BKP on the Priesthood Ban

[Uncle Ted]

Actually, anonymously written webpages seem to be just as effective on doctrine these days.

Yes, the old way required everyone to go out and buy new scriptures. That is so 20th century. The mormonnewsroom.org FAQ is the final word on the church doctrine these days.

[Moliere]

We'll need a revelation, which can be hard to come by these days.

Actually, anonymously written webpages seem to be just as effective on doctrine these days.

[byu71]

Just trust us. It's both wrong and offensive.

OK, I will trust you. I hope you will trust me that claiming we are descendents of monkeys is also wrong and offensive.

[jay santos]

I am not saying the Cain theory isn't hogwash, I am just wondering if there is more to it being offensive than political correctness.

Just trust us. It's both wrong and offensive.

[byu71]

On the descendents of Cain thing, what is offensive? Aren't we all in agreement that the sins of the parents do not fall upon the children. I would think those of the PC, enlightened group would be the first to say you would not hold it against the children for what a parent did?

If it is indeed offensive to the enlightened folks to believe in the Cain theory, I guess I should be outraged at the enlightened crowd for claiming I am the descendent of a monkey. Personally I would rather be a descendent of Cain than monkeys.

I am not saying the Cain theory isn't hogwash, I am just wondering if there is more to it being offensive than political correctness.

[pellegrino]

Another one from Stevenson, this is more clearly articulated, but I still don't agree with his conclusions about the modern church.

http://rationalfaiths.com/responsible-tell-unpleasant-stories-mormons-race/

[Uncle Ted]

We'll need a revelation, which can be hard to come by these days. Unless of course it has to do with increasing revenue streams or converts.

The church does have a revelation. It came in 1978 and Michael Jackson's skin got lighter.

[Northwestcoug]

lol, I saw that too. Read it closely, I think it's more likely he's not a fan of COB controlling the narrative and excommunicating those who offer alternative narratives. His basic gripe is that he did the same thing and got exed.

Good point. His mistake was that he put his name on his writings.

[pellegrino]

He does have a point here...



The LDS church does now has the problem with reconciling its scriptures with what they are saying today.

Personally I like the idea of just saying that Cain is Bigfoot. Let's go with that.

We'll need a revelation, which can be hard to come by these days. Unless of course it has to do with increasing revenue streams or converts.

[Uncle Ted]

Denver Snuffer is not a fan of the new race document.

http://denversnuffer.blogspot.com/2013/12/new-improved-mormonism.html

He does have a point here...

It is only in LDS scripture the mark is clarified. It was blackness: “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.” (Moses 7: 22.) This uniquely LDS scripture clarifies what Genesis does not make clear. For the Christians “in the United States from at least 1730's” this idea of blacks descending from Cain was merely a theory. But for Latter-day Saints it was a matter of actual canonized scripture. So the purging of the LDS sins is only partial. They need to condemn Enoch as yet another past, false leader who subscribed to a now discredited view.

The LDS church now has the problem with reconciling its scriptures with what they are saying today.

Personally I like the idea of just saying that Cain is Bigfoot. Let's go with that.

[pellegrino]

In other words, are they leaders if they don't really lead, are they prophets if they don't really prophesy?

If we as a people weren't ready for this by 2013, then what in the hell does that say about us? That we really are just as racist as some claim?

I thought he also missed Dehlin's point on the womens/LGBT movements too. Dehlin wasn't drawing a parallel between the movements; he was simply saying that if the church got the race thing wrong for so many years, then how do we know they are right about those issues (among many others).

The concept of prophets has taken a nasty knock for many. As I told my wife this am, I think you have four general responses these days:

1. Nice step, not enough, way late, but applaud the direction.

2. Oh, that's nice. Time to move on.

3. Meh.

4. Dude, where in the Holy name of Fetch did you put my church?!?!?!?!?!?

what's surprising about this is how strident group #4 is.

[Pheidippides]

I listened to it, and I was kind of blown away by Stevenson's comments about the collective responsibility of the church.

He elaborates on it here:

http://mormonhistoryguy.com/2013/12/13/2013-wow-ok/

I get what he means by saying that members weren't ready for the change, and even when it did come there was significant resistance, but what he fails to take into consideration is the simple fact that this is a top-down church. We follow the prophet, and when the prophet says shit like blacks are cursed, most of us take that pretty seriously. Yes, the body of the church was and to a certain degree is still racist, but the body of the church is also a flock, led by shepherds, who for the purposes of maintaining and leveraging their power, failed to be forthcoming and honest about the origins of the ban and the reasons why it was removed. The revelation was given, but there was zero follow-up. I don't care what McConkie said. The explanation should have come from the pulpit in October of 1978.

In sum, yes, we all have our own responsibility and complicity in this ugly affair, but it's unfair to put the collective blame that the members bear on the same level as the blame that the leaders bear. Rank and file members didn't set the doctrine/policy, they might have supported it with all their hearts, but had DOM done away with it in the 50s, they would have supported that with all their hearts, and Stevenson conveniently wants to forget that, for what reason, I do not know.

In other words, are they leaders if they don't really lead, are they prophets if they don't really prophesy?

If we as a people weren't ready for this by 2013, then what in the hell does that say about us? That we really are just as racist as some claim?

I thought he also missed Dehlin's point on the womens/LGBT movements too. Dehlin wasn't drawing a parallel between the movements; he was simply saying that if the church got the race thing wrong for so many years, then how do we know they are right about those issues (among many others).

The concept of prophets has taken a nasty knock for many. As I told my wife this am, I think you have four general responses these days:

1. Nice step, not enough, way late, but applaud the direction.

2. Oh, that's nice. Time to move on.

3. Meh.

4. Dude, where in the Holy name of Fetch did you put my church?!?!?!?!?!?

[byu71]

Did Washington and Lincoln claim they led God's country by direct revelation?

The biggest problem I have with all of this is that the church has trailed behind the enlightenment of today's sensibilities. Now, the church unequivocally condemns racism. Where was the church in the '60's? Surely a church whose leaders receive revelation from God on behalf of the church (if not the world) would be on the right side of these sorts of issues from the beginning, instead of trailing behind the rest of the country, kicking and screaming in some instances.

I would expect more enlightened thinking from the special witnesses of Jesus Christ.

I think you expect too much. Or it is a convenient argument to degrade someone else's unwavering belief that they receive direct revelation. They may indeed receive it, but I am of the belief it happens rarely and they are left with the same tools you and I have when it comes to receiving inspiration from the Almighty.

Heck, I only have to look back to the Apostles who hung out with Jesus for 3 years to understand they still are men with flaws and don't have direct channels to God. I think Peter denied Christ 3 times and while Paul didn't serve with Christ, he did see him and have a special calling. Yet, from what I have read of his writings, today he would be considered a male chauvinist pig.

[pellegrino]

Denver Snuffer is not a fan of the new race document.

http://denversnuffer.blogspot.com/2013/12/new-improved-mormonism.html

lol, I saw that too. Read it closely, I think it's more likely he's not a fan of COB controlling the narrative and excommunicating those who offer alternative narratives. His basic gripe is that he did the same thing and got exed.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Denver Snuffer is not a fan of the new race document.

http://denversnuffer.blogspot.com/2013/12/new-improved-mormonism.html