Hoping for some thoughts from mormons

[curiouslyminty]

I joined the religious forums tonight after a few google searches looking for the typical LDS members reasoning behind their faith. And decided it would probably be best to just ask! haha

I have been wanting to hear some thoughts after my own personal conversion to Christianity four years ago. Let me just explain my background of knowledge. I've went to four different mormon churches- one in liberty, MO, two in new orleans, and one in salt lake city. All extremely large (imo) and vibrant places. I can tell there is a strong genuine faith there and as such I found myself wanting to know more.

I bought a copy of the book of mormon and read the entire thing in one night actually. (three weeks ago) It sort of caught me offguard. To be honest I could barely believe what i was reading. So i bought a few commentaries and discovered the sort of shocking views on skin color, many Gods, and maybe more interestingly the claim that we all might become Gods.
Did i interpret some verses incorrectly? probably... Thats why im here. :biglaugh:Three questions/points and ill be done.

A) Why does the Book of Mormon appear to claim to be superior to the Bible? It appears that way from the beginning but i have the passages written down somewhere. (I Nephi 13:26-40; 3:166-193)-ish Do you believe the book of mormon to trump the original bible? Even in Contradictions?

B)[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] Second are the things which mormons disbelieve that are taught in the Bible. Unblief in the virgin birth, neccessity of baptism, ect I can give verses for all these if needed. Same question as above basically.

C) Third is the things that have had to be changed to fit with modern culture. (racism, polygamy, ect) Does it not seem rather odd to have a religion needing to be constantly modified by man? How do you personally find faith here?

These all stem from the fact that my family was catholic as I was growing up. As soon as I hit puberty I remember having doubts and eventually pure skeptisism at the church. What I eventually found was I didnt have a problem with God.. I had trouble with the people attempting to add and subtract to it. When I see the more modern mormans i get the same feeling, but knowing that you all probably didnt just get born into a mormon family. Why did you become a believer?

Or maybe more of an mean question, but one that im thinking.. why do you believe one man's word? speaking of joseph smith. If the answer is a personal experience thats fine, I would still like to hear a few words. Thanks! and hopefully I'm not sounding rude.
[/font][font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][/font]

 

[curiouslyminty]

And I understand that it is not just ONE man. But his wife and close friends. I still see it as jump of faith of monstrous proportions. A clarifyer(sp)- upon reading the book of mormon for the first time, did you immediately believe? or were you pursuaded by God or Man over time?

If it helps, I won't respond but merely read I don't want to seem like im attacking.. however much it might look like it. I want to know why I do or don't believe!

 

[Katzpur]

I joined the religious forums tonight after a few google searches looking for the typical LDS members reasoning behind their faith. And decided it would probably be best to just ask! haha

Well, I've got to admit... that's a novel approach! But much appreciated, I might add.

I bought a copy of the book of mormon and read the entire thing in one night actually. (three weeks ago) It sort of caught me offguard. To be honest I could barely believe what i was reading. So i bought a few commentaries and discovered the sort of shocking views on skin color, many Gods, and maybe more interestingly the claim that we all might become Gods.
Did i interpret some verses incorrectly? probably... Thats why im here. :biglaugh:Three questions/points and ill be done.

You've got to be kidding! That's over five hundred pages of heavy reading. I've never known anyone who was able to do that before. What part did you like best?

I've got a couple of questions before we get started. (1) Who published the commentaries? (2) Where in the Book of Mormon did you find the "shocking views on skin color, many Gods, and... the claim that we all might become Gods"? If you can tell me the verses you were questioning, perhaps I can tell you whether or not your interpretation was correct or not.

A) Why does the Book of Mormon appear to claim to be superior to the Bible? It appears that way from the beginning but i have the passages written down somewhere. (

I Nephi 13:26-40; 3:166-193)-ish Do you believe the book of mormon to trump the original bible? Even in Contradictions?

We believe them to complement each other. As you may have noticed, the subtitle of the Book of Mormon is "Another Testament of Jesus Christ." It's entire purpose is to stand as a witness to the Bible. It certainly doesn't trump the Bible, because it doesn't need to. I think the only thing about the Book of Mormon that might be said to be superior to the Bible is that the "original document" was translated only once prior to its publication. The Biblical writings were passed down from generation to generation and obviously hand-copied. It was also translated many times. If we were to compare the original BoM (i.e. the plates) to the original Bible (various documents), neither one would be superior to the other.

B)

[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] Second are the things which mormons disbelieve that are taught in the Bible. Unblief in the virgin birth, neccessity of baptism, ect I can give verses for all these if needed. Same question as above basically.

Yes, please do. We believe in the virgin birth and in the necessity of baptism, so I really don't know what you mean. Please cite chapter and verse, as it will help me answer your questions.

C) Third is the things that have had to be changed to fit with modern culture. (racism, polygamy, ect) Does it not seem rather odd to have a religion needing to be constantly modified by man? How do you personally find faith here?

It doesn't strike me as odd at all. The gospel has been the same since the beginning of time. But depending upon the needs of the people and their readiness to live new laws, God may change policies and procedures from time to time. I am personally drawn to Mormonism because it seems to answer all of my questions about God and my relationship to Him. There are no gaping holes in our theology and no puzzle pieces that just don't seem to fit. Mormonism makes total sense to me. That's why I am so content as a Latter-day Saint. Also, I am 100% convinced that the Apostasy Paul prophesied of did, in fact, take place. That's why I can't be comfortable in any other Christian denomination. I believe that a Restoration was absolutely necessary. I'm not talking about a Reformation; I'm talking about a Restoration of the truth from the ground up.

These all stem from the fact that my family was catholic as I was growing up. As soon as I hit puberty I remember having doubts and eventually pure skeptisism at the church. What I eventually found was I didnt have a problem with God.. I had trouble with the people attempting to add and subtract to it. When I see the more modern mormans i get the same feeling, but knowing that you all probably didnt just get born into a mormon family. Why did you become a believer?

I was personally born into a Mormon family. Acqalung is a convert, though, so she may be able to give you a different perspective.

As far as "adding or subtracting" from God's word, you've got to understand that we believe that a great many of the doctrines Christ taught we lost within the first couple of centuries after His death. It would stand to reason that they would have been re-introduced if His Church was, in fact, restored. I guess that's what it all gets down to. The things we believe happened between 1820 and 1830 or so either happened or they didn't. There's no other relevant perspective. And it gets down to whether or not you can trust what the Holy Ghost tells you.

Or maybe more of an mean question, but one that im thinking.. why do you believe one man's word? speaking of joseph smith. If the answer is a personal experience thats fine, I would still like to hear a few words. Thanks! and hopefully I'm not sounding rude.

[/font]

I believe his word because I believe that He was a prophet of God. It is inconceivable to me that God would leave us with nothing more than a book to rely on. Not that I'm trying to devalue the book, but you've got to admit, it's caused a bit of confusion over the ages. There are over 30,000 different Christian denominations in the world today, and no two of them teach exactly the same doctrines. In my opinion, God would want us to know the truth. And the only way this could happen was for Him to communicate through a prophet. If He did so in ancient times, and if Christ established His Church on a foundation of Prophets and Apostles, it seems quite logical to me that He intended to continue to direct His Church through them.

Kathryn

 

[Katzpur]

And I understand that it is not just ONE man. But his wife and close friends.

Sorry, you lost me here.

I still see it as jump of faith of monstrous proportions. A clarifyer(sp)- upon reading the book of mormon for the first time, did you immediately believe? or were you pursuaded by God or Man over time?

I'm sure it does. To me, the biggest leap of faith anyone has to take is believing that with God nothing is impossible. Once you get that one behind you, the rest is a piece of cake. I wish I could find the quote from Joseph Smith I'm thinking of, but I'm just not sure where to look. So, I'll paraphrase the best I can. He said something like, "I don't blame anybody for not believing my story. If I hadn't experienced what I did myself, I wouldn't believe it either."

If it helps, I won't respond but merely read I don't want to seem like im attacking.. however much it might look like it. I want to know why I do or don't believe!

There are several LDS posters here and I'm sure we'd all enjoy hearing your responses. I think the biggest help would be if you just didn't post too awfully many questions at once. It's sometimes pretty daunting to see a post that you know is going to take a full hour to respond to. One at a time and we'll get through it all.

Kathryn

 

[jonny]

A) Why does the Book of Mormon appear to claim to be superior to the Bible? It appears that way from the beginning but i have the passages written down somewhere. (I Nephi 13:26-40; 3:166-193)-ish Do you believe the book of mormon to trump the original bible? Even in Contradictions?

I have never seen any place where the Book of Mormon contradicts the Bible. If you see anything you can point it out to me, but we've had thread after thread on the subject here and no one has ever pointed anything out to me. Usually when someone starts a thread there is the sound of silence. It's pretty funny, people are quick to attack, but slow to find proof.

I don't think that the Book of Mormon ever claims to be superior to the Bible. It does claim that all truth is not contained in the Bible. LDS members accept both books as scripture. One point with the Book of Mormon is that LDS members believe that it was written for us today. This is not necessarily true with the Bible. Most of the letters and things were written to the members of the ancient church. The authors of the Book of Mormon knew that they were writing for us.

B)[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] Second are the things which mormons disbelieve that are taught in the Bible. Unblief in the virgin birth, neccessity of baptism, ect I can give verses for all these if needed. Same question as above basically.[/font]

Where did you get the idea the Mormons didn't believe in the virgin birth and in baptism being necessary? Our fourth article of faith is "We believe the first four principles and ordinances of the gospel are first, faith in the Lord Jesus Christ; Second, repentance, Third, baptism by immersion for the remission of sins; Fourth, the laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost."
[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]

C) Third is the things that have had to be changed to fit with modern culture. (racism, polygamy, ect) Does it not seem rather odd to have a religion needing to be constantly modified by man? How do you personally find faith here?

I have never understood the racism, and yes it bothers me - but not any more than any the racism in our country's history bothers me. I never was alive when the church had these policies, so I can't comment on it. I've had black LDS friends and roommates who I've discussed with it and they seem to see it as a trial of faith for black members. In a way it was a trial of faith for the entire church. I don't know of anyone who wasn't excited about the revelation allowing blacks to have the priesthood and it is a day that is still celebrated in the church.

Many people don't realize that much of the persecution in the early days of the church (especially in Missouri) was as a result of the church being against slavery. Part of Joseph Smith's platform when he ran for president dealt with the abolition of slavery.

As for polygamy, it served its purpose in the church. One of our articles of faith discusses obeying the laws of the land. The states made it illegal so the church obeyed the laws. I can't say that I am against polygamy because I come from polygamist ancestors. I am glad that the church doesn't practice it any more, but I don't have a problem with the fact that it did.

I personally don't find it odd that a religion would change its policies. I am much more satisfied by a religion that believes that God still speaks and directs his church than I would be by any religion that believes that the heavens are closed and leaves the direction of the church up to man. In this I find great faith.

These all stem from the fact that my family was catholic as I was growing up. As soon as I hit puberty I remember having doubts and eventually pure skeptisism at the church. What I eventually found was I didnt have a problem with God.. I had trouble with the people attempting to add and subtract to it. When I see the more modern mormans i get the same feeling, but knowing that you all probably didnt just get born into a mormon family. Why did you become a believer?

I was born into the church and I never really doubted it until my mission. I had an enormous trial of my faith at one point and was just about finished with everything. When I really became a believer was when I got down on my knees and asked God if I was following the path that he would have me follow. The answer was clear and I have never doubted my path since.

Or maybe more of an mean question, but one that im thinking.. why do you believe one man's word? speaking of joseph smith. If the answer is a personal experience thats fine, I would still like to hear a few words. Thanks! and hopefully I'm not sounding rude

I don't believe one man's word. Like I said above, I got down on my knees and found out for myself - the details of which are very personal. I believe God's word and that's all I need.

Thanks for asking the questions so respectfully.
[/font]

 

[jonny]

Above I noticed that you mentioned that you saw racism in the Book of Mormon. While it is true that there are a few references to skin color, I like to look at the Book of Mormon as a whole. It makes the indians a promised people of the Lord and puts us in the role of serving these people. I don't find this racist at all.

One scholar described the Book of Mormon as such - it is a "ruthlessly tragic narrative that chronicles the destruction of the white race and the fruition of the dark race."

From the sounds of your questions, you might be interested in reading Joseph Smith's new biography by Richard Bushman. It is written from a scholarly, not religious, angle, and covers many of the points that you brought up in your commentary.

 

[curiouslyminty]

Thanks for the response! I realize I was all over the map on my initial post but I feel almost bursting with confusing information. I actually did read the whole book albeit long.. (im single and displaced due to hurricane katrina, too much free time haha) My favorite part is vague since I didn't understand it all.

As for the views of racism (which is of key interest to me so I'll sit here for a bit) -

2 Nephi 5:21

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.

So black = bad? I found myself searching online for thoughts from mormon leaders on the issue.

Brigham Young in his 'Journal of Discourses' -

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.

Vol. 7, pg. 290-291
Cain slew his brother. . . and the Lord put a mark upon him, which is the flat nose and black skin.

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. The first man that committed the odious crime of killing one of his brethren will be cursed the longest of any one of the children of Adam. 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. Trace mankind down to after the flood, and then another curse is pronounced upon the same race--that they should be the "servant of servants;" and they will be, until that curse is removed.

ok... so maybe he is just a mormon extremist?
1 Nephi 13:15

And I beheld the Spirit of the Lord, that it was upon the Gentiles, and they did prosper and obtain the land for their inheritance; and I beheld that they were white, and exceedingly fair and beautiful, like unto my people before they were slain.

3 Nephi 2:15

And their curse was taken from them, and their skin became white like unto the Nephites.

Obviously white is better though..

The Prophet Joseph Fielding Smith

Not only was Cain called upon to suffer, but because of his wickedness he became the father of an inferior race. The Way to Perfection, p. 101

The Prophet Brigham Young

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. Journal of Discourses, Vol. 10, page 110

Are these people who became so called prophets of the mormon church really inspired? When i read the old testiment I see the 'mark' given to cain. But it DOESN'T specify what it is. Isn't it a bit convenient that when racism is at its height prophets show up declaring that being Black is a curse?

Lastly in the book of moses enoch is creating a city so perfect that it was taken up into heaven! Which was interesting except for the fact that it says in Moses 7:22-23 This perfect city contained “a mixture of all the seed of Adam” except the seed of Cain, "for the seed of Cain were black and had not place among them".

Luckily I do realize mormons see their fault. I read in a Salt Lake Tribune article from May 18, 1998 (library microfiche)
"…black members of the church in the United States as well as some Mormon scholars warn that the "racist legacy'' contained in various Mormon documents and authoritative statements risks undermining its mission unless they are disavowed. "In the absence of any official corrections, these speculative and pejorative ideas will continue to be perpetuated in the church indefinitely,'' Armand Mauss, president of the Mormon History Association

But not having happened yet.. Do you actually ascribe to me being less of a person based on skin color? Or that the scripture is outdated? Or that the prophets of that time were wrong? Or where do you go from there?

 

[Bishka]

Katzpur and Jonny you both are so awesome. I wish I could answer like you. Oh and to curiouslyminty. You are holding the prophets like they are infalliable, we know the prophets are men and falliable, just like every other man(other then Christ) has been. Prophets make mistakes, men make mistakes. Prophets are not without sin.

 

[jonny]

The belief that the mark of Cain was black skin is an idea that was very common in Christianity. You can find out more about this here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curse_and_mark_of_Cain

Are these people who became so called prophets of the mormon church really inspired?

Yes, but I doubt that every word that they spoke was inspired. Those that were are clear - they are printed in official church publications.

Do you actually ascribe to me being less of a person based on skin color? Or that the scripture is outdated? Or that the prophets of that time were wrong? Or where do you go from there?

No, I don't see any skin color as inferior. As I described above, I don't see the scripture as being racist. Some of the comments from leaders I do see as racist. I would say that those comments were wrong and obviously not inspired.

Where do I go from there? I don't understand it and the people who said it are dead so they cannot explain themselves. It may be that if they were alive today they would apologize for these comments and admit that they were wrong.

I would love for the church to formally apologize to African Americans for some of these comments of the past. I don't know if it will ever happen.

You may be interested in this website. The Genesis Group is an organization created for black members of the LDS church. They might have some more information for you: http://www.ldsgenesisgroup.org/

This webpage on Black LDS pioneers might interest you also: http://www.blackpioneerswest.com/

 

[jonny]

As I mentioned, the idea of the Mark of Cain was not uncommon in Christian churches. In Wikipedia, it mentions the beliefs in this that the protestants once held:

Adoption of the doctrine by Protestant groups

Most 19th and early 20th century Southern Baptist congregations in the southern United States taught that there were two separate heavens; one for blacks, and one for whites.

The doctrine was used to support a ban on ordaining blacks to most Protestant clergies until the 1960s in the U.S. and Europe. It is significant to note that the Coptic, Ethiopian, Orthodox, Thomasite and the Catholic church did not recognize these interpretations and did not participate in the religious movement to support them. Certain Catholic Diocese in the Southern United States did adopt a policy of not ordaining blacks to oversee, administer sacraments to, or accept confessions from white parishoners. This policy was not based on a Curse of Cain teaching, but was justified by any possible perceptions of having slaves rule over their masters.

Baptists and other denominations including Penecostals officially taught or practiced various forms of racial segregation well into the mid-to-late-20th century, although in practice all races were accepted to worship services after the 1970s and 1980s when many official policies were changed. Nearly all Protestant groups in America had supported the notion that black slavery, oppression, and African colonization was the result of God's curse on people with black skin or of African descent through Cain, or through the Curse of Ham, and many churches practiced racial segregation, as late as the 1990s, including Penecostalism. Today, however, official acceptance and practice of the doctrine among Protestant ogranizations is limited almost exclusively to churches connected to white supremacy, such as the Aryan World Church and the New Christian Crusade Church.


A little later...

When asked, church spokespeople generally repudiate the curse of Cain doctrine. However, despite urging from a number of black Mormons, there has not yet been an official and explicit church repudiation of the doctrine, or an admission that it was a mistake. In 1998, there was a report in the Los Angeles Times that the church leadership was considering an official repudiation of the curse of Cain and curse of Ham doctrines, to mark the 20th anniversary of the 1978 revelation. (Larry B. Stammer, "Mormons May Disavow Old View on Blacks", L.A. Times, May 18, 1998, p. A1). This, however, was quickly denied by the LDS spokesman Don LeFevre. (ABC News report, May 18, 1998). The Times later suggested that the publicity generated by its article may have caused the church to put an official disavowal on hold. (Stammer, "Mormon Plan to Disavow Racist Teachings Jeopardized by Publicity", L.A. Times, May 24, 1998).

 

[jonny]

Anyway, I guess what I'm trying to point out is yes, there were racist policies in the LDS church, but the critisism from *some* Protestant groups is nothing other than hypocrisy.

 

[curiouslyminty]

The belief that the mark of Cain was black skin is an idea that was very common in Christianity.

I would disagree. If you read the wikkipedia link you pasted, it says "Following the literal Biblical text, most scholars today interpret the "curse" as Cain's inability to cultivate crops and the necessity that he lead a nomadic lifestyle. They interpret the "mark" as a warning to others, but are unable to determine the form of the mark from the Biblical text."

AKA an unknown. Goes onto say that in the 18th century it was common thought to be black skin, because of the time period. Then these thoughts show up in holy scripture?

Sorry for pressing a talked out subject, just find it strange that God would help make mormonism as the christianity for 'now' by alienating a large portion of the populace. Except that if we look at who I believe wrote it, it makes sense. IMO God would never curse someone with a skin color..
Also, I read that in the past black people were not allowed to be mormon priests. Is that still true?

Last I'll say about it Thanks so much for the links. I'm looking at them now!

 

[curiouslyminty]

Yea I understand that people wrongly ADDED to the bible to show racism. Adopted beliefs. But all that was needed to clear that up was to head back to the original scriptures that had been there for 1500 years.

 

[Katzpur]

Thanks for the response! I realize I was all over the map on my initial post but I feel almost bursting with confusing information. I actually did read the whole book albeit long.. (im single and displaced due to hurricane katrina, too much free time haha) My favorite part is vague since I didn't understand it all.

As for the views of racism (which is of key interest to me so I'll sit here for a bit) -

2 Nephi 5:21
So black = bad? I found myself searching online for thoughts from mormon leaders on the issue.

Brigham Young in his 'Journal of Discourses' -
ok... so maybe he is just a mormon extremist?
1 Nephi 13:15
3 Nephi 2:15
Obviously white is better though..

The Prophet Joseph Fielding Smith The Prophet Brigham Young Are these people who became so called prophets of the mormon church really inspired? When i read the old testiment I see the 'mark' given to cain. But it DOESN'T specify what it is. Isn't it a bit convenient that when racism is at its height prophets show up declaring that being Black is a curse?

Lastly in the book of moses enoch is creating a city so perfect that it was taken up into heaven! Which was interesting except for the fact that it says in Moses 7:22-23 This perfect city contained “a mixture of all the seed of Adam” except the seed of Cain, "for the seed of Cain were black and had not place among them".

Luckily I do realize mormons see their fault. I read in a Salt Lake Tribune article from May 18, 1998 (library microfiche)
"…black members of the church in the United States as well as some Mormon scholars warn that the "racist legacy'' contained in various Mormon documents and authoritative statements risks undermining its mission unless they are disavowed. "In the absence of any official corrections, these speculative and pejorative ideas will continue to be perpetuated in the church indefinitely,'' Armand Mauss, president of the Mormon History Association

But not having happened yet.. Do you actually ascribe to me being less of a person based on skin color? Or that the scripture is outdated? Or that the prophets of that time were wrong? Or where do you go from there?

I probably shouldn't even attempt to respond to your post tonight since I really need to get to bed, and I can't do it justice. For now, let me say simply that the Book of Mormon does not teach racism. Neither do any of our Standard Works. I can (and will) give you some quotes from Biblical passages that are quite similar in tone to those in the Book of Mormon. Just not tonight.

I am also not going to deny for one minute that Brigham Young and some others of our leaders made some... well... racist remarks. I believe that these men were a product of their culture, though, and while that does not excuse their remarks, it sort of explains them. I think it's time we as Latter-day Saints started admitting that there were some problems in the past and not try to dismiss them. On the other hand, if we're willing to do that, people outside our faith need to realize that these remarks came from human beings who were fallible. Whatever they may have said really doesn't change the validity of the Church. They may have been inspired in their leadership, but they weren't perfect, and we know they weren't.

 

[jonny]

I would disagree. If you read the wikkipedia link you pasted, it says "Following the literal Biblical text, most scholars today interpret the "curse" as Cain's inability to cultivate crops and the necessity that he lead a nomadic lifestyle. They interpret the "mark" as a warning to others, but are unable to determine the form of the mark from the Biblical text."

AKA an unknown. Goes onto say that in the 18th century it was common thought to be black skin, because of the time period. Then these thoughts show up in holy scripture?

I think if you'll keep reading the article you'll find that the Curse of Cain was the foundation for the acceptance of slavery by many Christians.

Sorry for pressing a talked out subject, just find it strange that God would help make mormonism as the christianity for 'now' by alienating a large portion of the populace. Except that if we look at who I believe wrote it, it makes sense. IMO God would never curse someone with a skin color..

I find that strange also. I really don't know the history of these policies, but I do know that they were not in place during Joseph Smith's life. He ordained black members of the church to the priesthood and at least one that I know of served in a Quorum of the Seventy, which is a level of leadership in the church.

Also, I read that in the past black people were not allowed to be mormon priests. Is that still true?

No, it isn't true. The announcement that blacks would be allowed to hold the priesthood was so important to the church that it was cannonized as scripture and is found in the Doctrine and Covenants.

To Whom It May Concern:

On September 30, 1978, at the 148th Semiannual General Conference of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the following was presented by President N. Eldon Tanner, First Counselor in the First Presidency of the Church:

In early June of this year, the First Presidency announced that a revelation had been received by President Spencer W. Kimball extending priesthood and temple blessings to all worthy male members of the Church. President Kimball has asked that I advise the conference that after he had received this revelation, which came to him after extended meditation and prayer in the sacred rooms of the holy temple, he presented it to his counselors, who accepted it and approved it. It was then presented to the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, who unanimously approved it, and was subsequently presented to all other General Authorities, who likewise approved it unanimously.

President Kimball has asked that I now read this letter:

June 8, 1978
To all general and local priesthood officers of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints throughout the world:

Dear Brethren:

As we have witnessed the expansion of the work of the Lord over the earth, we have been grateful that people of many nations have responded to the message of the restored gospel, and have joined the Church in ever-increasing numbers. This, in turn, has inspired us with a desire to extend to every worthy member of the Church all of the privileges and blessings which the gospel affords.

Aware of the promises made by the prophets and presidents of the Church who have preceded us that at some time, in God’s eternal plan, all of our brethren who are worthy may receive the priesthood, and witnessing the faithfulness of those from whom the priesthood has been withheld, we have pleaded long and earnestly in behalf of these, our faithful brethren, spending many hours in the Upper Room of the Temple supplicating the Lord for divine guidance.

He has heard our prayers, and by revelation has confirmed that the long-promised day has come when every faithful, worthy man in the Church may receive the holy priesthood, with power to exercise its divine authority, and enjoy with his loved ones every blessing that flows therefrom, including the blessings of the temple. Accordingly, all worthy male members of the Church may be ordained to the priesthood without regard for race or color. Priesthood leaders are instructed to follow the policy of carefully interviewing all candidates for ordination to either the Aaronic or the Melchizedek Priesthood to insure that they meet the established standards for worthiness.

We declare with soberness that the Lord has now made known his will for the blessing of all his children throughout the earth who will hearken to the voice of his authorized servants, and prepare themselves to receive every blessing of the gospel.

Sincerely yours,

SPENCER W. KIMBALL
N. ELDON TANNER
MARION G. ROMNEY

The First Presidency

Recognizing Spencer W. Kimball as the prophet, seer, and revelator, and president of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, it is proposed that we as a constituent assembly accept this revelation as the word and will of the Lord. All in favor please signify by raising your right hand. Any opposed by the same sign.

The vote to sustain the foregoing motion was unanimous in the affirmative.

Salt Lake City, Utah, September 30, 1978.

As I mentioned earlier, the anniversary of this announcement is celebrated in the church.

 

[Katzpur]

I would disagree. If you read the wikkipedia link you pasted, it says "Following the literal Biblical text, most scholars today interpret the "curse" as Cain's inability to cultivate crops and the necessity that he lead a nomadic lifestyle. They interpret the "mark" as a warning to others, but are unable to determine the form of the mark from the Biblical text."

AKA an unknown. Goes onto say that in the 18th century it was common thought to be black skin, because of the time period. Then these thoughts show up in holy scripture?

Sorry for pressing a talked out subject, just find it strange that God would help make mormonism as the christianity for 'now' by alienating a large portion of the populace. Except that if we look at who I believe wrote it, it makes sense. IMO God would never curse someone with a skin color..
Also, I read that in the past black people were not allowed to be mormon priests. Is that still true?

Last I'll say about it Thanks so much for the links. I'm looking at them now!

I really, really want to address your concerns. They are entirely valid and you have the right to ask these questions. I promise to get back to you tomorrow. I just don't want you to think I'm ignoring the subject. I have some fascinating material I want to share. It's from a paper written by a Black member of the Church and presented at a seminar I went to last summer. Neat stuff.

 

[jonny]

Yea I understand that people wrongly ADDED to the bible to show racism. Adopted beliefs. But all that was needed to clear that up was to head back to the original scriptures that had been there for 1500 years.

I don't think that the church sees these scriptures are racist and they are not interpreted as being racist. You may be interested in this article: http://www.fairlds.org/pubs/conf/2003TveJ.html

Also, people who claim that the Book of Mormon is racist, tend to ignore this scripture:

2 Nephi 26:33 - "...he denieth none that come unto him, black and white, bond and free, male and female, and remembereth the heathen; and all are alike unto God, both Jew and Gentile."

 

[curiouslyminty]

Thanks Your sincerity helps me more than you know. Reading the old mormon texts non stop for a period of time you begin to see the writers as sort of.. well hard hearted. Talking to open people helps change that. I would like to ask some questions about when you think your prophets are speaking divine truth and when its fallible.. but its late! haha

 

[curiouslyminty]

Or is prophet just a title in LDS? I never even questioned if the use was different than the Old Testiment...

 

[Bishka]

Thanks Your sincerity helps me more than you know. Reading the old mormon texts non stop for a period of time you begin to see the writers as sort of.. well hard hearted. Talking to open people helps change that. I would like to ask some questions about when you think your prophets are speaking divine truth and when its fallible.. but its late! haha

What I think on that subject curiouslyminty, I believe that prophets are falliable, and they may say some things that aren't true and aren't divine inspiration, but we are taught in the Church to pray over something when it is given and if we feel it is right then we do it and know it is right. That's a quick answer for now, I'm tired and I start school tomorrow!