Evidence for God from Science

Another superb article..

Mormonism and the Negro: A look at their historical position

According to Mormon history and authoritative Mormon teachers, the Negro, as they were referred to, are a cursed race because they were not faithful to God in their first estate (the pre-existent life with God). Hence, when they are born they are born in black skinned families.

The early Mormon church was highly prejudicial against black people. And though there has been a change in attitude to blacks as of June 9, 1978 when they were finally allowed into the Mormon priesthood, it cannot be denied that Mormonism was, up until very recently, a segregated church.

Please consider the following small sample of official Mormon writings as proof of their prejudice, their inconsistency, their doctrinal waffling, their yielding to political pressure, and their failure to truly represent Christ on earth:

* "At the time the devil was cast out of heaven, there were some spirits that did not know who had authority, whether God or the devil. They consequently did not take a very active part on either side, but rather thought the devil had been abused, and considered he had rather the best claim to the government. These spirits were not considered bad enough to be cast down to hell, and never have bodies; neither were they considered worthy of an honorable body on this earth." (A speech by Elder Orson Hyde, delivered before the High Priests' Quorum, in Nauvoo, April 27th, 1845, printed in Liverpool, p. 30).
* "The very fact that God would allow those spirits who were less worthy in the spirit world to partake of a mortal body at all is further evidence of his mercy," (Mormonism and the Negro, part I, p. 48-50).
* "It is the Mormon belief that in our pre-mortal state there were a large number of individuals who, due to some act or behavior of their own in the pre-existence, forfeited the right to hold the Priesthood during their mortal lives...the Negro is thus denied the Priesthood because of his own behavior in the pre-existence," (The Church and the Negro, p. 42-43).
* "As a result of his rebellion, Cain was cursed and told that "the earth" would not thereafter yield him its abundance as previously. In addition he became the first mortal to be cursed as a son of perdition...The Lord placed on Cain a mark of a dark skin, and he became the ancestor of the black race. (Moses 5; Gen. 4; Teachings, p. 169)." (Mormon Doctrine, by Bruce McConkie, p. 109.)
* "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." (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, vol. 10, p. 110).
The reader should be reminded that Brigham Young, the second prophet of the Mormon church said that whatever he preached was as good as scripture (Journal of Discourses, vol. 13, p. 95, 264).
* "...the church went to court on several occasions to block Negroes from moving into the San Francisco neighborhood in which the headquarters was located," (The Christian Century, Sept. 29, 1965, p. 1184).
* On Oct. 28, 1865, the Mormon Church paper Millennial Star printed an article which stated that "Mormonism is that kind of religion the entire divinity of which is invalidated, and its truth utterly rejected, the moment that any one of its leading principles I acknowledged to be false..."
* The Mormon write John J. Stewart stated: "If we as members of the Church are going to pick and choose among the Prophet's teachings, and say 'this one is of God, we can accept it, but this one is of man, we will reject that,' then we are undermining the whole structure of our faith..." (Mormonism and the Negro, p. 19).
* "The prophets have declared that there are at least two major stipulations that have to be met before the Negroes will be allowed to possess the Priesthood. The first requirement relates to time. The Negroes will not be allowed to hold the Priesthood during mortality, in fact, not until after the resurrection of all of Adam's children. The other stipulation requires that Abel's seed receive the first opportunity of having the priesthood....the last of Adam's children will not be resurrected until the end of the millennium. Therefore, the Negroes will not receive the Priesthood until after that time... this will not happen until after the thousand years of Christ's reign on earth," (The Church and the Negro, 1967, p. 45-48).
* Albert B. Fritz, NAACP branch president, said at a civil rights meeting Friday night that his organization promised not to picket the 133rd Semi-Annual General Conference of the Church on Temple Square. He added, however, that the NAACP will picket Temple Square, next Saturday if the Church does not present an 'acceptable' statement on civil rights before that day," (Deseret News, Oct. 5, 1963).
* "Some 3,000 students, led by the BSU, paraded peacefully on the school's campus in Seattle Monday over the issue of alleged racism at BYU," (Deseret News, March 10, 1970).
* "The demonstration was the latest in a series of protests against The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormon) because the church bars Negroes from its priesthood," (Deseret News, Jan. 10, 1970).

* In June of 1978 the Mormon church officiated a "revelation" stating that blacks could then hold the priesthood.

The Bible says that God is not a respecter of persons, but the Mormon church is: First in its prejudice of the blacks for being black, and second in its succumbing to political and social pressure to change its doctrinal views. Is such a church really from God?

I am greatly indebted to the book Mormonism - Shadow or Reality by Jerald and Sandra Tanner for the sources cited above.

Source: http://www.carm.org/mormonism-and-the-negro

The blog I follow did a post on racism in the church recently (http://blog.mrm.org/2010/07/the-church- ... ed-racism/).

Here are some interesting quotes from The First Presidency of the Mormon church, provided by a poster on that blog (emphasis his, I think):

August 17, 1949

The attitude of the Church with reference to Negroes remains as it has always stood. IT IS NOT THE MATTER OF A DECLARATION OF 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.

The First Presidency

We see how the First Presidency of the church accepted this position as a doctrine and not a policy. Some people seem to confuse the two by saying the church changed a "policy" when it allowed blacks to hold the priesthood. This is false.

Here's another First Presidency quote:

“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.”
-First Presidency Statement given December 15th, 1969

More from this poster:

Lowry Nelson, a professor at what was called the Utah State Agricultural College in Logan, Utah, sent a letter on June 16, 1947, to the LDS First Presidency challenging the position of the LDS Church on people of African descent. On 17 July of the same year, the First Presidency replied:

Dear Brother Nelson:

As you have been advised, your letter of June 16 was received in due course . . . We have carefully considered [its] content; and are glad to advise you as follows:

We make this initial remark: the social side of the Restored Gospel is only an incident of it; it is not the end thereof.

The basic element of your ideas and concepts seems to be that all God's children stand in equal positions before Him in all things. Your knowledge of the Gospel will indicate to you that this is contrary to the very fundamentals of God's dealings with Israel dating from the time of His promise to Abraham regarding Abraham's seed and their position vis-a-vis God Himself. Indeed, some of God's children were assinged to superior positions before the world was formed.

We are aware that some Higher Critics do not accept this, but the Church does. Your position seems to lose sight of the revelations of the Lord touching the pre-existence of our spirits, the rebellion in heaven, and the doctrines that our birth into this life and the advantages under which we may be born, have a relationship in the life heretofore.

From the days of the Prophet Joseph Smith even until now, it is has been the doctrine of the Church, never questioned by any of the Church leaders, that the Negroes are not entitled to the full blessings of the Gospel.
Furthermore, your ideas, as we understand them, appear to contemplate the intermarriage of the Negro and White races, a concept which has heretofore been most repugnant to most normal-minded people from the ancient partiarchs till now. God's rule for Israel, His Chosen People, has been endogamous [meaning 'marriage within a specific tribe or similar social unit']. Modern Israel has been similarly directed.

We are not unmindful of the fact that there is a growing tendency, particularly among some educators, as it manifests itself in this are, toward the breaking down of race barriers in the matter of intermarriage between whites and blacks, but it does not have the sanction of the Church AND IS CONTRARY TO CHURCH DOCTRINE.

Faithfully yours,

[signed]
George Albert Smith
J. Reuben Clark, Jr.
David O. McKay
The First Presidency

Information on Lowry Nelson is available here: http://library.usu.edu/Specol/manuscript/collms17.html

“… No special effort has ever been made to proselyte among the Negro race, and social intercourse between the Whites and the Negroes should certainly not be encouraged because of leading to intermarriage, which the Lord has forbidden… This move which has now received some popular approval of trying to break down social barriers between the Whites and the Blacks is one that should not be encouraged because inevitably it means the mixing of the races if carried to its logical conclusion” (Letter from the First Presidency [Smith, Clark, McKay], 5 May 1947, to Virgil H. Sponberg, in Bennion papers).

And finally:

And lastly, in contrast to this:

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.

Read this:

“It seems to us that it ought to be possible to work this situation out without causing any feelings on the part of anybody. If the white sisters feel that they may not sit with them or near them, we feel sure that if the colored sisters were discretely approached, they would be happy to sit at one side in the rear or somewhere where they would not wound the sensibilities of the complaining sisters” (First Presidency letter [from Presidents Smith, Clark, and McKay] to Ezra T. Benson, 23 June 1942, in Bennion papers).

And well, last time I checked the responses to this post, the Mormons were trying to throw Jesus in a racist light along with God, the bible, etc., all the while denying that they were actually racist. Doubletalk, I know. But I definitely recommend this post to people who want to encounter the response that "the Bible is racist, too" and some reactions to it from mostly biblical inerrantists .

Nice work there openminded..

I'm not sure if many are aware of this, but there were many Mormon missionaries, prior to the 1978 ruling on Blacks, who questioned the Mormon church's lack of missionary work to countries like Africa. Apparently Africa was "out of bounds" to many of the earlier Mormon missionaries. One missionary, named Tom Hall, wrote a very important book on this subject called "Mormon Chronicles." In this book he wrote to a very high Mormon missionary authority called S. Dilworth Young. Hall repeatedly went back and forth on the issue with this authority and records some of the letters he received from him.

Here are some letters I found particularly interesting.. For not only was Africa off limits, but also neighboring countries like India..

Tom Hall wrote:July 25, 1975
Mr. T. W. Hall
Re: Missionary Work in India

Dear Brother Hall:

Thank you for your recent letter concerning the above named subject. We have had missionaries working in India in the last three years; but because of visa and other political problems, they have been withdrawn. We are working to have our missionaries labor in every part of the world; and the only reason that they are not in certain countries is because of these visa problems or, as in the case of many countries in Africa, the population is made up of mostly negroes. Thank you again for writing.

Sincerely your brethren,
THE FIRST COUNCIL OF THE SEVENTY
By S. Dilworth Young.

Why was India off limits? Dilworth explains why in another letter to Hall..

Tom Hall wrote:The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
The Council of The Seventy
47 E. South Temple Street
Salt Lake City, Utah
April 7, 1976.

Dear Brother Hall:
You want some material on the Church's stand on Negroes. While there is nothing official, a man by the name of Stewart has compiled several statements by the president of the Church. If you will write to the Deseret Book Company asking for the book Brother Stewart wrote about the Negroes, you will be sent some information. It is a small book and does not cost very much. The policy of the Church is as has been stated. We do not give the priesthood to Negroes. This is the policy of the First Presidency whom we uphold as prophets, seers, and revelators. I suppose you will have to make a choice as to whether or not you want to recognize President Kimball as a prophet, seer, and revelator. If you do, this question will not bother you anymore.

Sincerely yours,
S. Dilworth Young

The following is from a poster,Chris, on Mormanity who took verses from the Book of Moses into consideration alongside the Book of Abraham (in relation to race):

The Book of Abraham's comments about Ham should probably be read in light of the Book of Moses.

Moses 7:8: "For behold, the Lord shall curse the land with much heat, and the barrenness thereof shall go forth forever; and there was a blackness came upon all the children of Canaan, that they were despised among all people."

Moses 7:22: "And Enoch also beheld the residue of the people which were the sons of Adam; and they were a mixture of all the seed of Adam save it was the seed of Cain, for the seed of Cain were black, and had not place among them."

Thus although the Book of Abraham doesn't mention skin color, both Joseph's 19th century context and his earlier Bible revision would seem to point toward a racial interpretation.

Having said that, Joseph was not unreservedly racist. Ham's descendants were "blessed ... with the blessings of the earth, and with the blessings of wisdom, but cursed ... as pertaining to the Priesthood." The Alphabet and Grammar clarifies that this lineage was blessed with a "Kingly blessing". Thus the curse with respect to spiritual power would seem to be offset by a blessing with respect to temporal power. Pharaoh is also portrayed in the BoA as being a sincere religious seeker.

In the explanation to Facsimile 3, produced some 7 years after Abraham 1 was translated, Pharaoh's blackness seems to have been entirely forgotten. Here Pharaoh and his entourage are clearly white-skinned, except of course for the black bodied Anubis, who is identified as a slave named Shulem. This illustration undermines the racial interpretation of the BoA text, but obviously still reflects the prejudicial assumption that blacks' role in society is forced servitude.

IMO, Joseph's racial theories and attitudes were a decidedly inconsistent hodgepodge, some of it reflecting the prejudices of his day, and some of it surprisingly innovative and progressive.

For the life of me I can't see how Mormons can get out of this one... It's past was rooted and grounded in racism, fused into their documents, and later simply swept under the carpet.. You would literally have to put a bag over your head and say it's not true.

Let's grow up and move on folks..

First off, there is no evidence, other than later hearsay, to indicate that Joseph Smith believed that skin color made someone inferior. On the other hand, there is clear evidence that he considered black Africans to be just as capable as whites, given the same opportunities, and he favored freeing the slaves.
Second, at least two black men were ordained as elders during Joseph Smith’s time and the prophet himself signed the ordination certificate of one of them. That man, Elijah Abel, was later ordained a seventy and served as a missionary.

I, as a Mormon, personally believe the reason blacks were excluded from the priesthood had nothing to do with them or any kind of doctrine pertaining to lineage, but with the unworthiness of a white society that practiced slavery. I can accept that the policy was given by or influenced by revelation, and I can see why it may have been wise to keep it in place even after slavery was banned - again, not due to unworthiness among blacks, but due to the realities of life in a white society still struggling with the legacy of racism and slavery. In other words, it may be possible that the reason the Lord waited so long to reverse the restriction on blacks (or the reason the Church waited so long to ask the Lord for new guidance on the matter) was because that much time was needed before white society was really prepared to accept blacks as priesthood holders and thus leaders in their Church. This doesn't ease the pain for the black members who felt they were second-class members for all that time.

I believe that the Mormon church is God's church, but I also know that it is full of imperfect men.

element13 wrote:First off, there is no evidence, other than later hearsay, to indicate that Joseph Smith believed that skin color made someone inferior. On the other hand, there is clear evidence that he considered black Africans to be just as capable as whites, given the same opportunities, and he favored freeing the slaves.
Second, at least two black men were ordained as elders during Joseph Smith’s time and the prophet himself signed the ordination certificate of one of them. That man, Elijah Abel, was later ordained a seventy and served as a missionary.

I, as a Mormon, personally believe the reason blacks were excluded from the priesthood had nothing to do with them or any kind of doctrine pertaining to lineage, but with the unworthiness of a white society that practiced slavery. I can accept that the policy was given by or influenced by revelation, and I can see why it may have been wise to keep it in place even after slavery was banned - again, not due to unworthiness among blacks, but due to the realities of life in a white society still struggling with the legacy of racism and slavery. In other words, it may be possible that the reason the Lord waited so long to reverse the restriction on blacks (or the reason the Church waited so long to ask the Lord for new guidance on the matter) was because that much time was needed before white society was really prepared to accept blacks as priesthood holders and thus leaders in their Church. This doesn't ease the pain for the black members who felt they were second-class members for all that time.

I believe that the Mormon church is God's church, but I also know that it is full of imperfect men.

Joseph Smith Wrote in the following:

Abraham 1:20-27 -- “20 Behold, Potiphar’s Hill was in the land of Ur, of Chaldea. And the Lord broke down the altar of Elkenah, and of the gods of the land, and utterly destroyed them, and smote the priest that he died; and there was great mourning in Chaldea, and also in the court of Pharaoh; which Pharaoh signifies king by royal blood. 21 Now this king of Egypt was a descendant from the aloins of Ham, and was a partaker of the blood of the Canaanites by birth.

22 From this descent sprang all the Egyptians, and thus the blood of the Canaanites was preserved in the land. 23 The land of Egypt being first discovered by a woman, who was the daughter of Ham, and the daughter of Egyptus, which in the Chaldean signifies Egypt, which signifies that which is forbidden; 24 When this woman discovered the land it was under water, who afterward settled her sons in it; and thus, from Ham, sprang that race which preserved the curse in the land.

25 Now the first government of Egypt was established by Pharaoh, the eldest son of Egyptus, the daughter of Ham, and it was after the manner of the government of Ham, which was patriarchal. 26 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.

27 Now, Pharaoh being of that lineage by which he could not have the right of Priesthood, notwithstanding the Pharaohs would fain claim it from Noah, through Ham, therefore my father was led away by their idolatry…”

Moses 7:8,11-12,22 -- “8 For behold, the Lord shall curse the land with much heat, and the barrenness thereof shall go forth forever; and there was a blackness came upon all the children of Canaan, that they were despised among all people.

11 And he gave unto me a commandment that I should baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, which is full of grace and truth, and of the Holy Ghost, which beareth record of the Father and the Son. 12 And it came to pass that Enoch continued to call upon all the people, save it were the people of Canaan, to repent;

22 And Enoch also beheld the residue of the people which were the sons of Adam; and they were a mixture of all the seed of Adam save it was the seed of Cain, for the seed of Cain were black, and had not place among them.”

In the light of these, please explain Abr 1:27 and Moses 7:8 and 12 written by Joseph Smith regarding that Blacks are forbidden from the Mormon Priesthood?
-
-
-

"White" and "black" need not refer to skin color, as is clear from the following passages from the biblical book of Daniel: "And some of them of understanding shall fall, to try them, and to purge, and to make them white, even to the time of the end: because it is yet for a time appointed (Daniel 11:35). "Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand (Daniel 12:10). In both of these passages, the meaning of the word "white" is most obviously pure; to "make white" is to purify. When Joseph Smith first translated the Book of Mormon, he gave the literal rendering of "white" for the passage in 2 Nephi 30:6. For the 1840 edition, it was changed to "pure," which better reflected the meaning of the word used by Nephi. Subsequent editions, however, relied on the 1837 Book of Mormon, which still read "white." The same holds true for the Book of Moses and of Abraham.

I should note that if we condemn the Mormon teachings for alleged racism due to possibly figurative passages suggesting that white is better than dark, then we must also condemn the Bible for similar failings. Daniel 12:10, quoted above, speaks of the righteous being "made white," and Lamentations 4:6-8 equates whiteness with goodness (prior to a moral fall) and a black appearance with sin:

6. For the punishment of the iniquity of the daughter of my people is greater than the punishment of the sin of Sodom, that was overthrown as in a moment, and no hands stayed on her.
7. Her Nazarites were purer than snow, they were whiter than milk, they were more ruddy in body than rubies, their polishing was of sapphire:
8. Their visage is blacker than a coal; they are not known in the streets: their skin cleaveth to their bones; it is withered, it is become like a stick.

Further, the Abraham passage doesn't claim that Pharaoh and his descendants couldn't have the priesthood, but that he could not have the right of Priesthood. He did not lose the right to be ordained to the priesthood; rather, he lost the right to preside as the presiding high priest in a patriarchal order. That right went to Shem, not Ham. Naturally, Ham's descendants could not have that right, but they still could have the priesthood - nothing indicates they could not.

element13, there is no parallel between Smith's comments about white and black and what is said in the passages you cite. David and Solomon were semites and not caucasion. The context in the Biblical passages have nothing to do with race. I certainly agree that there are Biblical metaphores equating white with purity and black with evil. I even believe that those have been abused in historical context to apply to race. Those however are not the at the root core of the message in the Bible. I don't believe you can say that of Smith.

element13, I am not trying to come across the wrong way but the following passages that Joseph Smith Wrote do cause concern regarding this topic:

1 Nephi 11:13 (Mary) "she was exceedingly fair and white."

1 Nephi 12:23 (prophecy of the Lamanites) " became a dark, and loathsome, and a filthy people, full of idleness and all manner of abominations."

1 Nephi 13:15 (Gentiles) "they were white, and exceedingly fair and beautiful, like unto my people [Nephites] before they were slain."

2 Nephi 5:21 "a sore cursing . . . as they were white, and exceedingly fair and delightsome, that they might not be enticing unto my people the Lord God did cause a skin of blackness to come upon them."

2 Nephi 30:6 (prophecy to the Lamanites if they repented) "scales of darkness shall begin to fall. . . . they shall be a white and delightsome people" ("white and delightsome" was changed to "pure and delightsome" in 1981).

Jacob 3:5 (Lamanites cursed) "whom ye hate because of their filthiness and the cursing which hath come upon their skins. . . ."

Jacob 3:8-9 "their skins will be whiter than yours... revile no more against them because of the darkness of their skins. . . ."

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."

Alma 3:9 "whosoever did mingle his seed with that of the Lamanites did bring the same curse upon his seed."

Alma 3:14 (Lamanites cursed) "set a mark on them that they and their seed may be separated from thee and thy seed. . . ."

Alma 23:18 "[Lamanites] did open a correspondence with them [Nephites] and the curse of God did no more follow them."

3 Nephi 2:14-16 "Lamanites who had united with the Nephites were numbered among the Nephites; And their curse was taken from them, and their skin became white like unto the Nephites and . . . became exceedingly fair. . . . "

3 Nephi 19:25, 30 (Disciples) "they were as white as the countenance and also the garments of Jesus; and behold the whiteness thereof did exceed all the whiteness. . . . nothing upon earth so white as the whiteness thereof… and behold they were white, even as Jesus."

Mormon 5:15 (prophecy about the Lamanites) "for this people shall be scattered, and shall become a dark, a filthy, and a loathsome people, beyond the description of that which ever hath been amongst us. . . ."

Are you saying that there is a difference between what the current Mormon Priesthood now teaches than what Priesthood did in their past regarding racism against people of color as well as what the Joseph Smith inspired writings indicate?
-
-
-

element13 wrote:First off, there is no evidence, other than later hearsay, to indicate that Joseph Smith believed that skin color made someone inferior.

Your statement is incorrect.. Joseph Smith fused the "curse of Cain" into the BoM. Please read as it relates to one's skin color..

2 Nephi 5:21: And he had caused the cursing 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 delightsome, that they might not be enticing unto my people the Lord God did cause a skin of blackness to come upon them.

1 Nephi 12:23: And it came to pass that I beheld, after they had dwindled in unbelief they became a dark, and loathsome, and a filthy people, full of idleness and all manner of abominations.

Moses 7:5-8: And the Lord said unto me: Prophesy; and I prophesied, saying: Behold the people of Canaan, which are numerous, shall go forth in battle array against the people of Shum, and shall slay them that they shall utterly be destroyed; and the people of Canaan shall divide themselves in the land, and the land shall be barren and unfruitful, and none other people shall dwell there but the people of Canaan;
For behold, the Lord shall curse the land with much heat, and the barrenness thereof shall go forth forever; and there was a blackness came upon all the children of Canaan, that they were despised among all people.

Moses 7:22: And Enoch also beheld the residue of the people which were the sons of Adam; and they were a mixture of all the seed of Adam save it was the seed of Cain, for the seed of Cain were black, and had not place among them.

element13 wrote:On the other hand, there is clear evidence that he considered black Africans to be just as capable as whites, given the same opportunities, and he favored freeing the slaves.
Second, at least two black men were ordained as elders during Joseph Smith’s time and the prophet himself signed the ordination certificate of one of them. That man, Elijah Abel, was later ordained a seventy and served as a missionary.

Not so fast..

"Chapter VIII provides us with "Comments By and About Mormon Negroes," which essentially amount to testimonials about how the Church is just great as long as you know your place. Anyone who doubts this reviewer's saying so is welcome to read through their own copy of The Church and the Negro and see if this is not the case.

However, this chapter also contains a nice surprise for revisionist Mormons who point to Elijah Abel as an example of how blacks not being ordained to the priesthood was supposedly a "practice" but not a "doctrine." Brother Lund informs us

That Elijah Abel was a good man is not in question. The fact that he held the Priesthood is also a matter of record. But, as mentioned, the record needs to be clarified in a very major point. Once it was discovered that Elijah Abel was of Negroid ancestry, he was dropped from his Priesthood Quorum (1879).

Brother Lund's source for this information? The records in the Church Historian's office. Brother Lund also explains that the idea that the Church knowingly ordained a black man to the priesthood is mistaken, because Elijah Abel "was 'one-eighth Negro and light of color.' Nevertheless, he did have Negro blood and was therefore not eligible for the Priesthood."

Source: http://www.mormoncurtain.com/topic_blac ... thood.html

element13 wrote:I, as a Mormon, personally believe the reason blacks were excluded from the priesthood had nothing to do with them or any kind of doctrine pertaining to lineage, but with the unworthiness of a white society that practiced slavery. I can accept that the policy was given by or influenced by revelation, and I can see why it may have been wise to keep it in place even after slavery was banned - again, not due to unworthiness among blacks, but due to the realities of life in a white society still struggling with the legacy of racism and slavery. In other words, it may be possible that the reason the Lord waited so long to reverse the restriction on blacks (or the reason the Church waited so long to ask the Lord for new guidance on the matter) was because that much time was needed before white society was really prepared to accept blacks as priesthood holders and thus leaders in their Church. This doesn't ease the pain for the black members who felt they were second-class members for all that time.

The evidence is very clear in the Book of Mormon... Blacks were considered "cursed" of god.. Unfortunately, you can't escape this simple truth..

element13 wrote:I believe that the Mormon church is God's church, but I also know that it is full of imperfect men.

The Mormon Church is WITHOUT question, NOT God's church.. It is a complete abomination..

Doctrine and Convents 107:8-30 States this

8 The Melchizedek Priesthood holds the right of presidency, and has power and authority over all the offices in the church in all ages of the world, to administer in spiritual things.

30 The decisions of these quorums, or either of them, are to be made in all righteousness, in holiness, and lowliness of heart, meekness and long suffering, and in faith, and virtue, and knowledge, temperance, patience, godliness, brotherly kindness and charity…

32 And in case that any decision of these quorums is made in unrighteousness, it may be brought before a general assembly of the several quorums, which constitute the spiritual authorities of the church; otherwise there can be no appeal from their decision.


Doctrine and Convents’ 107:8-30 stated that those conferred to this Order and by the governing quorums be made with all all righteousness, in holiness, and lowliness of heart, meekness and long suffering, and in faith, and virtue, and knowledge, temperance, patience, godliness, brotherly kindness and charity…

How can the Mormons who held theses offices be able to make wrong decisions about African Americans – if so – then would that not disqualify them from the Priesthood and quorums?

LDS scholar Bruce R. McConkie writes: When the plan of salvation presented . . . and when the need for a Redeemer was explained, Satan offered to come into the world as the Son of God and be the Redeemer. "Behold here am I, send me," he said. . . . But then, as always, he was in opposition to the full plan of the Father, and so he sought to amend and change the terms of salvation; he sought to deny men their agency and to dethrone God (Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, 193).

According to a Mormon of such high standing: When a god rejected Lucifer's plan, a war in heaven ensued between the good spirit children verses the spirit children that sided with Lucifer. Then another group of spirits who were less valiant in this was, the god of this planet earth became displeased with them and He turned their skin black – cursing them.

Tenth President Joseph Fielding Smith writes: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, [refers to pre-existence state] and were obedient; more or less, to the laws that were given us there. Those who were faithful in all things there [refers to pre-existence state] received greater blessings here, and those who were not faithful received less. . . . There were no neutrals in the war in Heaven. All took sides either with Christ or with Satan. Every man had his agency there, and men receive rewards here based upon their actions there, just as they will receive rewards hereafter for deeds done in the body. The Negro, evidently, is receiving the reward he merits (Joseph Fielding Smith, Doctrines of Salvation, 1:61, 65-66).

If these guys had it wrong – what does that reveal to you about the Priesthood and governing bodies of Mormonism today? If they are fallible, then what of Mormon doctrine, books, and Joseph Smith?

What happened – to be ye perfect as your Father who is in heaven is perfect? D&C 107:32 kind of throws that out the window, does it not?

Why should the average Mormon strive to be ye perfect but they governing body can change the rules as they see fit to excuse themselves for not being so?
-
-
-

I think it is very dangerous when someone can threaten a Church with a lawsuit and get them to change their doctrine. Regardless of what that doctrine is. Very dangerous indeed. What's next? Suits by homosexuals?

The reason the book of mormon says that is because the book of mormon was a purley man-made book with human motives sewn throughout it.
It now seems very ovious that joseph smith was a racist along with being a pervert.