LDS

Status
Not open for further replies.
At the October 1960 LDS Church Conference, Spencer Kimball utilized 2 Nephi 30:6 when he stated how the Indians "are fast becoming a white and delightsome people." He said, "The [Indian] children in the home placement program in Utah are often lighter than their brothers and sisters in the hogans on the reservation" (Improvement Era, December 1960, pp. 922-3).
Click to expand...
Wht did Kimball mean when he said the children were "lighter"?

Brigham Young said:
"Why are so many of the inhabitants of the earth cursed with a skin of blackness?
Click to expand...
What did Young mean by "skin of blackness"?

Brigham Young said:
This was not to be, and the Lord put a mark upon him, which is the flat nose and black skin.
Click to expand...
What did Young mean by "black skin?

Joseph Fielding Smith said:
"There is a reason why one man is born black and with other disadvantages, while another is born white with great advantages
Click to expand...
"Born black" What does that mean?

Prophet John Taylor said:
For instance, the descendants of Cain cannot cast off their skin of blackness
Click to expand...
"Skin of blackness" What's that supposed to mean?

2 Nephi 5:21-23 said:
...wherefore, as they were white, and exceedingly fair and delightsome, that they might not be enticing unto [the Nephites] the Lord God did cause a skin of blackness to come upon them."
Click to expand...
There it is again, "Skin of blackness"?

Pearl of Great Price said:
“For behold, the Lord shall curse the land with much heat, and the bareness thereof shall go forth forever; and there was a blackness came upon all the children of Canaan, that they were despised among all people..."
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Janadele said:
Of course it is completely separate.

Scriptural language has always historically referenced unrighteousness or wickedness with darkness, and purity and righteousness with light.

It should also be remembered that meanings and interpretations of words have changed over time.

As previously posted, it was not "African-Americans" from whom the Lord withheld the responsibility of His Priesthood. This is not a debateable point.

For a short time, and for His own reasons, the Lord withheld the responsibility of His Priesthood from worthy males of Negro descent. They were always allowed the privilege of baptism, and of membership, through which they received the blessings of the Priesthood, without the responsibility... as is the situation also for women.
Click to expand...

Your ability to lie to yourself regarding the realities of your religion's racist past truly saddens me.
 
Janadele said:
Of Negro descent, is also of African descent,& not confined to African Americans nor to skin colour, nor are all persons of African descent of Negro descent.
Click to expand...

  • What is "Negro descent"?
  • How do you know when someone is "of negro descent"?
  • Why did the BofM and Church leaders use "skin of blackness"?
  • Why did the BofM say that the Lamanites were cursed with dark skin?
  • Why did Spencer W. Kimball say that Native Americans were becoming "lighter"?
BTW: Every human being is of African descent.
 
Janadele said:
As I posted earlier, I am at present recording an audio book of Jesus The Christ by James E. Talmage, as it is of special interest to me. I recommend anyone who is actually interested in the facts to purchase the book.
Click to expand...


Facts. How can you call anything to do with Jesus Christ a fact?

The bible is a merely sequence of opinions written by people who never met Jesus, and who wrote about him long after his death. There are no "facts" in the bible, only vague third, fourth, fifth hand recollections. Always keep in mind that that the Four Gospels were not actually written down by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. They were first recorded physically between 60 and 250 years after the death of Jesus Christ, before that, they were related from person to person, generation to generation, by word of mouth. If you have ever played a game of "Chinese whispers" you will understand the inaccuracies that will creep into any tome so related.

Now I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that Jesus Christ really existed; his name appears in too many historical documents relating to the time in which he lived, from too many widely different sources for him to have been a figment of someone's imagination; the Qu'ran, the Torah and the Talmud, and in the writings of Roman "scholars" Tacitus, Seutonius, Thallus and Pliny the Elder, all of which mention him on multiple occasions. However, the question of whether not he was divine is not a matter of "fact" its a matter of "faith", no more and no less.
 
Janadele said:
Of Negro descent, is also of African descent,& not confined to African Americans nor to skin colour, nor are all persons of African descent of Negro descent.
Click to expand...


So you are saying that "Negroes" are African, but they need not be black, and not all Africans are "Negroes".

So it seems you are unable to define what you are calling "Negroes", or you are very confused by trying to avoid sounding like what you sound like--a racist.
 
Janadele said:
It is not I who is confused :)
Click to expand...


Not confused but then a racist? (And no, a smiley won't help if that is what you are. That is despicable garbage.)

Can you please define what you mean by the "Negro race"?
 
Last edited:
Janadele said:
Shiner: Read my previous post more carefully.
Click to expand...


This one?


Originally Posted by Janadele
Every mortal ever born on this earth, and all those yet to come, are the Spiritual children of their Heavenly Mother and our Heavenly Father.
Click to expand...



It doesn't answer my question.

So, rather than vaguely referring me to a vague post of someone else' regurgitated words, how about just spelling it out for me. Please?

Why would God have only one Heavenly Mother Concubine, when he could have a whole Holy Harem?
 
Originally Posted by Janadele
Shiner: Read my previous post more carefully.
Click to expand...


I find it amusing interesting curious just plain rude, that you immediately respond to my question, whilst continually ignoring people who are asking the same questions over and over....for days and days......:rolleyes:

Slowvehicle said:
Janadele: Please answer my questions...
Click to expand...


In case you missed them, here's the latest reposting. Edited.


Slowvehicle said:
When, in your opinion, did the "Eve" and the "Adam" of this universe existr, and was it really in Missouri?

When, in your opinion, did the globally destructive punitive flood occur,in this universe?

Where might one find the "International Internet Laws" you claim have jurisdiction here?

Why, if the BoM lists "black skin" as the deal-breaker (until recently), do you claim that mormon doctrine defines "of African descent" as the criterion (and why does that not apply to all humans, as we are all "of African descent")?

Do consider answering these questions...

I thank you in advance.
Click to expand...
 
Janadele said:
It is not I who is confused
Click to expand...
It's you whose deliberately vague and uninformative posts are confusing everyone else about what the hell it is your church actually teaches.

Most of your church's teachings are just silly, but on this particular issue they are also deeply offensive so your obfuscation is understandable.
 
Shiner said:
Why would God have only one Heavenly Mother Concubine, when he could have a whole Holy Harem?
Click to expand...

Shiner, there's a reason Mormons dance around this. If you know any personally, you probably know how outraged they get at polygamous splinter groups like the FLDS (Fundamental LDS) headed by Warren Jeffs. They'll take great pains to point out that polygamy is no longer a Mormon doctrine. Well, yes and no.

True, you cannot practice polygamy here on earth (although I personally know a bishop who was actively and quite openly having an affair while still remaining the bishop and a member in good standing, so what's the difference, really?) but it's still part of their after-life scenario.

The best Mormon men and women will attain the top of the Celestial Kingdom after death. There they will become gods themselves and have their own worlds to populate, just like this one. (Yahweh still ranks over them, but they'll be like Yahweh for a new planet.) In order to populate those planets, one god and his wives (multiple) will have spirit babies. So, long story short, Mormons believe in afterlife polygamy, but only for the very best Mormons.

Now this being a very sexist religion, I will point out that one woman cannot have multiple husbands. Take my sister for example. She was married in the temple last year to a widower. My BIL is now "sealed for time and all eternity" to both his first wife and my sister. Since my BIL is about 15 years older than my sister, it stands to reason that he'll die first. If that happens, she can remarry, but not be sealed to a new husband. BIL gets sealed to two wives (or more if by some happenstance he outlives my sister), Sister gets one husband, end of story.
 
Just as an addition to my last post, the sealing in the temple is sexist, too. You get a new "temple name" and when you go through the temple. It's secret and you're not supposed to tell anyone. (I think everyone going through the temple on the same day gets the same name, or something, but I don't know how it's assigned.) Anyway, during the temple rituals you have to tell the workers your temple name to pass through the veil towards the end of the rituals and get admitted to the final Celestial room (they are said to be incredibly beautiful)

Well, when you get sealed to your new spouse, the new husband gives his temple name to the worker and is allowed through the veil. He then turns around and asks his new bride her temple name, which she tells him and he allows her through the veil. He finds out her special name and escorts her through to the celestial room, but she is never to know his temple name. I don't think a good Mormon wife is even supposed to ask about it, it's that secret. And that sexist.
 
Janadele said:
It is not I who is confused :)
Click to expand...
Then please could you help dispel our confusion by answering questions instead of speaking in vague riddles?

The answers to the questions might be obvious to you but they aren't obvious to those of us who are not steeped in LDS lore.

As well as Slowvehicle's oft-repeated questions which it would be polite of you to answer, please could you explain what you mean by "Negro". Please be explicit, as your explanations thus far have not been helpful.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom