A formal apology...

[_Mary]

Drifting, I know that Chris is quite happy for people to use a pseudonym if they want to protect family and friends. The main thing is support for the sentiments. I hope that there is not too much there that would offend active LDS.

[_Drifting]

Drifting, I know that Chris is quite happy for people to use a pseudonym if they want to protect family and friends. The main thing is support for the sentiments. I hope that there is not too much there that would offend active LDS.

I'm signed up!

[_Mary]

This has come up on Yahoo

Is it fair?

http://news.yahoo.com/mormons-black-pri ... 00296.html

[_why me]

Why me, I don't honestly believe that your arguments are valid.


If you want to use the Bible to justify the church ban on Blacks, then you are going to have a hard time.

In no way do the writers portray Peter as including everyone but the negro. It just isn't there Why me. The fullness of the gospel was to go to all. ALL.

Brigham, Joseph, whoever espoused it as doctrine, got it wrong. Plain and Simple... They were men, fallible men.

Let me try this again: Jesus visited one group of people and he was concerned with the conversion of the jews. He wasn't concerned about the Romans nor was he concerned about the barbarians. He was concerned about the jews. In fact, the Bible mainly documents God's relationship to the jews, his chosen people. Is that racist? Now Paul took the gospel to the gentiles. And some of the apostles were against this. But basically, Jesus was not traveling the world giving his message to the inhabitants of the earth.

[_why me]

Patriarchal blessing were used to determine if some one was black in Brazil. Problem is many Brazilians who were declared to be of the lineage of Ephraim later found black ancestors doing their genealogy. Produced quite the conundrum. It became so common that the brethren just decided to let is slide, with the pending temple opening and all that.

This was my point to Mary. It wasn't a black thing at all. But I don't think that she gets it. Also, the Mormon church never denied membership because of race. They did deny a certain group the priesthood but then again, they also denied women the priesthood. Should they offer an apology to women too?

[_Mary]

Let me try this again: Jesus visited one group of people and he was concerned with the conversion of the jews. He wasn't concerned about the Romans nor was he concerned about the barbarians. He was concerned about the jews. In fact, the Bible mainly documents God's relationship to the jews, his chosen people. Is that racist? Now Paul took the gospel to the gentiles. And some of the apostles were against this. But basically, Jesus was not traveling the world giving his message to the inhabitants of the earth.

Why me, let me try this again. Was the negro specifically excluded from Peter's vision of the white sheet?

[_Buffalo]

Why me, I don't honestly believe that your arguments are valid.


If you want to use the Bible to justify the church ban on Blacks, then you are going to have a hard time.

In no way do the writers portray Peter as including everyone but the negro. It just isn't there Why me. The fullness of the gospel was to go to all. ALL.

Brigham, Joseph, whoever espoused it as doctrine, got it wrong. Plain and Simple... They were men, fallible men.

Let me try this again: Jesus visited one group of people and he was concerned with the conversion of the jews. He wasn't concerned about the Romans nor was he concerned about the barbarians. He was concerned about the jews. In fact, the Bible mainly documents God's relationship to the jews, his chosen people. Is that racist? Now Paul took the gospel to the gentiles. And some of the apostles were against this. But basically, Jesus was not traveling the world giving his message to the inhabitants of the earth.

Why Me, do blacks count as gentiles?

[_Mary]

This was my point to Mary. It wasn't a black thing at all. But I don't think that she gets it. Also, the Mormon church never denied membership because of race. They did deny a certain group the priesthood but then again, they also denied women the priesthood. Should they offer an apology to women too?

Not relevant. All women are denied the priesthood regardless of race or colour.

Since I believe Mary to be the Apostle to the Apostles, and that many women held positions of leadership in the early church - you bet I think the church has got it wrong in denying women equal rights with men. And one day, probably not in my lifetime, when women hold the priesthood, I fully expect there will be an apology coming forth..

[_why me]

you bet I think the church has got it wrong in denying women equal rights with men. And one day, probably not in my lifetime, when women hold the priesthood, I fully expect there will be an apology coming forth..

It has nothing to do with equal rights. And what exactly are equal rights? Do you believe that women have more equality than men in some western societies? It seems so, especially when it comes to child custody. So, what is equality? And can full equality ever be achieved?

I think that this issue of the petition is deeper in your psyche than you wish to admit.

[_Drifting]

This was my point to Mary. It wasn't a black thing at all. But I don't think that she gets it. Also, the Mormon church never denied membership because of race. They did deny a certain group the priesthood but then again, they also denied women the priesthood. Should they offer an apology to women too?

Not relevant. All women are denied the priesthood regardless of race or colour.

Since I believe Mary to be the Apostle to the Apostles, and that many women held positions of leadership in the early church - you bet I think the church has got it wrong in denying women equal rights with men. And one day, probably not in my lifetime, when women hold the priesthood, I fully expect there will be an apology coming forth..

Well maybe not an apology, but perhaps a claim of amnesia with regards to why women were denied it...