Compromising your religion to "keep up with the times"

[Katzpur]

Of course you can find ECW to support your position. But I would contend that it's only the ones both you and I agree with. I'm totally cool and not emotional in the least about this. This is a debate isn't it? I'm not trying to hurt your feelings Katzpur.

Don't worry, Victor. You're not. If you want to have a go at this, it's fine with me.

 

[Katzpur]

you all funny trying to turn what people trying to say around and not answering what was asked. if your prophets were from god, god would have told them long before 1978 that the way you treated black people was wrong. i know this. my people know this. try and turn this around all you want. but god knows the truth.

Roland, I'm seriously trying to be upfront with you about this. I have not denied that some of our leaders had some very racist beliefs. All I'm trying to do is explain that no prophet who has ever lived (I'm including the Old Testament prophets) was perfect. Many of them had some significant shortcomings. Moses, as I said, killed a man. If you can say that you don't believe He was a prophet (because of what he did), then you can legitimately use the same argument against LDS prophets, none of whom are or were perfect.

I am old enough to remember the 1978 announcement that blacks were to be given the Priesthood. I was at work and it was shortly before lunch. Someone had the radio on and heard it on the news. Word spread quickly through the office where I worked. I can remember an absolutely euphoric feeling when I heard it. A few minutes later, I left the building. I still remember crossing the street to the mall across from my office. I felt so stupid, because I had this enormous grin on my face. I just couldn't wipe it off! I kept thinking, "Man, people are going to think I'm a nutcase, walking around smiling my head off." And then I looked around. People everywhere were smiling! It was a happy day for a lot of people, for a lot of white people.

The policy prohibiting blacks from holding the Priesthood was never a part of official church doctrine. It's not comfortable for me to say that, but that's how I see it. Nowhere in our "Doctrine and Covenants" (which is where the doctrine would most likely be found) are we told that blacks are not to hold the Priesthood. It was a practice that was put into place back in Brigham Young's day and which remained in force for many years. Do you know what it took for the practice to be rescinded? Men had to humble themselves enough to ask God for guidance. When they finally were able to do so, He responded to their prayers. I believe that this could have -- and should have -- taken place long before it did. You may feel that I'm just trying to appease you, and if that's how you feel, there is really nothing I can do about it. But in attempting to explain my feelings, I may very well be alienting myself from members of my own Church who may vehemently disagree with me. I am willing to do so because this is something I feel very strongly about.

You are absolutely right when you said that God knows the truth. There isn't a man or woman alive (or dead, for that matter) who will not have to stand before Him someday and be held accountable for every decision he or she ever made.

Kathryn

 

[SoyLeche]

Roland, I'm seriously trying to be upfront with you about this. I have not denied that some of our leaders had some very racist beliefs. All I'm trying to do is explain that no prophet who has ever lived (I'm including the Old Testament prophets) was perfect. Many of them had some significant shortcomings. Moses, as I said, killed a man. If you can say that you don't believe He was a prophet (because of what he did), then you can legitimately use the same argument against LDS prophets, none of whom are or were perfect.

I am old enough to remember the 1978 announcement that blacks were to be given the Priesthood. I was at work and it was shortly before lunch. Someone had the radio on and heard it on the news. Word spread quickly through the office where I worked. I can remember an absolutely euphoric feeling when I heard it. A few minutes later, I left the building. I still remember crossing the street to the mall across from my office. I felt so stupid, because I had this enormous grin on my face. I just couldn't wipe it off! I kept thinking, "Man, people are going to think I'm a nutcase, walking around smiling my head off." And then I looked around. People everywhere were smiling! It was a happy day for a lot of people, for a lot of white people.

The policy prohibiting blacks from holding the Priesthood was never a part of official church doctrine. It's not comfortable for me to say that, but that's how I see it. Nowhere in our "Doctrine and Covenants" (which is where the doctrine would most likely be found) are we told that blacks are not to hold the Priesthood. It was a practice that was put into place back in Brigham Young's day and which remained in force for many years. Do you know what it took for the practice to be rescinded? Men had to humble themselves enough to ask God for guidance. When they finally were able to do so, He responded to their prayers. I believe that this could have -- and should have -- taken place long before it did. You may feel that I'm just trying to appease you, and if that's how you feel, there is really nothing I can do about it. But in attempting to explain my feelings, I may very well be alienting myself from members of my own Church who may vehemently disagree with me. I am willing to do so because this is something I feel very strongly about.

Kathryn

According to Truman G. Madsen many of the prior Prophets had prayed about it and been turned down. I don't have any documentation of that though.

 

[Katzpur]

According to Truman G. Madsen many of the prior Prophets had prayed about it and been turned down. I don't have any documentation of that though.

That's possible. Then again, the entire Quorum of the Twelve would have to be in agreement on it in order for it to go any further. If even one of them had failed to support the prophet, no action would have been taken.

 

[SoyLeche]

Simply amazing. SoyLeche, do a search in a bible of your choice and type in the word "god/s" and tell me which one is NOT talking about planet earth. Most all are talking about matters that deal directly with the Israelites. Use this if you want:

http://www.biblegateway.com/

Actually, our whole argument is based on the fact that when God is mentioned in the Bible it is only talking about the planet Earth. That's why God can say that there are no other Gods. He is talking about for this Earth.

The other Gods that men have worshipped do not exist. Ra, Zeus, Thor - none of them exist. Every time that God says that he is the only God, that is what he is trying to convince the people of. "Stop worshiping false Gods and return to the true one." Joseph Smith believed that the verse that says "There are gods many and lords many" was describing things outside of this universe. Could be. The verse that says that God is "God of gods" I believe was referring to us. We have the potential to be gods.

 

[SoyLeche]

That's possible. Then again, the entire Quorum of the Twelve would have to be in agreement on it in order for it to go any further. If even one of them had failed to support the prophet, no action would have been taken.

If God had wanted it earlier, the Quorum of the Twelve would most likely have gone along.

 

[Quiddity]

I believe there are other god/s. They have no control what happens over God's cosmos (the one we recognize).

The god/s mentioned in the Bible and are dealing with the Israelites are false god/s we do not believe exist. For example: Egyptian idols.

These two separate groups of god/s have nothing to do with each other.

Actually that is how I understood it. Some are myth, some are demons, and others are attaching yourself to a certain good. And all I'm asking is for one example of a god that is outside of the earth and has powers to create and over the cosmos. Keep in mind that there is only ONE cosmos, not several. By cosmos, I'm talking about all that exist.
Just example in the Bible will do.

 

[Quiddity]

Actually, our whole argument is based on the fact that when God is mentioned in the Bible it is only talking about the planet Earth. That's why God can say that there are no other Gods. He is talking about for this Earth.

So when God says "there are no other gods" he really means "there are no other gods on earth" Do I have that right?

The other Gods that men have worshipped do not exist. Ra, Zeus, Thor - none of them exist. Every time that God says that he is the only God, that is what he is trying to convince the people of. "Stop worshiping false Gods and return to the true one." Joseph Smith believed that the verse that says "There are gods many and lords many" was describing things outside of this universe. Could be. The verse that says that God is "God of gods" I believe was referring to us. We have the potential to be gods.

But how do you know it's not talking about:
a) The mythical gods
b) Demons

 

[Katzpur]

If God had wanted it earlier, the Quorum of the Twelve would most likely have gone along.

Well, we're always saying that we have free agency, and we're always saying that none of our leaders are infallible. Then, when we find ourselves up against this particular issue, we aren't comfortable with the possibility that a single dissenter could have made all the difference. Consider, for instance, how many of the early members of the Quorum of the Twelve (in Joseph Smith's day) left the Church due to personal issues with Joseph. Men make mistakes -- now just as in 1830.

Although I hate to have to admit it, Brigham Young was not the most recent President of the Church to have made some rather "unflattering" remarks about blacks. But these men, as all men, are the product of their times and their cultures. Racism was widespread throughout the United States for many years. I don't think our leaders were any more or less racist than the leaders of a lot of other churches (unlike many churches, we have never, for instance, had segregated congregations). I'd like to think that, in their positions, they would have been less inclined to prejudice than the general US population, and most of them probably were.

I know find a whole lot more members of the Church on your side than I will on mine. I went to a FAIR Conference last year in which a couple of black speakers addressed the issue. One of them was Darius Gray, who is the current President of the Genesis Group -- I don't know if you are familiar with it or not. He has a close personal relationship with the First Presidency and said that the First Presidency had given him permission to say what he had to say in his paper. (PM me if you're interested in knowing more.) I don't want to go into the particulars of that paper here and now, since I see far more harm coming from it than good. Since I really don't want to turn this discussion into one where members of the Church find themselves at odds with one another, I will readily admit to the fact that I'm in the minority here and not try further to persuade anyone. I'm sure you will find that most members of the Church see it your way.

Kathryn

 

[Katzpur]

So when God says "there are no other gods" he really means "there are no other gods on earth" Do I have that right?

There are no other gods that have any influence upon us, no other gods who can hear and answer our prayers, no other gods who will stand in judgment of us someday. In short, no other gods over this earth.

But God is said to be "God of gods" and "a mighty God." The indefinite pronoun "a" is itself an indication that more than one "god" exists. Otherwise, the word "the" would more likely have been used. Obviously God is not "God of false gods," so you can't just say that every reference to "gods" in the scriptures is referring to false gods. The "gods" mentioned in the scriptures are, in my opinion, beings who have certain divine qualities. God (our God) is the mightiest of all of them. They are all subject to Him, just as we are. I think the biggest issue here is what the scriptures really mean by the word "gods."

 

[Quiddity]

There are no other gods that have any influence upon us, no other gods who can hear and answer our prayers, no other gods who will stand in judgment of us someday. In short, no other gods over this earth.

But God is said to be "God of gods" and "a mighty God." The indefinite pronoun "a" is itself an indication that more than one "god" exists. Otherwise, the word "the" would more likely have been used. Obviously God is not "God of false gods," so you can't just say that every reference to "gods" in the scriptures is referring to false gods. The "gods" mentioned in the scriptures are, in my opinion, beings who have certain divine qualities. God (our God) is the mightiest of all of them. They are all subject to Him, just as we are. I think the biggest issue here is what the scriptures really mean by the word "gods."

Post #347 I noted how I understand "gods".

 

[Aqualung]

Whether they have power over the earth is depedant upon whether people respond to them or not. My only point was that people on earth worshipped other gods, which completely contradicts your previous post.

It contradicts nothing.

Are you denying that people in the Bible worshipped other gods?

Absolutely not.

 

[Quiddity]

It contradicts nothing.

Absolutely not.

I'm in the process of clearing this up with other LDS members. Read previous post.

 

[Aqualung]

Ah, sorry there Victor.