Question for Don Bradley

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 7339
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Joseph Fielding Smith of The Quorum of the Twelve

Post by Shulem »

For generations the entire church walked lockstep and believed the leaders who taught that dark skin was a sign of the curse among the Lamanites. Definitions and explanations given through the inspiration of the leaders was final and binding upon all living Latter-day Saints of their time. But modern saints today run the previous church body under the bus and decry what the entire church once believed. Mormons today apostatize from Mormonism of yesterday. It's really that simple. Mormon apologists have absolutely no credibility in denouncing the curse without also denouncing the false spirit exhibited by the previous church in its entirety. Apologists laugh and make fun with mocking tones as they attempt to justify Book of Mormon racism with silly made-up ideas and excuses. Party like sarcasm and deceit drip and ooze off the faces of on-line apologists who attempt to explain away previous church beliefs. It's disgusting to say the least.

This was the universal belief of the entire church:

Image

Image

Joseph Fielding Smith wrote:The Present Status of the Lamanites

Question: "The question I have is concerning the present status of the Lamanites. I know that Laman and Lemuel and their families were cursed, but to what extent is this curse carried today? Was the darker skin all or just part of the curse? Will this curse be completely forgotten and taken away by the Lord on the basis of repentance and complete acceptance of the gospel?"

Answer: The dark skin was placed upon the Lamanites so that they could be distinguished from the Nephites and to keep the two peoples from mixing. The dark skin was the sign of the curse. The curse was the withdrawal of the Spirit of the Lord and the Lamanites becoming a "loathsome and filthy people, full of idleness and all manner of abominations." The Lord commanded the Nephites not to intermarry with them, for if they did they would partake of the curse.

At the time of the Savior's visit to the Nephites all of the people became united, and the curse and the dark skin which was its sign were removed. The two peoples became one and lived in full harmony and peace for about two hundred years.

There were no robbers, nor murderers, neither were there Lamanites, nor any manner of -ites; but they were in one, the children of Christ, and heirs to the kingdom of God.

EVIL BROUGHT RETURN OF DARK SKIN

After the people again forgot the Lord and dissensions arose, some of them took upon themselves the name Lamanites and the dark skin returned. When the Lamanites fully repent and sincerely receive the gospel, the Lord has promised to remove the dark skin. The Lord declared by revelation that, "before the great day of the Lord shall come, Jacob shall flourish in the wilderness, and the Lamanites shall blossom as the rose."

The dark skin of those who have come into the Church is no longer to be considered a sign of the curse. Many of these converts are delightsome and have the Spirit of the Lord. Perhaps there are some Lamanites today who are losing the dark pigment. Many of the members of the Church among the Catawba Indians of the South could readily pass as of the white race; also in other parts of the South.
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 7339
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Skin color slurs

Post by Shulem »

Jacob 3:9 wrote:Wherefore, a commandment I give unto you, which is the word of God, that ye revile no more against them because of the darkness of their skins
Or in other words, no more name-calling! Do not refer to Lamanites as darkies or call them flints. Do not make fun of or belittle their skin color. It is unbecoming. The cursing which hath come upon their skins (3:5) is their problem, not yours. I fear that unless ye shall repent of your sins that their skins will be whiter than yours (3:8), when Jesus comes.
User avatar
Moksha
God
Posts: 7387
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:13 am
Location: Koloburbia

Re: Question for Don Bradley

Post by Moksha »

Skin curses are so Mormonish. It would be fun if Mormons could all turn blue to distinguish themselves from gentiles.
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 7339
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Brigham Young

Post by Shulem »

Moksha wrote:
Sat Dec 28, 2024 9:04 am
Skin curses are so Mormonish. It would be fun if Mormons could all turn blue to distinguish themselves from gentiles.
For the record: here is Mormonism in all its Mormonish glory for everyone to say "amen", the President of the Melchizedek Priesthood spoke the word of the Lord through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit® although his voice was worn out and he had to stop speaking after railing on the blacks and belittling the African race. What a horrible spirit must have existed in that conference and the things that spewed out of Brigham's mouth are forever an embarrassment for Mormondom:
President Brigham Young, Delivered in the Tabernacle, Great Salt Lake City, October 9, 1859 wrote:
  • Joseph was foreordained to be the temporal Savior of his father's house, and the seed of Joseph are ordained to be the spiritual and temporal saviors of all the house of Israel in the latter days. Joseph's seed has mixed itself with all the seed of man upon the face of the whole earth. The great majority of those who are now before me are the descendants of that Joseph who was sold. Joseph Smith, junior, was foreordained to come through the loins of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, and so on down through the Prophets and Apostles; and thus he came forth in the last days to be a minister of salvation, and to hold the keys of the last dispensation of the fulness of times.
  • 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 anyone 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; and the Abolitionists cannot help it, nor in the least alter that decree. How long is that race to endure the dreadful curse that is upon them? That curse will remain upon them, and they never can hold the Priesthood or share in it until all the other descendants of Adam have received the promises and enjoyed the blessings of the Priesthood and the keys thereof. Until the last ones of the residue of Adam's children are brought up to that favorable position, the children of Cain cannot receive the first ordinances of the Priesthood. They were the first that were cursed, and they will be the last from whom the curse will be removed. When the residue of the family of Adam come up and receive their blessings, then the curse will be removed from the seed of Cain, and they will receive blessings in like proportion.

    I have but just commenced my remarks, and have presented you a few texts; and it is now time to adjourn. The exertion required to speak to you somewhat at length seems to injure me. I will therefore stop.

    I bless you all, inasmuch as you have desired and striven to do right, to revere the name of Deity, and to exalt the character of his Son on the earth. I bless you in the name of Jesus Christ! Amen.
Shut your mouth, Brigham Young -- you stand rebuked! You racist bastard! The future Mormon church will condemn you and disavow your teachings as uninspired and leading the church astray.

And here is the steamy turd the Church today produces as it shrugs its past and ignores the implications that go with condemning the body of the entire church as it existed for generations:
Race and the Priesthood wrote:Today, the Church disavows the theories advanced in the past that black skin is a sign of divine disfavor or curse, or that it reflects unrighteous actions in a premortal life; that mixed-race marriages are a sin; or that blacks or people of any other race or ethnicity are inferior in any way to anyone else. Church leaders today unequivocally condemn all racism, past and present, in any form.
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 7339
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Another Question for Don

Post by Shulem »

Don,

Today, I finished your chapter on Aminadi in the Temple. Your desire to create faith promoting parallels to satisfy readers is readily apparent. Your book is loaded with faith promoting parallels and stories but is entirely based on religious ideals having no evidence to convince nonmembers of the church how the Book of Mormon is historical.

Don: why didn't Nephi record the number (x) of days for the voyage to the promised land? What was that number, Don?

Tell me, I'm waiting for you to respond. Is there a faith promoting excuse for why Nephi or Mormon Joseph Smith were too stupid that they neglected to record a critical number for the most important day in which the whole Book of Mormon chronology was depended on?

Don, you do realize that Joseph Smith authored the Book of Mormon entirely out of his own ingenuity? I think you know it. In fact, I know you do. I think you know the only reason the number of days was not recorded in the replacement story is because Smith just couldn't recall the number and God wasn't going to help him remember a lie.
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 7339
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Re: Another Question for Don

Post by Shulem »

Shulem wrote:
Fri Jan 03, 2025 1:44 am

Don: why didn't Nephi record the number (x) of days for the voyage to the promised land? What was that number, Don?

Tell me, I'm waiting for you to respond. Is there a faith promoting excuse for why Nephi or Mormon Joseph Smith were too stupid that they neglected to record a critical number for the most important day in which the whole Book of Mormon chronology was depended on?

Don, you do realize that Joseph Smith authored the Book of Mormon entirely out of his own ingenuity? I think you know it. In fact, I know you do. I think you know the only reason the number of days was not recorded in the replacement story is because Smith just couldn't recall the number and God wasn't going to help him remember a lie.

Don, if you prefer to discuss this in the Celestial forum, I have included a new post, The space of many days, wherein you can base your comments. You have been challenged! Your credibility is on the line. But I'm afraid your understanding is somewhat limited due to the blindness of faith which so often gets in the way of truth. I want to find out if you are an honest person or a charlatan apologist pretending to be fair and balanced.

So, make up your mind, which is it?
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 7339
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Question for Dan Peterson

Post by Shulem »

Kishkumen wrote:
Wed Dec 11, 2024 9:29 pm
drumdude wrote:
Wed Dec 11, 2024 3:03 pm
We all have our biases, Kish. Your political ones are very similar to Paul’s religious ones.
Really? :roll:

Paul is the one taunting Don in a silly way. He could stand to see how his statements come across.

Don't be a lightweight, Kishy-baby.

This is taunting:


Shulem wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2025 8:19 pm
How about Dan Peterson and Interpreter produce a paper on this subject? Then, I can smack it down! :twisted:

Anyway, for the record book, here is some Vogel snips from another thread about Book of Mormon production.

Hey, President Daniel C. Peterson, I want to kick your ass. Will you please stick it out there so I can do it?
Okay, Paul, I'll work on it. wrote:Image
Thanks, Dan, you're a real pal.

:lol:
This should be fun. wrote:Image
dan vogel wrote:
Sun Jan 12, 2025 8:24 pm

<snip>

Rather, a better argument can be made that Mormon is one of Joseph Smith’s alter egos.

•Both were named after their fathers (Mormon 1:5).

•Both were “large in stature” (Mormon 2:1).

•Both moved with their fathers from the north country to a land southward at about age 10 or 11 (Mormon 1:6).

•Both moves were followed by war with the Lamanite/Indians and a period of peace (Mormon 1:8-12). Andrew Jackson’s army defeated the Seminoles in 1817-18.

•Both lived in a time of apostasy (Mormon 1:14).

•Both had a remarkable manifestation of Jesus at age 15 (Mormon 1:15).

•Both lived in a time when Gadianton robbers (or “secret combinations”), slippery treasures, and magic were prevalent (Mormon 1:17-19).

•Both were instructed to go to a hill and remove a record engraved on gold plates (Mormon 1:3-4).

•Mormon was about 24 years of age, which corresponds to 1830 when Joseph Smith published the Book of Mormon.

<snip>

Oh goody goody gumdrops, lazy learning Peterson is going to step up to the plate. Batter up!

:lol:

Does anyone know where Bradley ran off to? Don! Where are youuuuuuuu?

:lol:
User avatar
Moksha
God
Posts: 7387
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:13 am
Location: Koloburbia

Re: Question for Dan Peterson

Post by Moksha »

Shulem wrote:
Tue Jan 14, 2025 8:26 pm
Does anyone know where Bradley ran off to? Don! Where are youuuuuuuu?

:lol:
Don, his new wife Jasmine, and Kerry Shirts appeared on the first annual Smithmas Superpalooza Hullabaloo of the Coffee with Kish vlog.
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
User avatar
Kishkumen
God
Posts: 8384
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:37 pm
Location: Cassius University
Contact:

Re: Question for Don Bradley

Post by Kishkumen »

Yes, Don is around, very busy in fact. I don’t think this thread is on his list of priorities.
User avatar
IWMP
Pirate
Posts: 1754
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2021 1:46 pm

Re: Question for Don Bradley

Post by IWMP »

I'm not sure that it can be taken any other way than literal. If Joseph Smith was a prophet of an all knowing God, wouldn't God correct Joseph Smith and have him be more clear if the intention was non literal. It's very telling of the times and even if it is a translation and he is translating from prophet's of old then again, they took should have also received revelation from God that isn't racist?
Post Reply