Why do you ignore the scriptures that I presented?? I already demonstrated that the Book of Mormon is not racists, why am I the only one that has to respond?? But I will do it

"If you refuse to acknowledge them, we'll know conclusively that you are a dishonest flake.

3 Nephi 2:15
15 And their curse was taken from them, and their S K I N became white like unto the Nephites"


Interpretation 1: " As the “skin of blackness” is a metaphor, so too is the white skin of the Nephites. Perhaps 3 Nephi 2:15-16, in which the Lamanites have the curse taken from them, fulfills 2 Nephi 30:6. In these verses the Lamanite has become “white and delightsome” not “pure and delightsome.”"

Interpretation 2: "3 Nephi 2:15-16.

15 And their curse was taken from them, and their skin became white like unto the Nephites; 16 And their young men and their daughters became exceedingly fair, and they were numbered AMONG the Nephites, and were called Nephites. And thus ended the thirteenth year."
Even today, there are Blacks who have joined the Church, married White spouse, and their children became lighter than their Black parents. But isn't this a natural process, doesn't usually this occur when a black man marries a white women?


Jacob 3:8
8 O my brethren, I fear that unless ye shall repent of your sins that their S K I N S will be whiter than yours, when ye shall be brought with them before the throne of God.

How could the skins of the lamanites be whiter than the skins of the Nephites?? This is obviously not literal. However, black skin is not a curse, not does it mention it in this scripture.

"Alma 3:6
6 And the S K I N S 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."
Scripture, out of context, check Alma 3:7,14
In fact verse 14 proves that dark skin is not a curse.

I am not intending to preach, but to answer to the accusation that the Book of Mormon is racist.

"dark and loathsome,"
dark because:"and a filthy people, full of idleness and all manner of abominations," but Skin had nothing to do.

In fact, just like Bushman said, "...[T]he fact that [the Lamanites] are Israel, the chosen of God, adds a level of complexity to the Book of Mormon that simple racism does not explain. Incongruously, the book champions the Indians' place in world history, assigning them to a more glorious future than modern American whites.... Lamanite degradation is not ingrained in their natures, ineluctably bonded to their dark skins. Their wickedness is wholly cultural and frequently reversed. During one period, "they began to be a very industrious people; yea, and they were friendly with the Nephites; therefore, they did open a correspondence with them, and the curse of God did no more follow them." (Alma 23:18) In the end, the Lamanites triumph. The white Nephites perish, and the dark Lamanites remain."

The curse is this:
(2 Nephi 5:20) Wherefore, the word of the Lord was fulfilled which he spake unto me, saying that: Inasmuch as they will not hearken unto thy words they shall be cut off from the presence of the Lord. And behold, they were cut off from his presence. (2 Nephi 5:21) And he had caused the cursing to come upon them, yea, even a sore cursing, because of their iniquity.

In fact, they were cursed, before they had black skin: "Alma 3:14 Thus the word of God is fulfilled, for these are the words which he said to Nephi: Behold, the Lamanites have I cursed, and I will set a mark on them that they and their seed may be separated from thee and thy seed"

The mark was black skin, but not a curse.

Lamanites and Nephites are equal: (4 Nephi 1:2-3)
"And it came to pass in the thirty and sixth year, the people were all converted unto the Lord, upon all the face of the land, both Nephites and Lamanites, and there were no contentions and disputations among them, and every man did deal justly one with another.
And they had all things common among them; therefore there were not rich and poor, bond and free, but they were all made free, and partakers of the heavenly gift."

Everyone equal: (2 Nephi 26:33)
"black and white, bond and free, male and female; and he remembereth the heathen; and all are alike unto God, both Jew and Gentile"

Book of Mormon Condemns slavery
Benjamin has not suffered people to make slaves of one another, Mosiah 2:13
against Nephites’ law to have slaves, Alma 27:9

Also, I can prove with historical evidence that the translator, Joseph Smith, was not racist

"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....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."

(Mormon Church president Brigham Young, "Journal of Discourses," vol. 7, p. 290)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/11/2011 01:33AM by steve benson.

"Journal of Discourses" Is not all official doctrine, or based on official doctrine.

official doctrine:
http://newsroom.lds.org/article/approaching-mormon-doctrine

Now nowhere in the Pearl of Great price, would you find a scripture that says that black skin is a curse.

It makes me smile how all of you are attacking my beliefs.

Not sure, whats your problem, the Book of Mormon condemns slavery, and teaches that blacks and whites are equal
2 Ne. 26:33

as to what is and isn't doctrine. Not only is it too ambiguous to be helpful, it is not itself doctrine. How can you rely on a website article that does not even give the author's name as a basis for definitively settling what is and isn't doctrine. No less than than George Q. Cannon, a long-standing member of the First Presidency, said that the Journal of Discourses constituted part of the "standard works." So am I to take your word over his?

Face it. You're one of those people who are trapped in a cult and do not want to admit that your cult is based on a hoax and a fraud. So you do all of these flexy-bendy exercises, bend over backwards, squint sideways, change definitions, create creative interpretations, try different lenses and filters....all in an effort to avoid facing the obvious reality that is breathing down your neck every minute of every hour of every day of your existence. Just turn around, acknowledge the existence of reality and falsity of your cult and you will find that things will come quite nicely into focus and you won't need all of these intellectual gimmicks to get through the day.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/11/2011 02:13AM by steve benson.

Thanks for bringing your crazy to our board -- so entertaining. You just can't make this shit up!

I read and read looking for enlightenment, and entertainment, and then just when you're about to give up, a real nugget shows up.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/11/2011 02:22AM by Fetal Deity.

"The Journal of Discourses deservedly ranks as one of
the standard works of the church"

J of D Volume 8 Preface

Go ahead and take this to the next step. EVERYTHING in your books is a metaphor that can be interpreted any way that makes sense to you. No need to take anything literally or take responsibility for defending any of it, because it's ALL just a metaphor. Something doesn't make sense? You just haven't interpreted that symbol correctly. Something hateful and offensive? You just don't understand -- those words don't actually mean what they mean! They mean whatever I say they mean that happens to make sense to me at the moment.

Good job.

They start giving you this song and dance about how the bloody oaths and the handshakes are all metaphors and symbolic. But they can never agree on what the metaphors mean or what the symbols are, so everyone just makes up whatever helps them avoid facing the reality that the temple rituals are absurd anachronisms and plagiarized pageantry swiped wholesale from the Freemasons.

Yeah, someday I'm going to pay some metaphorical tithing to the LDS Church. Maybe the members who are asked to scrub toilets on the weekend because the Church is to greedy to pay a janitor should just do it metaphorically while they stay home and read a good book. ;o)

"For instance, the descendants of Cain cannot cast off their skin of blackness, at once, and immediately, although every soul of them should repent . . . . Cain and his posterity must wear the mark which God put upon them; and his white friends may wash the race of Cain with fuller's soap every day, they cannot wash away God's mark."

(John Taylor, Mormon apostle, LDS "prophet, seer and revelator," and eventual third president of the Mormon Church, in "Millennial Star," vol. 14, p. 418)

song and dance, you're simply confirming that you belong to the PIOYA (pull-it-out-yer-a**) school of Mormon apologetics. You're making stuff up as you go and demanding that we accept it--even though it flies in the face of common sense and is contrary to the plain language of the scriptures that you claim to believe in.

Actual official Mormon prophets have believed that the skin cursing was literal. Are you saying that you are wiser and more inspired than Spencer W. Kimball?

Read this:

"And the S K I N S 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."

Do you have a reading comprehension problem? Your reference to verse 14 is based on your own private fanciful interpretation--in other words, it's just another of your PIOYA answers.

Gorspel Dacktrin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> song and dance, you're simply confirming that you
> belong to the PIOYA (pull-it-out-yer-a**) school
> of Mormon apologetics. You're making stuff up as
> you go and demanding that we accept it--even
> though it flies in the face of common sense and is
> contrary to the plain language of the scriptures
> that you claim to believe in.
>
> Actual official Mormon prophets have believed that
> the skin cursing was literal. Are you saying that
> you are wiser and more inspired than Spencer W.
> Kimball?
>
> Read this:
>
> "And the S K I N S 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."
>
> Do you have a reading comprehension problem? Your
> reference to verse 14 is based on your own private
> fanciful interpretation--in other words, it's just
> another of your PIOYA answers.


Perfect! I agree, and on that same note, I find it interesting that PIOYA always have the 'it is not official church doctrine' bull of an excuse, but apparently what they have to say is much more official than what their own prophet has actually said.

maybe your buy-bull is metaphor.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/11/2011 01:52AM by Dave the Atheist.

"God has commanded Israel not to intermarry. To go against this commandment of God would be in sin. Those who willfully sin with their eyes open to this wrong will not be surprised to find that they will be separated from the presence of God in the world to come. This is spiritual death. . . .

"The reason that one would lose his blessings by marrying a Negro is due to the restriction placed upon them. 'No person having the least particle of Negro blood can hold the Priesthood' (Brigham Young). It does not matter if they are one-sixth Negro or one-hundred and sixth, the curse of no Priesthood is the same. If an individual who is entitled to the Priesthood marries a Negro, the Lord has decreed that only spirits who are not eligible for the Priesthood will come to that marriage as children. To intermarry with a Negro is to forfeit a "Nation of Priesthood holders"....

"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, and then, of course, they have been persuaded by some of the arguments that have been put forth . . . . We who teach in the Church certainly must have our feet on the ground and not to be led astray by the philosophies of men on this subject . . . .

"I think I have read enough to give you an idea of what the Negro is after. He is not just seeking the opportunity of sitting down in a cafe where white people eat. He isn't just trying to ride on the same streetcar or the same Pullman car with white people. It isn't that he just desires to go to the same theater as the white people. From this, and other interviews I have read, it appears that the Negro seeks absorption with the white race. He will not be satisfied until he achieves it by intermarriage. That is his objective and we must face it. We must not allow our feelings to carry us away, nor must we feel so sorry for Negroes that we will open our arms and embrace them with everything we have. Remember the little statement that we used to say about sin, 'First we pity, then endure, then embrace' . . . .

"Now let's talk about segregation again for a few moments. Was segregation a wrong principle? When the Lord chose the nations to which the spirits were to come, determining that some would be Japanese and some would be Chinese and some Negroes and some Americans, He engaged in an act of segregation . . . .

"When he told Enoch not 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....

"Who placed the Negroes originally in darkest Africa? Was it some man, or was it God? And when He placed them there, He segregated them . . . .

"The Lord segregated the people both as to blood and place of residence. At least in the cases of the Lamanites and the Negro we have the definite word of the Lord Himself that he placed a dark skin upon them as a curse--as a punishment and as a sign to all others. He forbade intermarriage with them under threat of extension of the curse. And He certainly segregated the descendants of Cain when He cursed the Negro as to the Priesthood, and drew an absolute line. You may even say He dropped an Iron curtain there . . . .

"Now we are generous with the Negro. We are willing that the Negro have the highest education. I would be willing to let every Negro drive a Cadillac if they could afford it. I would be willing that they have all the advantages they can get out of life in the world. But let them enjoy these things among themselves. I think the Lord segregated the Negro and who is man to change that segregation? It reminds me of the scripture on marriage, 'what God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.' Only here we have the reverse of the thing--what God hath separated, let not man bring together again.

"Think of the Negro, cursed as to the priesthood . . . . This Negro, who, in the pre-existence lived the type of life which justified the Lord in sending him to the earth in their lineage of Cain with a black skin, and possibly being born in darkest Africa--if that Negro is willing when he hears the gospel to accept it, he may have many of the blessings of the gospel. In spite of all he did in the pre-existent life, the Lord is willing, 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. 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 celestial glory."

(Mormon apostle and LDS "prophet, seer and revelator" Mark E. Petersen, "Race Problems -- As They Affect the Church," Convention of Teachers of Religion on the College/Online College Level, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah, 27 August 1954)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/11/2011 01:54AM by steve benson.

I'm not in the mood to be polite about the fallacy that the Book of Mormon somehow isn't racist because God provided the Lamanites an out from their curse...if they'd just be good.

So, a few of them took God up on his offer, and got to be white again. DON'T YOU SEE THE RACISM THERE IN ITSELF?????

Oh, I see, the Book of Mormon isn't racist because there's a button black people can push to become white, so you see, God is fair after all and anyone can be white. If you're black it's because you chose.....OMG I CAN BARELY GO ON.

OK so a few Lamanites got out of the curse by obeying God and becoming white...so we see that God ISN'T racist? The millions of other Lamanites who chose to stay bad, on the other hand, stayed black, up until God relieved them if their burden and simply swept them off the face of the earth like trash...

TheSkepticChristian, you are so wrong that it hurts my eyes reading your...stuff.

What you're saying is even MORE racist. Apologists dig the most wonderfully deep holes to toss the Book of Mormon into.

Please, continue digging.

(Jacob 3:5) Behold, the Lamanites your brethren, whom ye hate because of their filthiness and the cursing which hath come upon their skins...

This passage clearly demonstrates that not only was the curse dealing with the skin, but that the Nephites themselves were guilty of racism.

How could one be racist against someone of a different metaphorical skin color.

God, it's amazing to watch you people twist yourselves into knots trying to defend this crap.

Sources clearly show that, like the people of the BOM, the early church was racist. http://mormonstories.org/top10toughissues/blacks.html

Out of context ""And the S K I N S 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."

In Context ""And the S K I N S 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.""Thus the word of God is fulfilled, for these are the words which he said to Nephi: Behold, the Lamanites have I CURSED, and I WILL set a mark on them" (Alma 3:14)

"Your reference to verse 14 is based on your own private fanciful interpretation"
How, to me it seems pretty clear. Can you interpret it another way???

"Actual official Mormon prophets have believed that the skin cursing was literal."
True they are also human, why don't you try to understand what official doctrine is??
http://newsroom.lds.org/article/approaching-mormon-doctrine


"you saying that you are wiser and more inspired than Spencer W. Kimball?"

Noo, but after talking with many ex-mormons, I came to the conclusion, that most of them, don't understand what a prophet is, and don't know their purpose, or role.

Hope this helps,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yBtE5QbcDbU

Jacob 3:5
Black upon their skins?? or curse upon their skins?? its not black, its curse upon their skins. Black skins is not a curse. I already send you other scriptures that prove that black skin is not a curse.

"Nephi's brother Jacob publicly chastised the Nephites for hating the Lamanites because of their skin color (Jacob 3:5). While some Nephites looked upon the darkness of skin as a curse, Jacob corrected this erroneous assumption of superiority by noting that the Lamanites of that time were more virtuous and pure than some of their Nephite contemporaries (Jacob 3:5—7) and that such external differences as skin color are temporal and do not necessarily signify spiritual states (Jacob 3:8). He commanded the Nephites to repent and no longer revile against the Lamanites because of the darkness of their skins (Jacob 3:9—10)."
http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/review/?vol=15&num=2&id=508

"Your reference to verse 14 is based on your own private fanciful interpretation"
How, to me it seems pretty clear. Can you interpret it another way???

When I was a believer I made the same excuses you're making to tell myself that the Mormon scriptures don't mean what they say.

Even IF the black skin thing is a metaphor, it's a racist metaphor. That's like telling a racist joke and saying you're not racist, it's just a joke.

So do I give up the Celestial Kingdom because I left the church because it was unconscienable to me? Am I required, and are black people required for that matter, to see it your way and not only accept it but defend it in order to inherit exhaltation?

Why are you here? You're not here to save us, you're not here to save others from us, you're just here to argue?

If so please just go away.

Yes, you are a Mormon.

You make a nonsensical comment about context and then glue verse 14 to verse 6 as though they were part of the same verse. But that's not important. What is important is that you seem to think that verse 14 proves anything. The previous verse clearly states that the "mark" (i.e. the darkness of the skin) was part of the curse. Again, do you have a reading comprehension problem. The use of "and" in verse 14 in no way supports your odd notion that the skin color change was not part of the curse. Not only is the context extremely clear, but so is the plain text. So cursed them and then he changed their skin color. Why? Just an unrelated decorating and fashion decision? You need to grow up.

Here is my response to your silly link on doctrine. The linked article is useless as a guide to what is and isn't doctrine. Not only is it too ambiguous to be helpful, it is not itself doctrine. How can you rely on a website article that does not even give the author's name as a basis for definitively settling what is and isn't doctrine? No less than than George Q. Cannon, a long-standing member of the First Presidency, said that the Journal of Discourses constituted part of the "standard works." So am I to take your word over his?

Face it. You're one of those people who are trapped in a cult and do not want to admit that your cult is based on a hoax and a fraud. So you do all of these flexy-bendy exercises, bend over backwards, squint sideways, change definitions, create creative interpretations, try different lenses and filters....all in an effort to avoid facing the obvious reality that is breathing down your neck every minute of every hour of every day of your existence. Just turn around, acknowledge the existence of reality and falsity of your cult and you will find that things will come quite nicely into focus and you won't need all of these intellectual gimmicks to get through the day.

"The Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as President of this Church to lead you astray. It is not in the programme. It is not in the mind of God. If I were to attempt that, the Lord would remove me out of my place, and so He will any other man who attempts to lead the children of men astray from the oracles of God and from their duty."

http://lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/od/1?lang=eng

it just keeps getting better, what makes you think any of us believes anything Elder Anus Licker Bednar says?

"In a broad general sense, caste systems have their root and origin in the gospel itself, and when they operate according to the divine decree, the resultant restrictions and segregation are right and proper and have the approval of the Lord.

"To illustrate: Cain, Ham, and the whole Negro race have been cursed with a black skin, the mark of Cain, so they can be identified as a caste apart, a people with whom the other descendants of Adam should not intermarry. (Gen. 4; Moses 5.)

"The whole house of Israel was chosen as a peculiar people, one set apart from all other nations (Ex. 19:5-6; Deut. 7:6; 14:2); and they were forbidden to marry outside their own caste. (Ex. 34:10-17; Deut. 7:1-5.)

"In effect the Lamanites belonged to one caste and the Nephites to another, and a mark was put upon the Lamanites to keep the Nephites from intermixing with and marrying them. (Alma 3:6-11.) All this is not to say that any race, creed, or caste should be denied any inalienable rights.

"But it is to say that Deity in his infinite wisdom, to carry out his inscrutable purposes, has a caste system of his own, a system of segregation of races and peoples. The justice of such a system is evident when life is considered in its true eternal perspective. It is only by a knowledge of pre-existence that it can be known why some persons are born in one race or caste and some in another.

"However, in a broad general sense, caste systems have their origin in the gospel itself, and when they operate according to the divine decree, the resultant restrictions and segregation are right and proper and have the approval of the Lord."

(Mormon apostle and LDS "prophet, seer and reveloar" Bruce R. McConkie, in "Mormon Doctrine," 1st ed., p. 114)

"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."

(Mormon apostle, LDS "prophet, seer and revelator," and eventual 10th president of the Mormon Church Joseph Fielding Smith, in "Doctrines of Salvation," p. 61)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/11/2011 02:04AM by steve benson.

TheSkepticChristian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Interpretation 1: " As the “skin of blackness”
> is a metaphor, so too is the white skin of the Nephites.

1. How did a "metaphor" keep blacks from holding the priesthood until 1978?

2. If dark skin was not a curse, then why was Jane Elizabeth Manning refused an endowment, and sealing, but instead allowed to be sealed as a servant to JS? Why was she was not even allowed in the temple for the ceremony, and required to have a proxy?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Elizabeth_Manning_James

"Her request was refused. Instead, the First Presidency "decided she might be adopted into the family of Joseph Smith as a servant, which was done, a special ceremony having been prepared for the purpose."[2] The ceremony took place on May 18, 1894 with Joseph F. Smith acting as proxy for Joseph Smith, and Bathsheba W. Smith acting as proxy for Jane James (who was not allowed into the temple for the ordinance).[3] In the ceremony, Jane was "attached as a Servitor for eternity to the prophet Joseph Smith and in this capacity be connected with his family and be obedient to him in all things in the Lord as a faithful Servitor". (Salt Lake Temple Adoption Record, May 18, 1894, Book A, p. 26)"



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/11/2011 02:04AM by atheist&happy:-).

The priesthood ban was NEVER official doctrine, it was just a policy (for example: missionary rules are a policy, nothing to do with doctrine)

We don't know the reasons for the priesthood ban, the reasons are not found in the official doctrine.

Maybe the priesthood ban was a mistake, or Maybe God did mean to have the priesthood ban in his church, but the reasons have not yet been revealed. Unknown reasons. Trust me guys.

And there were blacks that had the priesthood before 1978.


I don't know what the issue is with you guys. Is the church promoting slavery or racism?? Noo

Jacob 3:5
Black upon their skins?? or curse upon their skins?? its not black, its curse upon their skins. Black skins is not a curse. I already send you other scriptures that prove that black skin is not a curse.

"Nephi's brother Jacob publicly chastised the Nephites for hating the Lamanites because of their skin color (Jacob 3:5). While some Nephites looked upon the darkness of skin as a curse, Jacob corrected this erroneous assumption of superiority by noting that the Lamanites of that time were more virtuous and pure than some of their Nephite contemporaries (Jacob 3:5—7) and that such external differences as skin color are temporal and do not necessarily signify spiritual states (Jacob 3:8). He commanded the Nephites to repent and no longer revile against the Lamanites because of the darkness of their skins (Jacob 3:9—10)."
http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/review/?vol=15&num=2&id=508

"Your reference to verse 14 is based on your own private fanciful interpretation"
How, to me it seems pretty clear. Can you interpret it another way???

is pathetic, right? I mean, look at you. Look at all the nonsense and quibbling and hair splitting you have to do. And what is the result? Both you and your religion come out smelling and looking worse than before you started your effort to "defend" it. So you have generations of Mormon prophets who just banned blacks from having the priesthood for the hell of it and now neither you nor they can explain why. Well, if that ain't a dandy selling point for your crackpot Church and its Moronic "living prophets" I don't know what is. ;o)

...silly me
It's not
"And he had caused the acursing 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 bdelightsome, that they might not be centicing unto my people the Lord God did cause a dskin of eblackness to come upon them."

It's actually that the lord cursed there hearts with blackness, made their skins black for some unrelated reason (the climate?), and then cursed their skins with some other curse (psoriasis?)

1. Hows that any better?
2. You're full of it

Please explain the metaphorical nature of this official First Presidency statement . . .

"The attitude of the Church with reference to Negroes remains as it has always stood. It is not a matter of the declaration of a policy but of direct commandment from the Lord, on which is founded the doctrine of the Church from the days of its organization, to the effect that Negroes may become members of the Church but that they are not entitled to the priesthood at the present time.

"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 fathers 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 now are entitled to.'

"President Wilford Woodruff made the following statement: 'The day will come when all that race will be redeemed and possess all the blessings which we now have.'

"The position of the Church regarding the Negro may be understood when another doctrine of the Church is kept in mind, namely, that the conduct of spirits in the premortal existence has some determining effect upon the conditions and circumstances under which these spirits take on mortality and that while the details of this principle have not been made known, the mortality is a privilege that is given to those who maintain their first estate; and that the worth of the privilege is so great that spirits are willing to come to earth and take on bodies no matter what the handicap may be as to the kind of bodies they are to secure; and that among the handicaps, failure of the right to enjoy in mortality the blessings of the priesthood is a handicap which spirits are willing to assume in order that they might come to earth. Under this principle there is no injustice whatsoever involved in this deprivation as to the holding of the priesthood by the Negroes."

("First Presidency Statement on the Negro Question," 17 August 1949)

looks like he knows nothing of mormonism.

"To General Authorities, Regional Representatives of the Twelve, Stake Presidents, Mission Presidents, and Bishops.

"Dear Brethren:

"In view of confusion that has arisen, it was decided at a meeting of the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve to restate the position of the Church with regard to the Negro both in society and in the Church.

"First, may we say that we know something of the sufferings of those who are discriminated against in a denial of their civil rights and Constitutional privileges. Our early history as a church is a tragic story of persecution and oppression. Our people repeatedly were denied the protection of the law. They were driven and plundered, robbed and murdered by mobs, who in many instances were aided and abetted by those sworn to uphold the law. We as a people have experienced the bitter fruits of civil discrimination and mob violence.

"We believe that the Constitution of the United States was divinely inspired, that it was produced by "wise men" whom God raised up for this "very purpose," and that the principles embodied in the Constitution are so fundamental and important that, if possible, they should be extended "for the rights and protection" of all mankind.

"In revelations received by the first prophet of the Church in this dispensation, Joseph Smith (1805-1844), the Lord made it clear that it is "not right that any man should be in bondage one to another." These words were spoken prior to the Civil War. From these and other revelations have sprung the Church's deep and historic concern with man's free agency and our commitment to the sacred principles of the Constitution.

"It follows, therefore, that we believe the Negro, as well as those of other races, should have his full Constitutional privileges as a member of society, and we hope that members of the Church everywhere will do their part as citizens to see that these rights are held inviolate. Each citizen must have equal opportunities and protection under the law with reference to civil rights.

**********"However, matters of faith, conscience, and theology are not within the purview of the civil law. The first amendment to the Constitution specifically provides that 'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.'

"The position of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints affecting those of the Negro race who choose to join the Church falls wholly within the category of religion. It has no bearing upon matters of civil rights. In no case or degree does it deny to the Negro his full privileges as a citizen of the nation.

"This position has no relevancy whatever to those who do not wish to [p.223]join the Church. Those individuals, we suppose, do not believe in the divine origin and nature of the church, nor that we have the priesthood of God. Therefore, if they feel we have no priesthood, they should have no concern with any aspect of our theology on priesthood so long as that theology does not deny any man his Constitutional privileges.

**********"A word of explanation concerning the position of the Church.

**********"The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints owes its origin, its existence, and its hope for the future to the principle of continuous revelation. 'We believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God.'

**********"From the beginning of this dispensation, Joseph Smith and all succeeding presidents of the Church have taught that Negroes, while spirit children of a common Father, and the progeny of our earthly parents Adam and Eve, were not yet to receive the priesthood, for reasons which we believe are known to God, but which He has not made fully known to man.

**********"Our living prophet, President David O. McKay, has said, 'The seeming discrimination by the Church toward the Negro is not something which originated with man; but goes back into the beginning with God . . . .

**********"'Revelation assures us that this plan antedates man's mortal existence, extending back to man's pre-existent state."

"President McKay has also said, 'Sometime in God's eternal plan, the Negro will be given the right to hold the priesthood.'

**********"Until God reveals His will in this matter, to him whom we sustain as a prophet, we are bound by that same will. Priesthood, when it is conferred on any man comes as a blessing from God, not of men.

"We feel nothing but love, compassion, and the deepest appreciation for the rich talents, endowments, and the earnest strivings of our Negro brothers and sisters. We are eager to share with men of all races the blessings of the Gospel. We have no racially-segregated congregations.

**********"Were we the leaders of an enterprise created by ourselves and operated only according to our own earthly wisdom, it would be a simple thing to act according to popular will. But we believe that this work is directed by God and that the conferring of the priesthood must await His revelation. To do otherwise would be to deny the very premise on which the Church is established.

**********"We recognize that those who do not accept the principle of modern revelation may oppose our point of view. We repeat that such would not wish for membership in the Church, and therefore the question of priesthood should hold no interest for them. Without prejudice they should grant us the privilege afforded under the Constitution to exercise our [p.224]chosen form of religion just as we must grant all others a similar privilege. They must recognize that the question of bestowing or withholding priesthood in the Church is a matter of religion and not a matter of Constitutional right.

"We extend the hand of friendship to men everywhere and the hand of fellowship to all who wish to join the Church and partake of the many rewarding opportunities to be found therein.

"We join with those throughout the world who pray that all of the blessings of the gospel of Jesus Christ may in due time of the Lord become available to men of faith everywhere. Until that time comes we must trust in God, in His wisdom and in His tender mercy.

"Meanwhile we must strive harder to emulate His Son, the Lord Jesus Christ, whose new commandment it was that we should love one another. In developing that love and concern for one another, while awaiting revelations yet to come, let us hope that with respect to these religious differences, we may gain reinforcement for understanding and appreciation for such differences. They challenge our common similarities, as children of one Father, to enlarge the out-reachings of our divine souls.

"Faithfully your brethren,
The First Presidency
By Hugh B. Brown
N. Eldon Tanner"

("First Presidency on the Rights of the Negro," 15 December 1969, ••••••••••emphasis added)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/11/2011 02:22AM by steve benson.