i thought it was cause BYU needed black players.

Have you guys figured out that references to black skin in the BOM were to that of those who were in the Americas. Did any of you Brainiacs figure out that it had nothing to do with people of African decent.

Did any of you brainiacs also figure out that the curse spoken of only had to do with holding the priesthood.

I notice you worship the same God who withheld the priesthood from everyone except one tribe of the house of Israel.

BTW who are the decedents of Cain that were cursed if it is not people of African decent.

Like I said in a previous thread, if you are trying to tie the LDS church to racism your tossing rocks in a glass house. I been to several Protestant churches and from what I've seen all of Protestantism is still segregated.

Do I also need to remind you that for one to join the KKK you have to be Protestant.

Makes me feel pretty good about being Mormon.


[This message has been edited by Hank Hill (edited 6/29/2006 3:36a).]

quote:

---

Did any of you brainiacs also figure out that the curse spoken of only had to do with holding the priesthood.

---

That is not what your apostle McConkie wrote.

Why then did Joseph Smith say that once dark skinned people are Mormon that their skin will become whiter????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Is white skin better than dark skin Hank Hill?

Just questions. Resonable questions. You have a greater understanding of the LDS church than we do.

whodat -how many white people do you know that wish they were black. How many black people do you know that wish they were white. I remember the black commedienne (I think it was Richard Pryor) who told his mostly white audience that not one of them, even though he had millions of dollars, would trade skin color with him in exhange for those millions. It was a most thought provoking statement. But blacks holding the priesthood is no longer an issue. They are welcomed in full fellowhip and treated as equals, unlike still many "christians" churches. I got over being called a "dog" by the saviour so I suggest you also try to move on.

quote:

---

how many white people do you know that wish they were black. How many black people do you know that wish they were white.

---

Somebody needs to be keeping a list of all these gems. Classic.

quote:

---

WhoDat: Why then did Joseph Smith say that once dark skinned people are Mormon that their skin will become whiter????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Is white skin better than dark skin Hank Hill?

---

I'm not Hank Hill, so if Hank wants to pipe in here he can, but Joseph never said that darked skinned people would become whiter, he said that with rightous living and keeping God's commandments they would become a "white and delightsome people." This has nothing to do with skin color, but is a metaphor as contrasted with "dark and lothesome" or "black and lothesome." When you say that someone has a dark mind, are you suggesting that somehow their brains have become black? No, it is metaphorical, just as what Joseph said is metaphorical.

Cold Steel

quote:

---

This has nothing to do with skin color, but is a metaphor as contrasted with "dark and lothesome" or "black and lothesome."

---

-Cole Steel

Joseph Smith in "History of the Church vol.4 pg. 501

quote:

---

For instance, the descendents of Cain cannot cast off their skin of blackness, at once, and immediately, although every soul of them should repent, obey the Gospel, and do right from this day forward...Cain and his posterity must wear the mark, which God put on them; and his white friends may wash the race of Cain with fuller's soap every day, they cannot wash away God's mark;...The Lamanites, through transgression, became a loathsome, ignorant and filthy people, and were cursed with a skin of darkness...yet, they have the promise, if they will believe, and work righteousness, that not many generations whall pass away before they shall become a white and delightsome people; but it will take some time to accomplish this at best (The Latter-Day Saintes Millenial Star. Vol. 14 pg 418

---

Cold Steel. You are clearly not using your prophets words for their intended purpose.

AND just because you only defense has been "what about the elipses?" I have reproduced the entire passage....

quote:

---

For instance, the descendents of Cain cannot cast off their skin of blackness, at once, and immediately, although every soul of them should repent, obey the Gospel, and do right from this day forward. The mark was put upon Cain, by God himself, because Cain killed his brother Abel, thereby hoping to get the birthright, and secure himself the blessings which belonged to Abel. But Cain could not obtain Abel's birthright by murder, as Jacob obtained Esau's by purchase, by contract, paying a mess of pottage, the same as buying a farm, and paying a stipulated price. By such mutual agreement, the farm changes owners; but if one man kills another for the sake of getting his farm, the farm does not change owners, though the owner be dead; it descends to his heirs.
Cain did not obtain Abel's birthright and blessings, though he killed for that purpose; the blessings which belonged to Able, descended to his posterity; and until the blessings of Abel's birthright are fully received, secured, and realized by his, (Abel's) descendents, Cain and his posterity must wear the mark, which God put on them; and his white friends may wash the race of Cain with fuller's soap every day, they cannot wash away God's mark; yet, the Canaanite may believe the Gospel, repent, and be baptized, and receive the Spirit of the Lord; and if he continue faithful, until Abel's race is satisfied with his blessings, then may the race of Cain receive a fullness of the Priesthood, and become satisfied with blessings, and the two become as one again, when Cain has paid the uttermost farthing.
The Lamanites, through transgression, became a loathsome, ignorant and filthy people, and were cursed with a skin of darkness, which they cannot throw off at pleasure, or in a moment, though they should all embrace the Gospel at once; yet they have the promise, if the will believe and work righteousness, that not many generations shall pass away before they shall become a white and delightsom people; but it will take some time to accomplish this, at best.

---

Now. Smith goes from explaining that blacks cannot remove the color of the skin with Fuller's soap...to if the grow in the Gospel they will become white. And you contend that the whiteness is "metaphorical?"

quote:

---

WhoDat: Cold Steel. You are clearly not using your prophets words for their intended purpose.

---

Quite the contrary. It is you that is misusing the quotes.

quote:

---

WhoDat: AND just because you only defense has been "what about the elipses?" I have reproduced the entire passage....

---

It was not my only defense, but my intention to demonstrate that your understanding of the quote was wrong.

quote:

---

For instance, the descendents of Cain cannot cast off their skin of blackness, at once, and immediately, although every soul of them should repent, obey the Gospel, and do right from this day forward. The mark was put upon Cain, by God himself, because Cain killed his brother Abel, thereby hoping to get the birthright, and secure himself the blessings which belonged to Abel. But Cain could not obtain Abel's birthright by murder, as Jacob obtained Esau's by purchase, by contract, paying a mess of pottage, the same as buying a farm, and paying a stipulated price. By such mutual agreement, the farm changes owners; but if one man kills another for the sake of getting his farm, the farm does not change owners, though the owner be dead; it descends to his heirs.
Cain did not obtain Abel's birthright and blessings, though he killed for that purpose; the blessings which belonged to Able, descended to his posterity; and until the blessings of Abel's birthright are fully received, secured, and realized by his, (Abel's) descendents, Cain and his posterity must wear the mark, which God put on them; and his white friends may wash the race of Cain with fuller's soap every day, they cannot wash away God's mark; yet, the Canaanite may believe the Gospel, repent, and be baptized, and receive the Spirit of the Lord; and if he continue faithful, until Abel's race is satisfied with his blessings, then may the race of Cain receive a fullness of the Priesthood, and become satisfied with blessings, and the two become as one again, when Cain has paid the uttermost farthing.
The Lamanites, through transgression, became a loathsome, ignorant and filthy people, and were cursed with a skin of darkness, which they cannot throw off at pleasure, or in a moment, though they should all embrace the Gospel at once; yet they have the promise, if the will believe and work righteousness, that not many generations shall pass away before they shall become a white and delightsome people; but it will take some time to accomplish this, at best.

---

You see if you look at the quote, Joseph is not talking about the seed of Cain becomeing a white and delightsome people, but the Lamanites, which are not of the seed of Cain, but of the seed of Israel.

quote:

---

WhoDat: Now. Smith goes from explaining that blacks cannot remove the color of the skin with Fuller's soap...to if the grow in the Gospel they will become white. And you contend that the whiteness is "metaphorical?"

---

Yes. The curse that the seed of Cain received was denial of the priesthood. This they would not receive until the "until Abel's race is satisfied with his blessings, then may the race of Cain receive a fullness of the Priesthood, and become satisfied with blessings, and the two become as one again, when Cain has paid the uttermost farthing." The mark is the dark skin, which does not change, while the curse does.
It is the Lamanites that became a dark and loathsome people, ignorant and filthy. But upon accepting the gospel they becomming righteous people they shall become "white and delightsome" meaning metaphorically they are a pure and righteous people once again. Nothing to do with the pigmentation of their skin.

Cold Steel

In June of 1978, the LDS-owned Deseret News newspaper printed an announcement by the LDS First Presidency stating that God, by revelation, would now allow all worthy male members in the LDS Church to receive the priesthood as well as "blessings of the temple." (Deseret News, 6/9/78, 1A). This "revelation," known as Official Declaration 2, can be found in printed form at the end of the Doctrine and Covenants.

To understand why this announcement was of such extreme importance, it is necessary to go back in time to what Mormons refer to as the pre-existence. According to LDS theology, the God of Mormonism, Elohim, resides near a star called Kolob where he lives with his many heavenly wives. Together they are producing millions upon millions of spirit children.

Mormon leaders have taught that aeons ago the time came to present a salvation plan for those of God's children who would eventually advance to a mortal state. Two of Elohim's sons, Jehovah (the pre-incarnate Christ) and Lucifer, presented their respective salvation plans for mortal man. According to LDS President Harold B. Lee: "…Lucifer, a son of God in the spirit world before the earth was formed, proposed a plan under which mortals would be saved without glory and honor of God. The plan of our Savior, Jehovah, was to give to each the right to choose for himself the course he would travel in earth life and all was to be done to the honor and glory of God our Heavenly Father" (Stand Ye In Holy Places, p.219).

When Lucifer's plan was rejected, he rebelled against his brother and father and persuaded a third of God's spirit children to join him. Led by Michael the archangel, the remaining spirit children of God would join in what is known as the war in heaven. Lucifer would lose and become known as Satan; his followers then became demons. Both would be cast out of heaven.

Unfortunately this battle had casualties of another sort. According to LDS Apostle Bruce McConkie, some of those who fought on God's side "were more valiant than others…Those who were less valiant in pre-existence and who thereby had certain spiritual restrictions imposed upon them during mortality are known to us as the negroes. Such spirits are sent to earth through the lineage of Cain, the mark put upon him for his rebellion against God and his murder of Abel being a black skin...The present status of the negro rests purely and simply on the foundation of pre-existence" (Mormon Doctrine, p.527, 1966 ed.). According to Brigham Young, Joseph Smith who classified these people as The Seed of Cain. Young said that "Joseph Smith had declared that the Negroes were not neutral in heaven, for all the spirits took sides, but 'the posterity of Cain are black because he (Cain) committed murder. He killed Abel and God set a mark upon his posterity'" (The Improvement Era, Joseph Fielding Smith, p.105).

As a consequence of their lack of valiance, these spirit children of God would be banned from holding priesthood authority when they finally received their mortal bodies here on earth. This sanction would make it impossible for them to enjoy the blessings of exaltation. In other words, they would not be allowed to become Gods in eternity, nor would they have the ability to procreate in eternity.

Tenth LDS President Joseph Fielding Smith wrote, "It was well understood by the early elders of the Church that the mark which was placed on Cain and which his posterity inherited was the black skin. The Book of Moses informs us that Cain and his descendants were black" (The Way to Perfection, p.107).

Smith also stated that "there is a reason why one man is born black and with other disadvantages, while another is born white with great advantages. The reason is that we once had an estate before we came here, and were obedient; more or less, to the laws that were given us there. Those who were faithful in all things there received greater blessings here, and those who were not faithful received less" (Doctrines of Salvation 1:61).

For these reasons, Bruce McConkie would write, "The negroes are not equal with other races where the receipt of certain spiritual blessings are concerned, particularly the priesthood and the temple blessings that flow therefrom…" (Mormon Doctrine, p.527, 1966 ed.)

Joseph Fielding Smith stated, "Not only was Cain called upon to suffer, but because of his wickedness he became the father of an inferior race" (The Way to Perfection, p.101). This comment is especially interesting since it was this same Joseph Fielding Smith who also said, "The Latter-day Saints have no animosity towards the Negro. Neither have they described him as belonging to an `inferior race'" (Answers to Gospel Questions 4:170).

The mark of a black skin would be of great importance to the LDS member for it would be the telltale sign as to who was and who was not qualified for celestial exaltation. In his book The Church and the Negro, Assistant church historian John Lund wrote, "It marked Cain as the father of the Negroid race. It also acted as a sign of protection for Cain and set his seed apart from the rest of Adam's children so there would be no intermarriage."

In a speech entitled Race Problems as they Affect the Church, LDS Apostle Mark E. Petersen asked, and answered, the following hypothetical question: "If I were to marry a Negro woman and have children by her, my children would all be cursed as to the priesthood. Do I want my children cursed as to the priesthood? If there is one drop of Negro blood in my children, as I have read to you, they receive the curse. There isn't any argument, therefore, as to inter-marriage with the Negro, is there?" (p.21.)

Brigham Young taught a much greater extreme. In a sermon given on March 8, 1863, Young stated, "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, 10:110).

The Devil's Representative?

On two separate occasions, third LDS President John Taylor stated that it was God's plan to allow the seed of Cain to remain on the earth in order for the devil to be properly represented. On August 28, 1881, he declared, "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" (Journal of Discourses 22:304).

The following year, Taylor reiterated his former comment when he said, "Why is it, in fact, that we should have a devil? Why did the Lord not kill him long ago? Because he could not do without him. He needed the devil and a great many of those who do his bidding to keep men straight, that we may learn to place our dependence on God, and trust in Him, and to observe his laws and keep his commandments. When he destroyed the inhabitants of the antediluvian world, he suffered a descendant of Cain to come through the flood in order that he might be properly represented upon the earth" (Journal of Discourses 23:336).

It isn't difficult to understand why many would look upon the LDS Church as a racist organization. However, Latter-day Saints would reject such a notion since, in their minds, the leaders were merely reflecting what they erroneously thought was the will of God. Mormons laid the responsibility for this doctrine on God Himself, not the personal bigotry, either real or imagined, of any particular Latter-day Saint. For instance, Mark Peterson said, "When He [God] placed the mark on Cain, He engaged in segregation. When he told Enoch not to preach the gospel to the descendants of Cain who were black, the Lord engaged in segregation. When He cursed the descendants of Cain as to the Priesthood, He engaged in segregation" (Race Problems, p.15).

Mormons were taught that even though Blacks could never be exalted and become Gods, they could enter the celestial kingdom. In his Race Problems as they Affect the Church speech (p.17), Peterson said, "If that Negro is faithful all his days, he can and will enter the celestial kingdom. He will go there as a servant, but he will get a celestial resurrection." Slavery revisited?

Forever Cursed?

Would those of African heritage be forever banned from holding the LDS Priesthood? Apparently not. LDS leaders did anticipate a day when the ban would eventually be lifted. However, such hopes did not support the change that came about in 1978. John Lund wrote, "There are two sublime stipulations that will have to be met before the Negroes will be allowed to possess the Priesthood, even if they are worthy... First, all of Adam's children will have to resurrect and secondly, the seed of Abel must first have an opportunity to possess the Priesthood" (The Church and The Negro, pp.109-110). As Lund noted, "These events will not occur until sometime after the millennium. It would be unwise to say Negroes will receive the Priesthood during their mortal existence."

Lund's comment is based on LDS precedent. On page 89 of his book he quotes a statement by the First Presidency that was given on August 17, 1951. That statement read, "The prophets of the Lord have made several statements as to the operation of the principle. President Brigham Young said, 'Why are so many of the inhabitants of the earth cursed with a skin of blackness? It comes in consequence of their father's rejecting the power of the Holy Priesthood, and the law of God. They will go down to death. And when all the rest of the children have received their blessings in the Holy Priesthood, then that curse will be removed from the seed of Cain, and they will then come up and possess the Priesthood, and receive all the blessings which we are now entitled to.'"

Notice Young made certain it was understood that only after "all the rest of the children" have received the priesthood that the curse be lifted. Lund wrote, "It is clearly stated in the above quotes that the Negroes must first pass through mortality before they may possess the Priesthood ('they will go down to death')" (p.47).

On December 3, 1854, Brigham Young said, "When all the other children of Adam have had the privilege of receiving the Priesthood, and of coming into the kingdom of God, and of being redeemed from the four quarters of the earth, and have received their resurrection from the dead, then it will be time enough to remove the curse from Cain and his posterity" (Journal of Discourses 2:143).

President Wilford Woodruff noted in his journal that President Young said, "...that mark shall remain upon the seed of Cain until the seed of Abel shall be redeemed, and Cain shall not receive the Priesthood, until the time of that redemption" (History of Wilford Woodruff, p.351, as printed in The Way to Perfection, p.106).

Since the resurrection from the dead has not taken place, and the redemption of Abel's posterity has not come to fruition, it is apparent that the LDS Church was premature in its 1978 decision.

Contradicting Past Prophets and LDS Scripture

In Declaration 2, Spencer Kimball stated that past prophets of the LDS Church had promised that at some time the ban would be lifted and that God, by revelation, had shown him that the day has come. This statement is certainly misleading. As previously mentioned, past prophets had said the time would not come until after the resurrection, not 1978! Kimball's declaration contradicts both past LDS leaders and the Standard Works.

David O. McKay, Mormonism's ninth president, said, "I know of no scriptural basis for denying the Priesthood to Negroes other than one verse in the Book of Abraham (1:26)." This LDS passage reads, "Pharaoh, being a righteous man, established his kingdom and judged his people wisely and justly all his days, seeking earnestly to imitate that order established by the fathers in the first generations, in the days of the first patriarchal reign, even in the reign of Adam, and also of Noah, his father, who blessed him with the blessings of the earth, and with the blessings of wisdom, but cursed him as pertaining to the Priesthood." The obvious question is this: If LDS Scripture supports a curse upon the Seed of Cain, didn't lifting the curse violate LDS Scripture?

An article in the January 1969 Improvement Era magazine (p.13) quotes then-Apostle Harold B. Lee. He stated, "If it is not in the standard works, we may well assume that it is speculation, man's own personal opinion; and if it contradicts what is in the scriptures, it is not true." Lee would become president of the LDS Church on July 7, 1972. Lee's statement raises another obvious question: Since the Book of Abraham had been used to justify not giving the Blacks the Priesthood, doesn't the 1978 decision show that this reversal is 'not true'? Since the lifting of the ban contradicted LDS scripture, it seems that the membership should not have voted to sustain this decision on September 30, 1978.

A great majority of Latter-day Saints simply attributed this to "Latter-day Revelation" and questioned it no further; however, the timing for such a change is certainly suspect. In my opinion the fiasco in Brazil was one of the strongest reasons why the ban was lifted. In anticipation of the opening of its new temple in Sao Paulo, the LDS Church was ordaining hundreds of Brazilians to its priesthood. Did the LDS Church ignore Brazilian history? Between 1538 and Brazil's abolition of slavery in 1888, about five million African slaves were brought to that country. Through mixed marriages, Mulattos make up a substantial portion of the Brazilian population. How would the LDS Church possibly know whether or not those being ordained were qualified? With the dedication of this temple only a few months away, it would seem imperative that the church either lift the ban or face the possibility of a public relations nightmare.

The fact that Blacks were being punished for something they couldn't even remember doing makes this doctrine even more offensive. However, while lifting the ban may have put the LDS Church in a more positive light socially, it demonstrated once more the instability of its doctrines and the fickleness of its God. The decision made in 1978 also demonstrates that the LDS people will accept just about anything their leaders tell them. When it comes to accountability, the leadership of the LDS Church answers to no one. Latter-day Saints may respond by saying their leaders are accountable to God, but what does this really mean when they are allowed to make decisions that contradict what Mormons have historically considered to be God's unchanging will?

To be sure, the LDS curse upon the Blacks had no biblical justification. This teaching most certainly reflects the social upbringing and bigotry of Mormonism's early leaders rather than the will of the Christian God. The message of the New Testament proclaims that a person's past has no bearing on what he can receive from our gracious God. The Bible declares that God will not hold past transgressions against those who come to Him by faith. (Isaiah 43:25; Jeremiah 31:34; Romans 4:5-7, 23; Hebrews. 8:12).

Declaration 2 definitely leaves us with reasons to question the validity of the LDS Church. One, there was no biblical reason for the discrimination in the first place; and two, there was no precedent according to Mormonism to lift it.

Remember, circumsicion was forever until the Lord replaced it. The Gentiles were dogs and not to recive it, but the Lord changed it. The Mosiac law was permanent until the Lord replaced it with a higher law. I use these as examples as to how the Lord changes policy. So it is with the blacks. They have suffered enough over the many, many centuries and paid the price.

Thanks imbagg. I can see your point. That is at least a viable explanation as opposed to, "They never said that."

I will mention this about circumsicion though. Although the act of circumsicion was made not necessary believers were still required to circumsize their hearts. And as the sign of the old covenant was circumsicion that sign was replaced by baptism. The sign changed but the promise did not.

WhoDat, where did you "article" come from?

Cold Steel

www.articlesthatWhoDatNguyenUses.com

Just kidding.

I don't have the link on this computer. I'll post it later.

Whodat -I think I would rather have a symbolic circumscision of the heart than a real, physical circumcision of my privates. Was that just a convenient change do you think for new converts.

The vast majority of the circumsized were infants (on the eighth day to be exact).

I was circumsized and do not remember it.

If you converted as an adult, what would it be like?

I don't want to think about it...

all this talk aobut circumcisions and mosaic law is silly. you can't compare them to mormon doctrinal inconsistencies.

the jews had a covenant with God. in that covenant were many requirements of them. they didn't keep their end of the bargain. God gave them a couple hundred chances to keep it, but they didn't. they blew it. so God brought in the new covenant. God didn't just randomly change his mind. once the mosaic covenant was done with, those rituals had no meaning.

comparing the end of the mosaic covenant to the "revelation" that blacks were out of "time out" is silly.

Not silly my friend, it just shows that God does change his policy. When did you stop being a "dog", which is what Christ called you and I and all gentiles?

[This message has been edited by ibmagg (edited 7/1/2006 12:22p).]