Seriously? Dark skin was a metaphor?

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_harmony
_Emeritus
Posts: 18195
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am

Re: Seriously? Dark skin was a metaphor?

Post by _harmony »

Themis wrote:Ok. You are an ass and he is not.


You know, asses take too much abuse around here. Sure, they're small minded, hairy, with big ears and big teeth, but still... their general stubbornness, nasty tempers, and biting stupidity shouldn't be held against them. They are asses, after all.
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
_Themis
_Emeritus
Posts: 13426
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 6:43 pm

Re: Seriously? Dark skin was a metaphor?

Post by _Themis »

harmony wrote:
Themis wrote:Ok. You are an ass and he is not.


You know, asses take too much abuse around here. Sure, they're small minded, hairy, with big ears and big teeth, but still... their general stubbornness, nasty tempers, and biting stupidity shouldn't be held against them. They are asses, after all.


:lol:
42
_malkie
_Emeritus
Posts: 2663
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 11:03 pm

Re: Seriously? Dark skin was a metaphor?

Post by _malkie »

ldsfaqs wrote:
thews wrote:More BS. Your lies just pile atop each other in the hopes someone agrees with your BS. You know the truth.


The only "BS" is coming from you....

You know all about seer stones placed in a hat yet remain silent.


And this is a problem how???
Clearly you don't know your Bible in which Prophets "often" used stones with "revelatory" powers.

You know all about the curse of Cain being black skin... that's the truth.


haa haa.... It's not at all the truth, because those only banned from the Priesthood were those of African Lineage, no matter their skin color. Not only that, but many other races that were just as black or close to African black WERE given the Priesthood, from India, to Central/South America, the Islands, etc.

The "curse" was the denial of the Priesthood for a particular lineage, correct or not.

Do you fancy yourself a respectable liar? Do the stories you have made up make you feel better about the people you've intentionally deceived? Someday Consiglieri, you will meet your maker. Then and only then you can explain why you chose to deceive people by withholding the truth and creating arguments based on distortion in order to deceive them... sleep well.


Odd that I'm defending Consig, even though I know he wouldn't care or want it, the fact is is that it is YOU who are the immoral person here. We are the Mormons. We are the ones who know our religion, and it is YOU who pervert it, and it is YOU who serve the evil one by using a little truth to tell great lies, distorting what is actually true.

Enjoy your sin.....

I had to LOL when I read this.

You see, when I read the post from Thews a couple of pages back, my first thought was that perhaps ldsfaqs had somehow hacked into Thews' account.
NOMinal member

Maksutov: "... if you give someone else the means to always push your buttons, you're lost."
_Droopy
_Emeritus
Posts: 9826
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 4:06 pm

Re: Seriously? Dark skin was a metaphor?

Post by _Droopy »

You know, asses take too much abuse around here. Sure, they're small minded, hairy, with big ears and big teeth, but still... their general stubbornness, nasty tempers, and biting stupidity shouldn't be held against them. They are asses, after all.


Democrats?
Nothing is going to startle us more when we pass through the veil to the other side than to realize how well we know our Father [in Heaven] and how familiar his face is to us

- President Ezra Taft Benson


I am so old that I can remember when most of the people promoting race hate were white.

- Thomas Sowell
_thews
_Emeritus
Posts: 3053
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 2:26 pm

Re: Seriously? Dark skin was a metaphor?

Post by _thews »

ldsfaqs wrote:
thews wrote:More BS. Your lies just pile atop each other in the hopes someone agrees with your BS. You know the truth.


The only "BS" is coming from you....

Really ldsfaqs? Isn't your supposed counter that Joseph Smith used something like 9 different translation methods? How about tea leaves? Was that one of them?


ldsfaqs wrote:
thews wrote:You know all about seer stones placed in a hat yet remain silent.


And this is a problem how???

It's a problem when someone who doesn't know the difference between seer stones and the conflated use of Urim and Thummim to remain silent to keep them in ignorant bliss.


ldsfaqs wrote:Clearly you don't know your Bible in which Prophets "often" used stones with "revelatory" powers.

Clearly you don't know that "revelatory powers" from God are not used to contact/appease evil treasure guardians.

ldsfaqs wrote:
thews wrote:You know all about the curse of Cain being black skin... that's the truth.


haa haa.... It's not at all the truth, because those only banned from the Priesthood were those of African Lineage, no matter their skin color. Not only that, but many other races that were just as black or close to African black WERE given the Priesthood, from India, to Central/South America, the Islands, etc.

Your ignorance knows no boundaries. Say it a hundred more times, you know, since you were a supposed "anti" at some point, but the facts are not on your side and ignorance of those facts isn't going to go away:

http://mormonthink.com/blackweb.htm
3 Nephi 2:15

"And their curse was taken from them, and their skin became white like unto the Nephites."
Jacob 3: 5, 8-9

5 Behold, the Lamanites your brethren, whom ye hate because of their filthiness and the cursing which hath come upon their skins, are more righteous than you; for they have not forgotten the commandment of the Lord, which was given unto our father—that they should have save it were one wife, and concubines they should have none, and there should not be whoredoms committed among them.

8 O my brethren, I fear that unless ye shall repent of your sins that their skins will be whiter than yours, when ye shall be brought with them before the throne of God.
9 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; neither shall ye revile against them because of their filthiness; but ye shall remember your own filthiness, and remember that their filthiness came because of their fathers.


ldsfaqs wrote:The "curse" was the denial of the Priesthood for a particular lineage, correct or not.

More ignorant blather. You can spin your rhetoric till the cows come home, but the bliss you find is in ignorance of the facts.

ldsfaqs wrote:
thews wrote:Do you fancy yourself a respectable liar? Do the stories you have made up make you feel better about the people you've intentionally deceived? Someday Consiglieri, you will meet your maker. Then and only then you can explain why you chose to deceive people by withholding the truth and creating arguments based on distortion in order to deceive them... sleep well.


Odd that I'm defending Consig, even though I know he wouldn't care or want it, the fact is is that it is YOU who are the immoral person here. We are the Mormons. We are the ones who know our religion, and it is YOU who pervert it, and it is YOU who serve the evil one by using a little truth to tell great lies, distorting what is actually true.

Enjoy your sin.....

You are nothing more than a sociopath obiewan. Continue to spout the same tired opinion that contradicts fact, but the truth is the truth and your opinion doesn't mean squat. The quotes above prove this, and until you can acknowledge them in your supposed argument you simply can't be taken seriously.
Last edited by Guest on Tue Mar 27, 2012 5:03 am, edited 1 time in total.
2 Tim 4:3 For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine.
2 Tim 4:4 They will turn their ears away from the truth & turn aside to myths
_thews
_Emeritus
Posts: 3053
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 2:26 pm

Re: Seriously? Dark skin was a metaphor?

Post by _thews »

Themis wrote:
thews wrote:

Really? Please decipher this so that I can understand your supposed point:



Ok. You are an ass and he is not.

Ouch baby, very ouch. Does playing the heavy on a third grade playground make you feel more manly?

Themis wrote:Clear enough for you. I may not agree with consig on a number of LDS issue, and I think he looks to hard to make things fit as he is doing with the black skin being metaphor, but he behaves well all the time, and is much more desirable to discuss issues with.

Ok, so because you like Consig, you find it acceptable that he intentionally deceives those that trust him? What if I were to formulate a hypothesis that the holocaust never happened and sold it to those that wanted to believe it never happened? Would that make it ok because I was some sort of nice guy? Consig knows the truth and uses Mormon rabbit holes to paint a picture using the shadows of dancing flames to deceive those who trust him. He follows the guideline of those who use him to deceive, telling him what he can or cannot say, and he abides by their wishes to sell their snake oil. Do you know what a false witness is? Do you know what a teacher to itching ears is? Do you find the character trait of someone who intentionally deceives as admirable?

Themis wrote:You are not, regardless of whether you are correct or not. You may want to consider that you will get farther with people by behaving better.

I'm rubber and you're glue... neener, neener, neener. Call a spade a spade and a liar a liar. A teacher to itching ears has to sleep too... knowledge of that deceit will make a decent soul question its motives. That's my intent... if Consig chooses to continue his intentional deception, it speaks volumes regarding his character. These poor souls that are being lied to is what's keeping them from the truth. The teachers to itching ears know the deception they teach. You find this admirable? ...I don't.
2 Tim 4:3 For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine.
2 Tim 4:4 They will turn their ears away from the truth & turn aside to myths
_thews
_Emeritus
Posts: 3053
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 2:26 pm

Re: Seriously? Dark skin was a metaphor?

Post by _thews »

harmony wrote:
Themis wrote:Ok. You are an ass and he is not.


You know, asses take too much abuse around here. Sure, they're small minded, hairy, with big ears and big teeth, but still... their general stubbornness, nasty tempers, and biting stupidity shouldn't be held against them. They are asses, after all.

I see the hens are checking in. Please tell us harmony, as I've asked you many times, how do you reconcile rejecting polygamy in Mormon heaven? Doesn't that one thing damn your soul per the D&C? Do you find bliss in ignorance? I suppose you'll ignore the question again, because you don't really believe in Joseph Smith's truth claims, but can't admit it while pretending to believe... isn't that right?
2 Tim 4:3 For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine.
2 Tim 4:4 They will turn their ears away from the truth & turn aside to myths
Post Reply