigham Young University (1999-2008), I taught, among other things—multiculturalism. In class, some of my generational LDS students proposed that those with black skin were blighted with something they called “the curse of Cain.” Alarmed by this belief, I began to investigate LDS scriptures on the topic and discovered scriptural support in the Book of Mormon and the Pearl of Great Price corroborating students’ beliefs.

Because these scriptures still exist, are read, and revered, the lingering conundrum for the Mormon Church is this: How to explain the 20-some passages of LDS scripture that can be considered racist. So, this new attempt to state a non-biased position on race, which falls short of an apology, ignores the challenge of present-day scriptures.

As well intended as the latest words on the official church website are, they can affect no real change in policy or teachings because these scriptures remain. Why call these scriptures racist? The definition of racist is the belief that some races of people are better than others because of their race, their skin color. This is precisely what the LDS scriptures STILL teach. Here are few examples just from the Book of Mormon:

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…”

3 Nephi 2:15 “And their curse was taken from them, and their skin becamewhite like unto the Nephites;”

3 Nephi 19:30 “And when Jesus had spoken these words he came again unto his disciples; and behold they did pray steadfastly, without ceasing, unto him; and he did smile upon them again; and behold they werewhite, even as Jesus.”

As these passages explain, the Lamanites (forerunners of the dark-skinned Native Americans descended from the Jews according to the Book of Mormon) were given a mark of dark skin as a curse for their transgression, not toward God, by the way, but toward their brethren, the “righteous” Nephites. Later when some Lamanites became righteous, the curse was removed and their skin became white.

This repulsion for the LDS racist scriptures I had discovered began to soften my heart toward the biblical God who, according to the Bible, is no respecter of persons and who shows no favoritism. When I read the Bible, its teachings were unmistakably clear because they were repeated over and over. One of these undeniable themes is that God is no respecter of persons and shows no favoritism, no bias.

What to do with the racist scriptures? If the LDS Church moves to remove them, then that calls into question all other things Joseph Smith wrote as scripture and said came from God. Can the Mormon Church say they’re an allegory that means something other than what they say literally? As of today, the church is still defending the four standard works on their official website as “utterly reliable” and “pure truth.”


TOPICS: History; Other non-Christian; Religion & Culture; Theology
KEYWORDS: antichristian; bookofmormon; inman; lds; mormonism; racism
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 251-265 next last
From ex-BYU professor Lynn Wilder's piece:

"As a professor at Brigham Young University (1999-2008), I taught, among other things—multiculturalism. In class, some of my generational LDS students proposed that those with black skin were blighted with something they called “the curse of Cain.” Alarmed by this belief, I began to investigate LDS scriptures on the topic and discovered scriptural support in the Book of Mormon and the Pearl of Great Price corroborating students’ beliefs. Because these scriptures still exist, are read, and revered, the lingering conundrum for the Mormon Church is this: How to explain the 20-some passages of LDS scripture that can be considered racist."

The Mormon church released its new "statement" on race and the priesthood in December. (See link in first graph of article). This ex-BYU prof, who has since become a Christian, says of the Mormon Church statement:

"So, this new attempt to state a non-biased position on race, which falls short of an apology, ignores the challenge of present-day scriptures. As well intended as the latest words on the official church website are, they can affect no real change in policy or teachings because these scriptures remain. Why call these scriptures racist? The definition of racist is the belief that some races of people are better than others because of their race, their skin color. This is precisely what the LDS scriptures STILL teach. Here are few examples just from the Book of Mormon:"

And then Wilder quotes these three Book of Mormon racist passages:

* 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…”

3 Nephi 2:15 “And their curse was taken from them, and their skin becamewhite like unto the Nephites;”

3 Nephi 19:30 “And when Jesus had spoken these words he came again unto his disciples; and behold they did pray steadfastly, without ceasing, unto him; and he did smile upon them again; and behold they werewhite, even as Jesus.”

1 posted on 01/06/2014 3:53:42 PM PST by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

sigh


2 posted on 01/06/2014 4:14:49 PM PST by svcw (Not 'hope and change' but 'dopes in chains')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

Seems like they’re in a pickle. If Mormons rely on Joseph Smith’s authority as a prophet to legitimize their reorganization of the church and reinterpretation of Scripture, they cannot very well disavow that authority when it comes to racist verses. Either he was rely enough to break off from the rest of Christianity to follow only him, or he wasn’t. If he wasn’t reliable when it came to the racist parts, why should anyone think he was reliable enough to follow off into the hinterlands on matters of salvation?


3 posted on 01/06/2014 4:42:11 PM PST by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

racist prophet placemarker


4 posted on 01/06/2014 4:43:57 PM PST by aMorePerfectUnion (Truth is hate to those who hate the Truth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

the modern Mormon Church disavows “that blacks or people of any other race or ethnicity are inferior in any way to anyone else…”
_____________________________________

Oh noez heres the Mormons saying that Joey Smith and Briggie Young were not twoo prophets and the Mormon religion is not two..


5 posted on 01/06/2014 5:02:59 PM PST by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #6 Removed by Moderator

To: Boogieman

“Seems like they’re in a pickle. If Mormons rely on Joseph Smith’s authority as a prophet to legitimize their reorganization of the church and reinterpretation of Scripture, they cannot very well disavow that authority when it comes to racist verses. Either he was rely enough to break off from the rest of Christianity to follow only him, or he wasn’t. If he wasn’t reliable when it came to the racist parts, why should anyone think he was reliable enough to follow off into the hinterlands on matters of salvation?”

Excellent point!


7 posted on 01/06/2014 5:15:26 PM PST by ReformationFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

Comment #8 Removed by Moderator

Comment #9 Removed by Moderator

Comment #10 Removed by Moderator

To: Greetings_Puny_Humans

It takes a while for changes that the Mormon gods proclaim to kick in..

Look at polygamy...

1890 Woodruff claims that the Mormon gods say nix to polygamy

1945 the last polygamous Mormon “prophet/president” dies


11 posted on 01/06/2014 5:54:13 PM PST by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan

The usual workaround for that type of thing is that his work was for an imperfect people in an earlier time.


12 posted on 01/06/2014 5:55:26 PM PST by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian
... the Mormon Church gave black members of African ancestry ... equal access to the priesthood...

No, no, NO!! You HATER!!

GOD did!


He has heard our prayers, and by revelation has confirmed that the long-promised day has come when every faithful, worthy man in the Church may receive the holy priesthood, with power to exercise its divine authority, and enjoy with his loved ones every blessing that flows therefrom, including the blessings of the temple.

13 posted on 01/06/2014 6:22:39 PM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

Official Declaration—2

 

To Whom It May Concern:

On 30 September 1978, at the 148th Semiannual General Conference of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the following was presented by President N. Eldon Tanner, First Counselor in the First Presidency of the Church:

In early June of this year, the First Presidency announced that a revelation had been received by President Spencer W. Kimball extending priesthood and temple blessings to all worthy male members of the Church. President Kimball has asked that I advise the conference that after he had received this revelation, which came to him after extended meditation and prayer in the sacred rooms of the holy temple, he presented it to his counselors, who accepted it and approved it. It was then presented to the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, who unanimously approved it, and was subsequently presented to all other General Authorities, who likewise approved it unanimously.

President Kimball has asked that I now read this letter:

June 8, 1978
To all general and local priesthood officers of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints throughout the world:
Dear Brethren:

As we have witnessed the expansion of the work of the Lord over the earth, we have been grateful that people of many nations have responded to the message of the restored gospel, and have joined the Church in ever-increasing numbers. This, in turn, has inspired us with a desire to extend to every worthy member of the Church all of the privileges and blessings which the gospel affords.

Aware of the promises made by the prophets and presidents of the Church who have preceded us that at some time, in God’s eternal plan, all of our brethren who are worthy may receive the priesthood, and witnessing the faithfulness of those from whom the priesthood has been withheld, we have pleaded long and earnestly in behalf of these, our faithful brethren, spending many hours in the Upper Room of the Temple supplicating the Lord for divine guidance.

He has heard our prayers, and by revelation has confirmed that the long-promised day has come when every faithful, worthy man in the Church may receive the holy priesthood, with power to exercise its divine authority, and enjoy with his loved ones every blessing that flows therefrom, including the blessings of the temple. Accordingly, all worthy male members of the Church may be ordained to the priesthood without regard for race or color. Priesthood leaders are instructed to follow the policy of carefully interviewing all candidates for ordination to either the Aaronic or the Melchizedek Priesthood to insure that they meet the established standards for worthiness.

We declare with soberness that the Lord has now made known his will for the blessing of all his children throughout the earth who will hearken to the voice of his authorized servants, and prepare themselves to receive every blessing of the gospel.

Sincerely yours,
Spencer W. Kimball
N. Eldon Tanner
Marion G. Romney
The First Presidency

Recognizing Spencer W. Kimball as the prophet, seer, and revelator, and president of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, it is proposed that we as a constituent assembly accept this revelation as the word and will of the Lord. All in favor please signify by raising your right hand. Any opposed by the same sign.

The vote to sustain the foregoing motion was unanimous in the affirmative.

Salt Lake City, Utah, September 30, 1978.

14 posted on 01/06/2014 6:23:12 PM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

I thought the ‘church’ blamed the racist teachings on the times the ‘church’ was founded in?


15 posted on 01/06/2014 6:24:35 PM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman; restornu
Seems like they’re in a pickle.

What 'pickle'?

They ignore bigger stuff than this these days!

16 posted on 01/06/2014 6:25:31 PM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

Comment #17 Removed by Moderator

To: teppe
You are such a merchant of smears, innuendo, distortions and fabrications.

And you fully support the following statements:


Questions put to Joseph Smith: "'Do you believe the Bible?' [Smith:]'If we do, we are the only people under heaven that does, for there are none of the religious sects of the day that do'. When asked 'Will everybody be damned, but Mormons'? [Smith replied] 'Yes, and a great portion of them, unless they repent, and work righteousness." (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 119).
Joseph Smith: "for the teachers of religion of the different sects understood the same passages of scripture so differently as to destroy all confidence in settling the question by an appeal to the Bible" (from Pearl of Great Price 1:12). "What is it that inspires professors of Christianity generally with a hope of salvation? It is that smooth, sophisticated influence of the devil, by which he deceives the whole world" (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p.270).
 
 
 
Brigham Young stated this repeatedly: "When the light came to me I saw that all the so-called Christian world was grovelling in darkness" (Journal of Discourses 5:73); "The Christian world, so-called, are heathens as to the knowledge of the salvation of God" (Journal of Discourses 8:171); "With a regard to true theology, a more ignorant people never lived than the present so-called Christian world" (Journal of Discourses 8:199); "And who is there that acknowledges [God's] hand? ...You may wander east, west, north, and south, and you cannot find it in any church or government on the earth, except the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" (Journal of Discourses , vol. 6, p.24); "Should you ask why we differ from other Christians, as they are called, it is simply because they are not Christians as the New Testament defines Christianity" (Journal of Discourses 10:230).
 
 
 
Orson Pratt proclaimed: "Both Catholics and Protestants are nothing less than the 'whore of Babylon' whom the Lord denounces by the mouth of John the Revelator as having corrupted all the earth by their fornications and wickedness. Any person who shall be so corrupt as to receive a holy ordinance of the Gospel from the ministers of any of these apostate churches will be sent down to hell with them, unless they repent" (The Seer, p. 255).
 
 
 
Orson Pratt also said: "This great apostasy commenced about the close of the first century of the Christian era, and it has been waxing worse and worse from then until now" (Journal of Discourses
, vol.18, p.44) and: "But as there has been no Christian Church on the earth for a great many centuries past, until the present century, the people have lost sight of the pattern that God has given according to which the Christian Church should be established, and they have denominated a great variety of people Christian Churches, because they profess to be ...But there has been a long apostasy, during which the nations have been cursed with apostate churches in great abundance" (Journal of Discourses , 18:172).
 
 
President John Taylor stated: "Christianity...is a perfect pack of nonsense...the devil could not invent a better engine to spread his work than the Christianity of the nineteenth century." (Journal of Discourses , vol. 6, p.167); "Where shall we look for the true order or authority of God? It cannot be found in any nation of Christendom." (Journal of Discourses , 10:127).
 
 
 
James Talmage said: "A self-suggesting interpretation of history indicates that there has been a great departure from the way of salvation as laid down by the Savior, a universal apostasy from the Church of Christ". (A Study of the Articles of Faith, p.182).
 
 
 
President Joseph Fielding Smith said: "Doctrines were corrupted, authority lost, and a false order of religion took the place of the gospel of Jesus Christ, just as it had been the case in former dispensations, and the people were left in spiritual darkness." (Doctrines of Salvation, p.266). "For hundreds of years the world was wrapped in a veil of spiritual darkness, until there was not one fundamental truth belonging to the place of salvation ...Joseph Smith declared that in the year 1820 the Lord revealed to him that all the 'Christian' churches were in error, teaching for commandments the doctrines of men" (Doctrines of Salvation, vol. 3, p.282).
 
 
 
More recent statements by apostle Bruce McConkie are also very clear: "Apostasy was universal...And this darkness still prevails except among those who have come to a knowledge of the restored gospel" (Doctrines of Salvation, vol 3, p.265); "Thus the signs of the times include the prevailing apostate darkness in the sects of Christendom and in the religious world in general" (The Millennial Messiah, p.403); "a perverted Christianity holds sway among the so-called Christians of apostate Christendom" (Mormon Doctrine, p.132); "virtually all the millions of apostate Christendom have abased themselves before the mythical throne of a mythical Christ whom they vainly suppose to be a spirit essence who is incorporeal uncreated, immaterial and three-in-one with the Father and Holy Spirit" (Mormon Doctrine, p.269); "Gnosticism is one of the great pagan philosophies which antedated Christ and the Christian Era and which was later commingled with pure Christianity to form the apostate religion that has prevailed in the world since the early days of that era." (Mormon Doctrine, p.316).
 
 
 
President George Q. Cannon said: "After the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was organized, there were only two churches upon the earth. They were known respectively as the Church of the Lamb of God and Babylon. The various organizations which are called churches throughout Christendom, though differing in their creeds and organizations, have one common origin. They all belong to Babylon" (Gospel Truth, p.324).
 
 
President Wilford Woodruff stated: "the Gospel of modern Christendom shuts up the Lord, and stops all communication with Him. I want nothing to do with such a Gospel, I would rather prefer the Gospel of the dark ages, so called" (Journal of Discourses , vol. 2, p.196).

18 posted on 01/06/2014 6:28:57 PM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Tennessee Nana
It takes a while for changes that the Mormon gods proclaim to kick in..

Won't they be surprised!!


"Now if any of you will deny the plurality of wives, and continue to do so, I promise that you will be damned;

and I will go still further and say, take this revelation, or any other revelation that the Lord has given,

and deny it in your feelings, and I promise that you will be damned.

Brigham Young - JoD 3:266 (July 14, 1855)

19 posted on 01/06/2014 6:30:40 PM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Elsie
...including the blessings of the temple.

Like 15% or so of all MORMONs do.

20 posted on 01/06/2014 6:31:41 PM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

Comment #21 Removed by Moderator

To: Elsie

Yeah the slowness started with Joey Smith..

about 1820 those 2 personages...Els you know the ones..well the one that wasn’t mute told Joey Smith not join a Christian church..like as in NONE NEVER NOT AT ALL FOREVER...

Well 10 years later Joey was still joining Christian churches..the Methodists, the Presbyterians...

see it does take a wee bit for the commandments of the Mormon lords to kick in...


22 posted on 01/06/2014 7:11:39 PM PST by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Elsie; All
I thought the ‘church’ blamed the racist teachings on the times the ‘church’ was founded in?

Good pt.

But when it came to the choice of which "prophet" to toss under the bus, well, hey' 'twas easier to agree with the RLDS assessments & Emma Smith's assessment of Brigham Young than to topple the very Joseph Smith foundation of their church.

The church had already silently done that by tossing Brigham's "Adam is God" & "blood atonement" tabernacle teachings under the bus.

And, yeah, it's kind of difficult to make your university namesake a PR sacrificial lamb, but I think they finally realized, "what comes around, goes around" -- and, knowing, that Brigham Young threw John D. Lee under the Mountain Meadows Massacre justice bus stop -- protecting himself & other Mormons by making Lee the sacrificial wolf in that case...they figured, "Well, hey, it's Brigham's turn."

23 posted on 01/06/2014 7:23:25 PM PST by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: 9YearLurker

Do today’s Mormons claim that they’ve now reached perfection?

I’d respond that I consider all people(except, of course for Christ Himself) imperfect in any time, past present and future.


24 posted on 01/06/2014 7:36:27 PM PST by ReformationFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan; Boogieman

Joseph Smith never was a races.

1836
Elijah Abel Ordained an Elder
In March, Elijah Abel is given the priesthood and ordained to the office of Elder. This is reportedly done by Joseph Smith himself.

Joseph Smith Slavery Editorial
In the April issue of the Messenger and Advocate, Joseph Smith writes that the methods of the abolitionists are not helping the cause of the slaves.

Elijah Abel Listed in the Messenger and Advocate
In the June issue of the Messenger and Advocate, the elders in Kirtland Ohio are listed. Elijah Abel is listed as an Elder.

Elijah Abel Ordained a Seventy
In December Elijah is ordained a Seventy by Zebedee Coltrin. He also becomes a “duly licensed minister of the Gospel” for missionary work in Ohio. (Minutes of the Seventies Journal, December 20, 1836)

Nondiscriminatory Rules Published for Governing the Temple in Kirtland
The rules provided for “old or young, rich or poor, male or female, bond or free, black or white, believer or unbeliever…” (History of the Church 2: 368-69

Letter of the Prophet to John C. Bennett–On Bennett’s Correspondence Anent Slavery.

EDITOR’S OFFICE, NAUVOO, ILLINOIS, March 7, 1842

March 1842, Joseph Smith writes the following in a letter on the subject of slavery, “I have just been perusing your correspondence with Doctor Dyer, on the subject of American slavery, and the students of the Quincy Mission Institute, and it makes my blood boil within me to reflect upon the injustice, cruelty, and oppression of the rulers of the people. When will these things cease to be, and the Constitution and the laws again bear rule? I fear for my beloved country mob violence, injustice and cruelty appear to be the darling attributes of Missouri, and no man taketh it to heart! O tempora! O mores! What think you should be done?”

Your friend,
JOSEPH SMITH

[History of the Church, 4:544]

Note: O tempora! O mores! is a Latin phrase meaning Alas for the times and the manners.


Once, as the Mayor of Nauvoo, Illinois he was told of a black man in Nauvoo named Anthony who had sold liquor on Sunday; which was a violation of the Nauvoo City Code. Mormon writer Mary Frost Adams tells us what happened:

“While he was acting as mayor of the city, a colored man named Anthony was arrested for selling liquor on Sunday, contrary to law. He pleaded that the reason he had done so was that he might raise the money to purchase the liberty of a dear child held as a slave in a Southern State. He had been able to purchase the liberty of himself and his wife and now wished to bring his little child to their new home. Joseph said, ‘I am sorry, Anthony, but the law must be observed and we will have to impose a fine.’ The next day Brother Joseph presented Anthony with a fine horse, directing him to sell it, and use the money obtained for the purchase of the child.” (Young Woman’s Journal, p.538)

(THE FOLLOWING IS NOT DOCUMENTED) The horse was Joseph’s prized white stallion, and was worth about $500; a huge sum at the time. With the money from the sale, Anthony was able to purchase his child out of slavery.

http://www.blacklds.org/quotes#boil


25 posted on 01/06/2014 8:48:06 PM PST by restornu (Every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up. Matt 15:13)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan; Boogieman

Why did Joseph Smith decided to be a candidate in the 1844 presidential election? It is hard to believe that he thought he could win the election, but he was not a frivolous candidate.

Joseph Smith said on February 8, 1844:

I would not have suffered my name to have been used by my friends on anywise as President of the United States, or candidade for that office, if I and my friend could have had the privilege of enjoying our religious and civil rights as American citizens…But this as a people we have been denied from the beginning. Persecution has rolled upon our heads from time to time…. because of our religion; and no portion of the government as yet stepped forward for our relief. And in view of these things, I feel it to be my right and privilege to obtain what influence and power I can, lawfully, in the United States, for the protection of injured innocence.

Clearly, Joseph Smith was trying to gain as much influence as possible to protect his people, even if he probably knew that he could not become president. In fact, he even speculated that he could be killed because of his campaign.

Joseph Smith‘s platform was contained in a pamphlet titled General Smith’s Views of the Powers and Policy of the Government of the United States.

Among other interesting ideas, he proposed the abolition of slavery by the year 1850. His solution to the problem was to

pay every man a reasonable price for his slaves out of the surplus revenue arising from the sale of public land, and from the deduction of pay from members of Congress. Break off the shackles from the poor black man, and hire them to labor like other human beings

Was this solution economically impractical? According to Dr. Garr

…the way that ultimately the United States settled the slavery issue was through civil war – a conflict that cost more than fifteen billion dollars and more than 600,000 lives….a conflict that left the South in economic ruin and implanted bitterness and hatred in the hearts of millions…In retrospect, it would seem that Joseph Smith’s solution to the slavery was more sensible than Civil War.

Joseph Smith was killed on June 27, 1844 and obviously he never became president. The American people could not find a better solution to slavery and it went through a terrible Civil War.

I can’t avoid thinking how different could have been U.S. history if the American people has listened to Joseph Smith’s counsel.

http://giuseppemartinengo.com/166/why-did-joseph-smith-run-for-president-in-1844


26 posted on 01/06/2014 9:00:05 PM PST by restornu (Every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up. Matt 15:13)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Elsie; Colofornian
Aware of the promises made by the prophets and presidents of the Church who have preceded us that at some time, in God’s eternal plan, all of our brethren who are worthy may receive the priesthood, and witnessing the faithfulness of those from whom the priesthood has been withheld, we have pleaded long and earnestly in behalf of these, our faithful brethren, spending many hours in the Upper Room of the Temple supplicating the Lord for divine guidance.

I wonder what Joseph Smith would have thought about this? It sounds to me like the guys in charge in 1978 weren't "comfortable" with the revelation JS received from Almighty God and they really, really wanted God to change His mind. They spent "many hours" begging and pleading with God to repent of His earlier revealed "truth" and bring it up to date so that everyone would not be able to accuse the Mormons of racism anymore. So, God - the one who is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow, the God who is not a man, so he does not lie. He is not human, so he does not change his mind. Has he ever spoken and failed to act? Has he ever promised and not carried it through? (Numbers 23:19) - according to the LDS was persuaded to change His mind, to rescind His decrees and let Himself be talked into something He had previously (according to JS) declared was the truth. I agree, there is a huge pickle jar they find themselves in.

27 posted on 01/06/2014 11:01:04 PM PST by boatbums (God is ready to assume full responsibility for the life wholly yielded to Him.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: restornu; Colofornian; Elsie; ReformationFan; Boogieman
Joseph Smith never was a races.

Do you mean to say he was never a racist? You can quote whatever you want about what the man may or may not have thought about slavery, but it sounds like he was the one who declared that God told him what he did about the black race - it's right there in your own scriptures, is it not? Did Mormonism allow black men to hold Temple Recommends? Did Mormonism allow black men to serve as bishops? Did not JS claim that black skin was a sign of God's curse upon a race?

I'm sure Colofornian isn't making it all up about what your religion used to hold and that its leaders waited until the late 1970's to think about changing those doctrines towards the black race. It's fine and good to be personally against slavery, but people can be against it and yet still be racists.

28 posted on 01/06/2014 11:12:40 PM PST by boatbums (God is ready to assume full responsibility for the life wholly yielded to Him.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: boatbums; teppe; Jeff Head

I wonder what Joseph Smith would have thought about this?

****

I think he is pleased if you saw my Post #25-26 not that it will make a difference some, but I think disinformation should be corrected.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3109040/posts?page=25#25

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3109040/posts?page=26#26


29 posted on 01/06/2014 11:13:10 PM PST by restornu (Every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up. Matt 15:13)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: restornu
I think he is pleased if you saw my Post #25-26 not that it will make a difference some, but I think disinformation should be corrected.

What disinformation is that? You think he would have been pleased to hear the leaders who came after him negated his own sworn revelation from God? Is Numbers 23:19 in your Bible? It says:

God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?

God doesn't change His mind. God doesn't lie. Unlike men, God doesn't make mistakes and have to be persuaded to go back on His word. If Mormons believe that God can be talked into changing His mind, then what truth is really absolute? What truths can we rely upon?

30 posted on 01/06/2014 11:25:41 PM PST by boatbums (God is ready to assume full responsibility for the life wholly yielded to Him.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: boatbums

I can only speak for what is recorded in Church History
And the platform Joseph ran on.

The trouble started after Joseph Was Killed it seems this Zevedee Coltrin had something to do with the change.


31 posted on 01/06/2014 11:56:04 PM PST by restornu (Every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up. Matt 15:13)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: restornu; Colofornian
I can only speak for what is recorded in Church History And the platform Joseph ran on. The trouble started after Joseph Was Killed it seems this Zevedee Coltrin had something to do with the change.

Did this Zevedee Coltrin write the Book of Mormon? As the OP said:

    Because these scriptures still exist, are read, and revered, the lingering conundrum for the Mormon Church is this: How to explain the 20-some passages of LDS scripture that can be considered racist. So, this new attempt to state a non-biased position on race, which falls short of an apology, ignores the challenge of present-day scriptures.

    As well intended as the latest words on the official church website are, they can affect no real change in policy or teachings because these scriptures remain. Why call these scriptures racist? The definition of racist is the belief that some races of people are better than others because of their race, their skin color. This is precisely what the LDS scriptures STILL teach. Here are few examples just from the Book of Mormon:

    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…”

    3 Nephi 2:15 “And their curse was taken from them, and their skin becamewhite like unto the Nephites;”

    3 Nephi 19:30 “And when Jesus had spoken these words he came again unto his disciples; and behold they did pray steadfastly, without ceasing, unto him; and he did smile upon them again; and behold they werewhite, even as Jesus.”

    As these passages explain, the Lamanites (forerunners of the dark-skinned Native Americans descended from the Jews according to the Book of Mormon) were given a mark of dark skin as a curse for their transgression, not toward God, by the way, but toward their brethren, the “righteous” Nephites. Later when some Lamanites became righteous, the curse was removed and their skin became white.

Are you saying Joseph Smith DIDN'T write the BOM? Whatever you think Coltrin had to do with LDS doctrines about the black race, you cannot ignore what is STILL in your religion's scriptures.

32 posted on 01/07/2014 12:05:32 AM PST by boatbums (God is ready to assume full responsibility for the life wholly yielded to Him.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: restornu; boatbums; Elsie; All
Elijah Abel Ordained a Seventy In December Elijah is ordained a Seventy by Zebedee Coltrin. He also becomes a “duly licensed minister of the Gospel” for missionary work in Ohio. (Minutes of the Seventies Journal, December 20, 1836)

ALL: Let me tell you the rest of the story here:

First of all, Restornu cites Mormon "Zebedee Coltrin." Per Mormon author William E. Berrett's 1967 book:
Mormonism and the Negro: An explanation and defense..... w/Historical Supplement-The Church and the Negroid People by William E. Berrett
...what did Zebedee Coltrin later say about this?

Per Berrett, citing Coltrin in his book, p. 11: "In the washing and annointing of Brother Abel at Kirtland, I annointed him and while I had my hands upon his head, I never had such an unpleasant feelings in my life. And I said, 'I never would again annoint another person who had Negro blood in him unless I was commanded by the Prophet to do so.' ZEBEDEE COLTRIN" [Note: Caps in original of book]

This is racist clap-trap, pure and simple

It's two such 1967 books, Berrett's -- and another one by Mormon author John L. Lund -- which gives us more info. (Lund's book was entitled: "The Church and the Negro," Paramount Publishers, Glendale, CA).

Lund wrote [citing caps as it appears in book]:

"HISTORY RECORDS AN INCIDENT OF ELIJAH ABEL, A Negro, being given the Priesthood. It should be understood, however, that when the Church leaders became aware that this man had Negro blood, his Priesthood was suspended...That Elijah Abel was a good man is not in question. Once it was discovered that Elijah Abel was of Negroid ancestry, he was dropped from his Priesthood Quorum (1879)."

Source: pp. 76-77 of Lund's book.

So the "poster boy" Restornu wants to elevate for the world to see was actually discriminated against by the Mormon church simply because of his skin color.

Lund concedes that Abel wasn't dropped for any moral reason.

Berrett also provides us with plenty more info:

* "This man [Elijah Abel] was one-eighth Negro and was light of color." (Berrett, p. 7)
* "...Elijah Abel was only part Negro...in a meeting, May 31, 1879, at the home of President A.O. Smoot, Provo, Utah, leaders of the Church reapproved that the Priesthood was not for the Negro, and that Elijah Abel was not to exercise any Priesthood rights." (Berrett, p. 8)
* "Brother Coltrin further said: Brother Abel was ordained a seventy because he had labored on the Temple, (it must have been in the 2nd Quorum) and when the Prophet Joseph learned of his lineage he was dropped from the Quorum, and another was put in his place." (Berrett, p. 10)

Did you all catch the above?

While Abel wasn't stripped of his priesthood until May 31, 1879 under Mormon "prophet" John Taylor's reign (Brigham Young had died in 1877), Zebedee Coltrin, the Mormon leader who washed and annointed Abel and later reported racist feelings about it, said...

...'twas JOSEPH SMITH himself who removed Abel from the Mormon leadership council -- the 2nd quorum -- called the "Seventy" much, much earlier!!!

Per Andrew Jensen's LDS Biographical Encyclopedia, vol. 3, p. 577, Abel was ordained a Seventy on April 4, 1841 (he was ordained an Elder March 3, 1836). I've yet to find a date when his Quorum status was revoked by Joseph Smith...if Coltrin is correct--as cited by Berrett, then it would have been anytime the last three years of Smith's life.

Note: There's confusion within Mormon historians if Abel was restored to the Third Quorum of Seventy after 1879, because Andrew Jensen's LDS Biographical Encyclopedia, vol. 3, p. 577 records Abel, at the age of 73, undertaking one more mission to Canada representing that Quorum.

Just as many Mormons continued getting married into plural unions in Mexico post 1890 after its Manifesto dispromoting polygamy, if Abel was restored to the Quorum -- this time the Third Quorum -- I suppose the Mormon church didn't mind it as long as Abel was beyond the U.S. Territories (Canada).

Questions, Restornu:
#1 Did you know the above facts -- about Abel FIRST being removed as a Seventy because of his race by Joseph Smith himself? (Certainly the Mormon Church knew this when it tried to subtly blame Brigham Young and those church leaders who followed him in their December 2013 statement; yet actually Brigham Young wasn't the "Prophet" in 1879 when Abel has his priesthood duties revoked; John Taylor was)
#2 Did you know what Zebedee Coltrin later reported about washing and annointed Elijah Abel?
#3 Did you know Abel's priesthood status was dropped at a Provo, Utah meeting on May 31, 1879?
#4 And finally, if you didn't know any of these facts, what Mormon source are you reading that gives you an intentionally incomplete and lopsided "faith-promoting" side of their history, and thereby has lost all credibility?

33 posted on 01/07/2014 4:51:56 AM PST by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: All; restornu
Restornu, Acts 10:34 tells us, "God is no respecter of persons."

If the God of the Bible is "no respecter of persons," tell us, why...
... the Mormon church leadership -- accountable to John Taylor...perhaps Taylor was even there at the meeting...
...decided that their god on May 31, 1879 was to be a "respecter of persons," after all???

Do you (and other Lds FREEPERs reading this) condemn John Taylor & his leaders for removing Elijah Abel as a Mormon member of the Priesthood strictly due to him being 1/8th of black ancestry?

If not, why not?

And if not, isn't this -- by your collective continued silence
-- an issue where 2014 Mormons become culpable as well?

If we don't specifically condemn the specific corporate racism practiced by specific leaders, then aren't you sanctioning it when you become aware of it -- and don't condemn them for it?

Here you raised examples where you thought this promotes a "positive" side of Mormon history not practicing racism; yet per Zebedee Coltrin, and per two 1967 Mormon book authors, it actually depicts the exact reverse!!

34 posted on 01/07/2014 5:04:02 AM PST by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman
Seems like they’re in a pickle. If Mormons rely on Joseph Smith’s authority as a prophet to legitimize their reorganization of the church and reinterpretation of Scripture, they cannot very well disavow that authority when it comes to racist verses. Either he was rely enough to break off from the rest of Christianity to follow only him, or he wasn’t. If he wasn’t reliable when it came to the racist parts, why should anyone think he was reliable enough to follow off into the hinterlands on matters of salvation?

The problem comes from the modern-day article of faith that anything with racist connotations is automatically false and evil.

What happens if they just go "OK, our scriptures are racist. So?"

If you want really racist stuff, take a look at the Hindu caste system, and its theological underpinnings.

35 posted on 01/07/2014 5:12:34 AM PST by PapaBear3625 (You don't notice it's a police state until the police come for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian
Are Racist LDS Scriptures Still Deemed “Utterly Reliable” and “Pure Truth”?

They NEVER were; except to a small group of deceived folks who came up with a new strain of TARES.

36 posted on 01/07/2014 5:18:02 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All; boatbums; Elsie; Zakeet; restornu
ALL: If you click on the Lds.org link in the first graph of this thread post, you'll find the Mormon Church December 2013 "clarification" on race and the priesthood.

Then, I suggest you read my post #33 to become familiar with Elijah Abel. Abel was born July 25, 1810 in Maryland. Was 1/8th of black ancestry. Was a faithful Mormon to the end of his life, dying on Christmas Day, 1884 of debility -- suffered from exposure while being a 73-->74 yo Lds missionary to Canada and then Ohio.

Per assistant historian Andrew Jensen, in his LDS Bigraphical Encyclopedia, vol. 3, p. 577: "He died in full faith of the" [Mormon version of the] Gospel."

Then read the little the Mormon Church had to say about Abel in their December 2013 statement:

"Even after 1852, at least two black Mormons continued to hold the priesthood. When one of these men, Elijah Abel, petitioned to receive his temple endowment in 1879, his request was denied."

IoW, Abel wanted access to a new Mormon temple in Utah. He applied for his endowment. And at a meeting at the home of...
...Abraham O. Smoot (Smoot's wikipedia entry shows him to be the second mayor of Salt Lake City and an early supporter of Brigham Young Academy, which came to be BYU...see Abraham O. Smoot)...
...on May 31, 1879...
...not only was Abel's temple endowment denied...
...but two 1967 Mormon authors claim Abel's priesthood duties were suspended...

(Note: It's possible that some of his priesthood duties were restored by 1883)

But, of course, don't expect full disclosure from the Mormon Church authorities when they tell its history!

37 posted on 01/07/2014 5:18:47 AM PST by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian
Are Racist LDS Scriptures Still Deemed “Utterly Reliable” and “Pure Truth”?

Are ANY LDS Scriptures Still Deemed “Utterly Reliable” and “Pure Truth” by MORMONs?


They seem to twist, modify and ignore a LOT of them!

38 posted on 01/07/2014 5:19:27 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian
--- and, knowing, that Brigham Young threw John D. Lee under the Mountain Meadows Massacre justice bus stop --


"I am a true believer in the gospel of Jesus Christ, I do not believe everything that is now being taught and practiced by Brigham Young.

 I do not care who hears it. It is my last word - it is so.

 I believe he is lead­ing the people astray, downward to destruction.

 But I believe in the gospel that was taught in its purity by Joseph Smith, in former days.

 I have my reasons for it.

 

"I studied to make this man's [Brigham Young] will my pleasure for thirty years.

See, now, what I have come to this day!

 

"I have been sacrificed in a cowardly, dastardly manner." (Lee enun­ciated this sentence with marked emphasis.)

 

 

Excerpted from -->  http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/mountainmeadows/leeexecution.html

39 posted on 01/07/2014 5:23:23 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan
Do today’s Mormons claim that they’ve now reached perfection?

I doubt is, as the one's I've conversed with here are ALWAYS ready for a NEW 'revelation' from GOD!

They'll be SO easy to steer in whatever direction Satan wants.

40 posted on 01/07/2014 5:25:29 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Elsie; colorcountry

Ping to colorcountry on Elsie’s post here!


41 posted on 01/07/2014 5:25:40 AM PST by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: restornu
Joseph Smith never was a races.

HA ha!

This is as good a reason to NOT discuss the ERROR of Mormonism as the Catholic claim that their REALLY bad popes did NOT influence their church!

42 posted on 01/07/2014 5:26:55 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: restornu
Why did Joseph Smith decided to be a candidate in the 1844 presidential election? It is hard to believe that he thought he could win the election, but he was not a frivolous candidate.

Why did Willard Mitt Romney decide to be a candidate in the 2008 & 2012 presidential elections? It is hard to believe that he thought he could win the election, for he WAS an un-electable candidate.

43 posted on 01/07/2014 5:29:11 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: restornu
Joseph Smith said on February 8, 1844:

Blah, blah and further more; BLAH!

44 posted on 01/07/2014 5:30:18 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: restornu
Joseph Smith said on February 8, 1844:

But this as a people we have been denied from the beginning. Persecution has rolled upon our heads from time to time…


Yes, this VICTIM mantle is something you MORMONs have clung to quite well.

45 posted on 01/07/2014 5:31:28 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: restornu
Joseph Smith was killed on June 27, 1844 and obviously he never became president.

I; for one; would think that a Prophet of GOD would have seen this coming!




 
"Joseph; I advise you not to go to that jail."
 
"Darn gnats!!"
 
 
"Joseph; I'm telling you to not to go to that jail."
 
"Flies are BAD today!!"
 
 
"Joseph; It ain't gonna be pretty if you ignore me and go to that jail!"
 
"Crummy mosquitos are EVERYWHERE!!!"
 
 
"Joseph!  Do NOT go to that jail!"
 
"And those bedbugs really savaged me last night, too!"
 
 
"JOSEPH!!  Wake up boy!   Do Not Go To That JAIL!!!"
 
"All right Sheriff - here I am, so give me a nice room while my Lawyer, my Advocate, my Comforter presents the LAW to the Judge and I am VINDICATED!!!"
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 


46 posted on 01/07/2014 5:33:00 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: boatbums
I wonder what Joseph Smith would have thought about this? It sounds to me like the guys in charge in 1978 weren't "comfortable" with the revelation JS received from Almighty God and they really, really wanted God to change His mind.

I wonder what Thomas Monson and the Twelve Yesmen aren't "comfortable" with now?

Just WHAT are they really, really REALLY wanting God to change His mind about NOW?

47 posted on 01/07/2014 5:35:36 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: restornu
...but I think disinformation should be corrected.

THIS?

From YOU?

48 posted on 01/07/2014 5:36:25 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: restornu
...but I think disinformation should be corrected.

Is an up-to-date TR REALLY needed to enter into the highest level of MORMON Heaven?

49 posted on 01/07/2014 5:37:51 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: restornu
...but I think disinformation should be corrected.

WHERE can we find the FULLNESS of the gospel in the Book of MORMON?

50 posted on 01/07/2014 5:38:22 AM PST by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 251-265 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson