Blacks and racism, church transparency

[LDS Watchman]

Church leaders love being vague. Oh how I wish they would preach like Nephi in plainness.

For everything there is a season, including a time to be plain and a time to be vague.

Jesus intentionally taught in parables, so some would understand and those who weren't ready wouldn't. Those who didn't understand would avoid bringing condemnation upon themselves for not acting upon the higher knowledge they weren't prepared to receive yet.

[Redpilled Mormon]

Just to throw another wrench into the works, there's also a narrative that 'blackness of skin' is an ancient hebrew idiom that has nothing to do with melanin content, and so doesn't translate well into english.

Trying to figure out where I first saw this... I know there was a vid of a lds leader (a 70?) expounding upon this viewpoint, he cited some experts in ancient hebraic.

It would be hilarious if there was so much consternation about this and ultimately it turns out it never had anything to do with actual skin color at all.

The Book of Mormon clearly refers to actual skin color being turned black and Joseph clearly equated blacks with the descendants of Cain/Canaan who he said were black on Moses 7, cursed not to have the priesthood in Abraham 1, and cursed to be the servant of servants in Genesis 9.

And that's good enough for me. I really couldn't care less about some alleged Hebrew idiom that attempts to make Joseph Smith look like a clueless racist bigot.

Yeah I don't care much what Joseph might have said on the subject (even if it isn't just another misattribution) as that holds no weight one way or the other, but I do think there's a solid argument that what's discussed in the Book of Mormon actually entails a darkening of skin, although again those weren't any sort of descendants of Cain, so this could not have been the same curse that theoretically affected Cain and his descendants.

Particularly the bit during the wars where they found some men within the Nephite army who were descendants of Lamanites, for the purpose of infiltrating a city of the Lamanites, so that the spies might pass as being Lamanites. Seems clear there must have been some physically visible signs of being genetically Lamanite.

[Redpilled Mormon]

Church leaders love being vague. Oh how I wish they would preach like Nephi in plainness.

For everything there is a season, including a time to be plain and a time to be vague.

Jesus intentionally taught in parables, so some would understand and those who weren't ready wouldn't. Those who didn't understand would avoid bringing condemnation upon themselves for not acting upon the higher knowledge they weren't prepared to receive yet.

I guess we're in the season now where God approves of Gadianton secret combinations running his church...

[Reluctant Watchman]

Notice the context for this quote. And this man will be the next president of the LDS org.

[LDS Watchman]

Yeah I don't care much what Joseph might have said on the subject (even if it isn't just another misattribution) as that holds no weight one way or the other,

Why doesn't what Joseph said on the subject hold any weight one way or another?

[LDS Watchman]

Church leaders love being vague. Oh how I wish they would preach like Nephi in plainness.

For everything there is a season, including a time to be plain and a time to be vague.

Jesus intentionally taught in parables, so some would understand and those who weren't ready wouldn't. Those who didn't understand would avoid bringing condemnation upon themselves for not acting upon the higher knowledge they weren't prepared to receive yet.

I guess we're in the season now where God approves of Gadianton secret combinations running his church...

Actually we're in a season where many people such as yourself think it's okay to make accusations against the Lord's church without any proof.

[Reluctant Watchman]

Actually we're in a season where many people such as yourself think it's okay to make accusations against the Lord's church without any proof.

What better "proof" than to receive a witness from the Holy Ghost? Regardless of the evidence you are seeking, the church leaders are aligning with the Gads. I'm sorry if you can't see that.

[simpleton]

Actually we're in a season where many people such as yourself think it's okay to make accusations against the Lord's church without any proof.

What better "proof" than to receive a witness from the Holy Ghost? Regardless of the evidence you are seeking, the church leaders are aligning with the Gads. I'm sorry if you can't see that.

Aligned....

[Reluctant Watchman]

Actually we're in a season where many people such as yourself think it's okay to make accusations against the Lord's church without any proof.

What better "proof" than to receive a witness from the Holy Ghost? Regardless of the evidence you are seeking, the church leaders are aligning with the Gads. I'm sorry if you can't see that.

Aligned....

I used "aligning" because I don't think they are done. They need the flock to get behind them as well.

[LDS Watchman]

Actually we're in a season where many people such as yourself think it's okay to make accusations against the Lord's church without any proof.

What better "proof" than to receive a witness from the Holy Ghost? Regardless of the evidence you are seeking, the church leaders are aligning with the Gads. I'm sorry if you can't see that.

A supposed witness from the Holy Ghost isn't good enough.

"Nothing is a greater injury to the children of men than to be under the influence of a false spirit when they think they have the Spirit of God" -Joseph Smith

[Reluctant Watchman]

Actually we're in a season where many people such as yourself think it's okay to make accusations against the Lord's church without any proof.

What better "proof" than to receive a witness from the Holy Ghost? Regardless of the evidence you are seeking, the church leaders are aligning with the Gads. I'm sorry if you can't see that.

A supposed witness from the Holy Ghost isn't good enough.

"Nothing is a greater injury to the children of men than to be under the influence of a false spirit when they think they have the Spirit of God" -Joseph Smith

I understand that people can be deceived, but making a statement such as "the Holy Ghost isn't good enough" is a mockery of God. Let God speak to me the way He does through the Spirit. Any attempt to diminish the witness of another is weak sauce at best.

And I get it, we can both receive "supposed" witnesses that are contrary.

[Jashon]

That quote by GES, which isn't in the church news article, but is in the post linked above, is this:

One of our recent church manuals includes a paragraph with some outdated commentary about race. It was mistakenly included in the printed version of the manual, which had been prepared for print nearly two years ago. When it was brought to the attention of Church leaders late last year, they directed that it be immediately removed in our online manuals, which is used by the majority of our members. We have also directed that any future printed manuals will reflect this change. We’re asking our members to disregard that paragraph in the printed manual. I’m deeply saddened by any hurt this error may have caused for some of our members and for others. Our position as a Church is clear—we condemn all racism, past and present, in any form and disavow any theory advanced that black or dark skin is a sign of a curse.

The glaring problem is that the commentary is by a former prophet, and it's just a summary of what the Book of Mormon says. Yet GES says the commentary is obsolete. So he thinks all the Book of Mormon language on skin color is obsolete. The post linked to concludes the same thing, because it's the only legitimate conclusion that can be reached.

This comment doesn't change what I said. Just because the commentary was outdated, that doesn't mean it's wrong. It just means that it's no longer the official position of the church and people are now left to draw their own conclusions.

This is very interesting. Joseph Fielding Smith's commentary is a simple, accurate summary of Book of Mormon language. Taken together – the pandering words of GES and the unnecessary action the church took to delete JFS's correct textual analysis – this all means that Q15 have repudiated all the relevant Book of Mormon language on skin color being a sign of a divine curse. As I said before, we must now disbelieve what we read in the Book of Mormon. We're told to ignore JFS's commentary and therefore ignore what it says in the Book of Mormon and abide by Q15's disavowal/repudiation.

[LDS Watchman]

That quote by GES, which isn't in the church news article, but is in the post linked above, is this:

One of our recent church manuals includes a paragraph with some outdated commentary about race. It was mistakenly included in the printed version of the manual, which had been prepared for print nearly two years ago. When it was brought to the attention of Church leaders late last year, they directed that it be immediately removed in our online manuals, which is used by the majority of our members. We have also directed that any future printed manuals will reflect this change. We’re asking our members to disregard that paragraph in the printed manual. I’m deeply saddened by any hurt this error may have caused for some of our members and for others. Our position as a Church is clear—we condemn all racism, past and present, in any form and disavow any theory advanced that black or dark skin is a sign of a curse.

The glaring problem is that the commentary is by a former prophet, and it's just a summary of what the Book of Mormon says. Yet GES says the commentary is obsolete. So he thinks all the Book of Mormon language on skin color is obsolete. The post linked to concludes the same thing, because it's the only legitimate conclusion that can be reached.

This comment doesn't change what I said. Just because the commentary was outdated, that doesn't mean it's wrong. It just means that it's no longer the official position of the church and people are now left to draw their own conclusions.

This is very interesting. Joseph Fielding Smith's commentary is a simple, accurate summary of Book of Mormon language. Taken together – the pandering words of GES and the unnecessary action the church took to delete JFS's correct textual analysis – this all means that Q15 have repudiated all the relevant Book of Mormon language on skin color being a sign of a divine curse. As I said before, we must now disbelieve what we read in the Book of Mormon. We're told to ignore JFS's commentary and therefore ignore what it says in the Book of Mormon and abide by Q15's disavowal/repudiation.

Once again, you are free to interpret what they said and did this way, but you know full well that this isn't actually what they said and did.

[LDS Watchman]

Actually we're in a season where many people such as yourself think it's okay to make accusations against the Lord's church without any proof.

What better "proof" than to receive a witness from the Holy Ghost? Regardless of the evidence you are seeking, the church leaders are aligning with the Gads. I'm sorry if you can't see that.

A supposed witness from the Holy Ghost isn't good enough.

"Nothing is a greater injury to the children of men than to be under the influence of a false spirit when they think they have the Spirit of God" -Joseph Smith

I understand that people can be deceived, but making a statement such as "the Holy Ghost isn't good enough" is a mockery of God. Let God speak to me the way He does through the Spirit. Any attempt to diminish the witness of another is weak sauce at best.

And I get it, we can both receive "supposed" witnesses that are contrary.

What I said is most certainly not a mockery before God. The whole point is that false spirits abound and people are often deceived.

So we need more proof than someone claiming a witness of the Holy Ghost.

[Reluctant Watchman]

What I said is most certainly not a mockery before God. The whole point is that false spirits abound and people are often deceived.

So we need more proof than someone claiming a witness of the Holy Ghost.

YOU require that. I do not. BTW, there is plenty out there. We see and perceive what we want to see and perceive

[LDS Watchman]

What I said is most certainly not a mockery before God. The whole point is that false spirits abound and people are often deceived.

So we need more proof than someone claiming a witness of the Holy Ghost.

YOU require that. I do not. BTW, there is plenty out there. We see and perceive what we want to see and perceive

So you'll accept the testimony of a "TBM" that the Holy Ghost bore witness to them that RMN is a true prophet of God at face value or do you require additional proof?

[Redpilled Mormon]

Yeah I don't care much what Joseph might have said on the subject (even if it isn't just another misattribution) as that holds no weight one way or the other,

Why doesn't what Joseph said on the subject hold any weight one way or another?

Did you miss my prior post where I explained my irrefutable position on why? (I assume it was irrefutable because you never even attempted to refute it). Scroll up and find it for a longer explanation.

Short version: because I'm not a man-worshipper. And I'd like to suggest you stop being one too.

[Redpilled Mormon]

Church leaders love being vague. Oh how I wish they would preach like Nephi in plainness.

For everything there is a season, including a time to be plain and a time to be vague.

Jesus intentionally taught in parables, so some would understand and those who weren't ready wouldn't. Those who didn't understand would avoid bringing condemnation upon themselves for not acting upon the higher knowledge they weren't prepared to receive yet.

I guess we're in the season now where God approves of Gadianton secret combinations running his church...

Actually we're in a season where many people such as yourself think it's okay to make accusations against the Lord's church without any proof.

"without any proof"? lol the cognitive dissonance here...

[LDS Watchman]

Yeah I don't care much what Joseph might have said on the subject (even if it isn't just another misattribution) as that holds no weight one way or the other,

Why doesn't what Joseph said on the subject hold any weight one way or another?

Did you miss my prior post where I explained my irrefutable position on why? (I assume it was irrefutable because you never even attempted to refute it). Scroll up and find it for a longer explanation.

Short version: because I'm not a man-worshipper. And I'd like to suggest you stop being one too.

Oh yeah, you believe the church falsely attributed all of those primary sources to Joseph Smith (even though they are all easily verified as being from him) and that Joseph Smith was probably a fallen prophet (yet Brigham is the guy you throw under the bus for everything not Joseph) .

That's anything but an "irrefutable position."

[LDS Watchman]

For everything there is a season, including a time to be plain and a time to be vague.

Jesus intentionally taught in parables, so some would understand and those who weren't ready wouldn't. Those who didn't understand would avoid bringing condemnation upon themselves for not acting upon the higher knowledge they weren't prepared to receive yet.

I guess we're in the season now where God approves of Gadianton secret combinations running his church...

Actually we're in a season where many people such as yourself think it's okay to make accusations against the Lord's church without any proof.

"without any proof"? lol the cognitive dissonance here...

Show us the proof in a separate thread then.

[Reluctant Watchman]

So you'll accept the testimony of a "TBM" that the Holy Ghost bore witness to them that RMN is a true prophet of God at face value or do you require additional proof?

Did you read what I said earlier? Obviously not.

[LDS Watchman]

So you'll accept the testimony of a "TBM" that the Holy Ghost bore witness to them that RMN is a true prophet of God at face value or do you require additional proof?

Did you read what I said earlier? Obviously not.

Okay cool. So you agree that someone claiming a witness of the Holy Ghost isn't enough proof then?

[Reluctant Watchman]

So you'll accept the testimony of a "TBM" that the Holy Ghost bore witness to them that RMN is a true prophet of God at face value or do you require additional proof?

Did you read what I said earlier? Obviously not.

Okay cool. So you agree that someone claiming a witness of the Holy Ghost isn't enough proof then?

You are good at mincing words.

[Jashon]

That quote by GES, which isn't in the church news article, but is in the post linked above, is this:

The glaring problem is that the commentary is by a former prophet, and it's just a summary of what the Book of Mormon says. Yet GES says the commentary is obsolete. So he thinks all the Book of Mormon language on skin color is obsolete. The post linked to concludes the same thing, because it's the only legitimate conclusion that can be reached.

This comment doesn't change what I said. Just because the commentary was outdated, that doesn't mean it's wrong. It just means that it's no longer the official position of the church and people are now left to draw their own conclusions.

This is very interesting. Joseph Fielding Smith's commentary is a simple, accurate summary of Book of Mormon language. Taken together – the pandering words of GES and the unnecessary action the church took to delete JFS's correct textual analysis – this all means that Q15 have repudiated all the relevant Book of Mormon language on skin color being a sign of a divine curse. As I said before, we must now disbelieve what we read in the Book of Mormon. We're told to ignore JFS's commentary and therefore ignore what it says in the Book of Mormon and abide by Q15's disavowal/repudiation.

Once again, you are free to interpret what they said and did this way, but you know full well that this isn't actually what they said and did.

Even if we analyze this as generously as we can, it still looks bad for Q15. It means they are following what is fashionable, not what is true.

The generous analysis is this: Q15 know what JFS wrote is accurate, since it faithfully reflects the language of the Book of Mormon. But so many members have a problem with the language – for cultural reasons or because they can't figure out that the language, in context, isn't racist – that Q15 have decided to memory-hole the commentary. Of course this is a weak, faithless approach by Q15, an Orwellian approach – and it goes directly against the moral imperative of their calling. This all leads to more problems down the road, as they meekly choose to memory-hole more and more scripture/doctrine as the demands increase.

[Bronco73idi]

All this debate because we are to weak to read Jeremiah literally.

27 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will sow the house of Israel and the house of Judah with the seed of man, and with the seed of beast.
29 In those days they shall say no more, The fathers have eaten a sour grape, and the children’s teeth are set on edge.

27 says I’m going to mix all the races children (seed) together.
29 says the curse of Cain is lifted from these generations.

It’s so plain and simple if we take our emotional opinion of a certain word definition out of the equation. I say emotional opinion because most of our definitions come from our opinion of a “word meaning” when that word was written long time ago.