My problems with the R&P Statement

[_Shulem]

I've heard the curse of cain doctrine preached in church by those who claimed to be moved by the so-called Mormon holy ghost and bore their testimony and witness in the name of jesus christ. That's pretty much the power of Mormonism -- and it's all a bunch of garbage. I don't believe in any of those testimonies I heard during all my years in Mormonism. Garbage!

Paul O

[_Fence Sitter]

There is a line of apologetic argument (promoted by Brant Gardner, among others, if I recall) that says that the racist passages in the Book of Mormon are accurate presentations of the fallible, racist attitudes of the culture (and Prophets) of that time and place.

So these passages can be ignored from a doctrinal standpoint, but serve as an evidence of the authenticity of the record, since we would expect such attitudes from those people.

So God, when he has the chance to delete these racist teaching, still allows Joseph Smith to translate them, because 190 years in the future, when his chosen people finally figure out that they have been racist all this time, they can also point to the cultural racism in the Book of Mormon in past people favored by God.

It's another bulls eye!

[_Bazooka]

There is a line of apologetic argument (promoted by Brant Gardner, among others, if I recall) that says that the racist passages in the Book of Mormon are accurate presentations of the fallible, racist attitudes of the culture (and Prophets) of that time and place.

So these passages can be ignored from a doctrinal standpoint, but serve as an evidence of the authenticity of the record, since we would expect such attitudes from those people.

So God, when he has the chance to delete these racist teaching, still allows Joseph Smith to translate them, because 190 years in the future, when his chosen people finally figure out that they have been racist all this time, they can also point to the cultural racism in the Book of Mormon in past people favored by God.

It's another bulls eye!

When in "Race and the Priesthood" they pinpoint the racist ideas and theories, that influenced the one person on earth who had a direct interaction with God, probably came from the racism that existed within the culture of the day. Why didn't they also examine the very real possibility that those racist idea and theories were reinforced (if not started) in Brigham Young's mind by the racism of the Book of Mormon peoples, as told within the key scriptures that he studied daily?

[_bcspace]

The new R&P Statement says this:

"Today, the Church disavows the theories advanced in the past that black skin is a sign of divine disfavor or curse...."

Problem...The Book of Mormon teaches this:

"And he [God] 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 [note: flints are dark black]; 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." (2 Nephi 5:21)

Both of these statements CANNOT BE TRUE! If the R&B Statement is false, then why did the FP approve it? If they approved it, WHY did they not sign it? If the Book of Mormon statement is FALSE, then how much more of the book is false, or is it all false? The Law of Contradiction: black and white: black cannot also be white, and white cannot also be black. Both cannot be true at that same time.

THAT is my problem with the R&P Statement.

I addressed that in a thread on the MDDB. My conclusion is contextual. the key is 'theories advanced in the past'. What theories in the past? The theories in the recent past. Thus the disavowal is related only to the recent ban.

In addition, besides the context given that supports BY as a prophet and the ban as doctrinal/inspired, there is the question of what the Church means by disavow as there are multiple possibilities. They could simply be distancing themselves from the explanations given in the sense that they don't know why in which case it becomes the same answer as has always been given. Basically the Church is invoking 'plausible deniability'. It does seem that they are merely distancing themselves from the issue rather than actually stating the explanations are wrong and give their own explanation which is the beliefs at the time.

Elsewhere the doctrinal tie-in between the curse and mark of Cain and the curse and mark of the Lamanites remains (PofGP Institute Manual Moses 5 for example). The 'Old Testament explanation', that in times past the Lord has withheld the Priesthood based on lineage remains (PofGP Institute Manual Abraham 1 for example).

I'm having less and less of a problem with it myself. Basically the Church has told you nothing new while knowing that you will think they are. Yet another successful deflection of a molehill being made into a mountain. The prophets must indeed be inspired.

[_Tobin]

Tobin, so you're saying the author of the Book of Mormon was wrong?

I'm pointing out that the Nephites were human-beings and as capable of racism and bigotry as we are.

That the Mormon scripture is wrong?

The Book of Mormon is a generational record of MAN's dealings with God. It was written by men - please try to keep that in mind.

[_Tobin]

Tobin, so you're saying the author of the Book of Mormon was wrong? That the Mormon scripture is wrong? Because whatever you say, the fact is the Church doesn't believe that to be true and it will never denounce its own scriptures. And if we cannot deduce what the "divine" thinks about this matter through the scriptures then how can you know anything about the divine?

There is a line of apologetic argument (promoted by Brant Gardner, among others, if I recall) that says that the racist passages in the Book of Mormon are accurate presentations of the fallible, racist attitudes of the culture (and Prophets) of that time and place.

So these passages can be ignored from a doctrinal standpoint, but serve as an evidence of the authenticity of the record, since we would expect such attitudes from those people.

Hardly.

[_ZelphtheGreat]

"And he [God] 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 [note: flints are dark black]; 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." (2 Nephi 5:21)

------------------

Having made flint arrowheads for a few decades I will disagree with you. Some are gray, some almost clear and some near white. Even Obsidian which makes stunning arrowheads and blades are not all black. You have the idea right and it is telling that no GA's signed these public statements, but the idea of flint as just dark does not work.

[_DannyBoy]

Ok, what does the verse mean that "they had become lie unto a flint"???

"And he [God] 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 [note: flints are dark black]; 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." (2 Nephi 5:21)

------------------

Having made flint arrowheads for a few decades I will disagree with you. Some are gray, some almost clear and some near white. Even Obsidian which makes stunning arrowheads and blades are not all black. You have the idea right and it is telling that no GA's signed these public statements, but the idea of flint as just dark does not work.

[_DannyBoy]

PROBLEM:

The Prophets were racist in the time of Nephi and wrote racist, and therefore, WRONG things?

Ok...tells me we cannot trust the Book of Mormon in anything it says, because it may be wRONG things which were influenced by the culture at the time.

Basically, Mormon Apologists are saying: "Look, every generation can choose which Verses to believe as true, and which to say these things were wrong interpretations at the time".

Conclusion: The Scriptures are MEANINGLESS and untrustworthy guides.

Tobin, so you're saying the author of the Book of Mormon was wrong?

I'm pointing out that the Nephites were human-beings and as capable of racism and bigotry as we are.

That the Mormon scripture is wrong?

The Book of Mormon is a generational record of MAN's dealings with God. It was written by men - please try to keep that in mind.

[_Tobin]

PROBLEM:

The Prophets were racist in the time of Nephi and wrote racist, and therefore, WRONG things?

Ok...tells me we cannot trust the Book of Mormon in anything it says, because it may be wRONG things which were influenced by the culture at the time.

Basically, Mormon Apologists are saying: "Look, every generation can choose which Verses to believe as true, and which to say these things were wrong interpretations at the time".

Conclusion: The Scriptures are MEANINGLESS and untrustworthy guides.

Again, you and I have a different view of what the scriptures are. The scriptures are merely a generational record written by men of their experiences with God. They aren't meant to answer all your questions and contain many of the biases of the men that wrote them. They are merely meant to remind you that there is a God and that you should seek him yourself and get your answers from and experience him yourself. They were never meant to be a substitute for God.