Professor of Mormon Studies and occasional apologist in an interesting interview on Mormon Stories says he thinks Brigham Young sinned when he implemented priesthood restrictions on Black folks.

He also said he thinks Joseph Smith's behavior in polygamy t was a sin.

People used to kicked out of the church for saying this kind of thing, but he is revered- gives fireside all over the Moridor and beyond.

It will be interesting to see if this catches on in the church or if he gets silenced.

Seems like a decent dude.

Could you by any chance clue us in as to where in this very long video he says that? Perhaps an approximation, if you don't know the number of minutes into the video?
Thanks!

While a majority of Americans at the time agreed with him, BY was objectively racist and bigoted. JS was an ethical sleazeball by most cultures standards anywhere.

Did they sin? That implies God did not approve of their conduct. I think that’s a ridiculous standard because what God approves or disapproves of is strongly influenced by whoever decides to speak for God.

As for what LDS Inc will do about this guy - I think they will ignore him, as will the membership.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/25/2022 08:41AM by Brother Of Jerry.

Brother Of Jerry Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> . . . what God approves or disapproves
> of is strongly influenced by whoever decides to
> speak for God.

Strange, that.

I'm concerned with BoJ's use of the word 'objectively'.

The world is full of corners into which we can objectively paint ourselves.



If a centipede had wings attached to every segment, which set of wings would be the primary wings...I mean, objectively speaking?

> The world is full of corners into which we can
> objectively paint ourselves.

But painting yourself into that corner still doesn't explain the stool and the pointy cap, does it.

My potty-training was skimped on . . .

Brother Of Jerry Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> JS was an ethical sleazeball by most cultures
> standards anywhere.

Please excuse my aside but this is a funny coincidence. I'm just reading an article about words being their own opposites. The kind of thought that amuses me on a Sunday morning.

I tripped over the phrase "ethical sleazeball" in this post because it could mean Joseph was a sleazeball but somehow managed to be ethical with it - my first impression on encountering that label - or it could be that he was ethically challenged, which fortunately I soon realized, after an initial double take, is the meaning BoJ intends wrt JS.

Here's the article about the same words that literally have two exactly opposite meanings.

https://getpocket.com/explore/item/25-words-that-are-their-own-opposites?utm_source=pocket-newtab


Language is fun!

I think that so-called "prophets of God" should adhere to a higher standard of behavior, but maybe that's me.

You must be on the wrong side of the double standard.

Another big sin was conning people to believe "God said so" to get them to accept whatever they wanted.

Only later do people realize they have to explain away their credibility. "Oh, he was speaking as a man that time." "Prophets aren't perfect; sometimes they sin." Well, how are people supposed to know? Clearly praying about it isn't cutting it.

(Sorry in advance!)

Is he related to Perry Mason? That World explain a Lot!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/25/2022 11:47AM by GNPE.

I still don't understand not blaming Joseph for the ban on blacks holding the priesthood.

Joseph wrote the book of Abraham.

The book of Abraham clearly states the the wife of Ham was Egyptus and she was a descendant of Cain and preserved the curse of a black skin after the flood.

Furthermore the book of Abraham states concerning her son "Pharoh was of that lineage denied the priesthood."

So Joseph wrote the ban via a scripture. The church lies and blames Brigham.

That's right. JS may not have imposed the ban across the board, but he's the one who devised the rationale.

That's the problem with Mason's position: you can't disavow racism without disavowing the Book of Mormon and the Pearl of Great Price, and you can't call polygamy a mistake without discrediting the D&C and the several founding prophets of the restoration.

Without racism and polygamy, there is no Mormonism.

add lots of Patriarchy.

But mommy, Mormons are "Forever Families", so we get to be your kids forever and ever.

When's supper going to be ready?

CK:

are we there yet?

Not yet. Women in the earthly church are still allowed to speak, though under the "direction" and presiding authority of, you guessed it, the men.

Once they are shut out entirely, then the earthly church will be an accurate representation of the celestial world.

The temple Celestial Rooms are our current closest approximation to heaven. All members are expected to STFU and move along because they detract from the perfect sterility of the empty room.


It's hard to believe we once put up with all of that. What were we thinking?

The best I can come up with is that it's like when you carefully drive the speed limit because you're behind a highway patrol vehicle . . .

He must not understand the second anointing.