Think racism isn't taught to Mormon kids? Think again.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

I said no such thing. I said you should read the Bible and Book of Mormon with a degree of maturity and sophistication, so you can properly understand those books and what is contained in them.

Because that's what should be required to understand the writings of barbaric tribesmen dictated by a polygamous god? Hrm... I'm not sure it's that difficult to understand.

And in fact, when the Book of Mormon says God curses someone with dark skin because said individual is so very bad, it doesn't take much sophistication to interpret that as God uses dark skin to mark evil people.

You, on the other hand, claim racists wrote the Book of Mormon and we should disregard their racist screeds.

- VRDRC

[_LDSToronto]

Who cares?!? It is evidence of change that you claim you do not see.

Hey, women had the right to bless, wash, and anoint the sick. That's a change, too, right?


You see, Tobin, the problem with saying that blacks receiving the priesthood is a sign that the church disavows it's racist past is that, well, the church has never disavowed it's racist past. I've seen no evidence of repentance or apology or even explanation. Nor has the fundamental theme of the Book of Mormon changed - dark-skinned Lamanites are generally evil, fair-skinned Nephites are generally good, until they behaved like those loathsome, filthy Lamanites.

So, where again is all that wonderfully positive change you keep going on about?

When leaders of the church disavow things like this, like President Hinckley did on CNN - then that is a clear sign that it is on its way out. Of course you can find evidence of it still. It takes time to remove things like this.

It takes 8 years to change an important doctrine and correct members? Baloney. When members were attributing false doctrine to church leaders in 2008, there was no hesitancy in correcting them: http://www.ldschurchnews.com/articles/5 ... ement.html

So I'm calling BS - when an official statement comes out and says the LDS Church no longer teaches nor believes to be doctrine the notion that human beings will become gods, then you can come talk to me about it. Until then we all know that this doctrine has not changed.

As I've said, change is happening. Many Mormons are speaking out about how gays are treated by the Church. There is a generational conflict going on and the leadership isn't apt to change overnight. It took over a century to remove the ban of blacks from the priesthood. It will take some time to see change in these policies as well.

Well, what I'm seeing are a bunch of Mormons too scared to leave their church for fear of social consequences and so are attempting to sugarcoat a whole bunch of it's teachings. My advice - speak with your feet. Get out of the church, stop with the new-order BS, and let your absence speak volumes.

H.

[_Bob Loblaw]

Well, what I'm seeing are a bunch of Mormons too scared to leave their church for fear of social consequences and so are attempting to sugarcoat a whole bunch of it's teachings. My advice - speak with your feet. Get out of the church, stop with the new-order b***s***, and let your absence speak volumes.

H.

Ya, that's about right. Be patient, they tell us, and Mormonism will catch up with the rest of the world.

No, thanks.

[_Rufus]

So the Book of Mormon was not racist, the Nephites were? Or is it that if there be mistakes they be the mistakes of men? or was/is Joseph Smith correct when he proclaimed the book to be the most correct book on the face of the earth? (despite all of the horrendous grammatical mistakes in the original test, but I digress)?

Oh My God! It is so confusing the amount of mental energy some are willing to put themselves through to try to make everything fit into its little box.

Circular reasoncing creates circular reasoning.

Thank-you Tobin for your enlightenment.

[_Tobin]

I said no such thing. I said you should read the Bible and Book of Mormon with a degree of maturity and sophistication, so you can properly understand those books and what is contained in them.

Because that's what should be required to understand the writings of barbaric tribesmen dictated by a polygamous god? Hrm... I'm not sure it's that difficult to understand.

And in fact, when the Book of Mormon says God curses someone with dark skin because said individual is so very bad, it doesn't take much sophistication to interpret that as God uses dark skin to mark evil people.

You, on the other hand, claim racists wrote the Book of Mormon and we should disregard their racist screeds.

- VRDRC

Again, I made no such claims. I said the Bible (and Book of Mormon) should be read with a degree of maturity and sophistication. Naturally, you should be repelled by biased or bigoted statements in either book. That should be used as an example of what not to believe and do. That is why it is necessary to read it with a degree of maturity and sophistications so you don't blindly accept and hold incorrect views (and use those books to justify those views as is often done).

[_Tobin]

Who cares?!? It is evidence of change that you claim you do not see.

Hey, women had the right to bless, wash, and anoint the sick. That's a change, too, right?

They still can in the temple.

You see, Tobin, the problem with saying that blacks receiving the priesthood is a sign that the church disavows it's racist past is that, well, the church has never disavowed it's racist past. I've seen no evidence of repentance or apology or even explanation. Nor has the fundamental theme of the Book of Mormon changed - dark-skinned Lamanites are generally evil, fair-skinned Nephites are generally good, until they behaved like those loathsome, filthy Lamanites.

Of course the Church should apologize and take additional steps to separate itself from its past. As far as the general claim that the Book of Mormon is a racist book however. That is a stretch. If that were true, then the Book of Mormon wouldn't have this view that the Lamanites were good and the Nephites (the white people) were loathsome, filthy and evil at times too. That just destroys your claim about it being a racist book. Now, I do agree there are racist statements in there. Those should be highlighted and used as an example of what not to do since clearly it isn't a true principle.

So, where again is all that wonderfully positive change you keep going on about?

Blacks can hold the priesthood and enjoy all the blessings they were denied. That is a positive change.

When leaders of the church disavow things like this, like President Hinckley did on CNN - then that is a clear sign that it is on its way out. Of course you can find evidence of it still. It takes time to remove things like this.

It takes 8 years to change an important doctrine and correct members? Baloney. When members were attributing false doctrine to church leaders in 2008, there was no hesitancy in correcting them: http://www.ldschurchnews.com/articles/5 ... ement.html
So I'm calling b***s*** - when an official statement comes out and says the LDS Church no longer teaches nor believes to be doctrine the notion that human beings will become gods, then you can come talk to me about it. Until then we all know that this doctrine has not changed.

Again, this is a process that takes time. Obviously, you recognize there was a denial made in the interview and subsequent statements made by the leadership of the Church however.

As I've said, change is happening. Many Mormons are speaking out about how gays are treated by the Church. There is a generational conflict going on and the leadership isn't apt to change overnight. It took over a century to remove the ban of blacks from the priesthood. It will take some time to see change in these policies as well.

Well, what I'm seeing are a bunch of Mormons too scared to leave their church for fear of social consequences and so are attempting to sugarcoat a whole bunch of it's teachings. My advice - speak with your feet. Get out of the church, stop with the new-order b***s***, and let your absence speak volumes.

That is unproductive. Protesting outside the buildings isn't a positive way to influence people. Standing up inside, bearing your testimony, showing kindness to everyone and leading a Christ-like example is a much better use of your time.

[_Tobin]

So the Book of Mormon was not racist, the Nephites were? Or is it that if there be mistakes they be the mistakes of men? or was/is Joseph Smith correct when he proclaimed the book to be the most correct book on the face of the earth? (despite all of the horrendous grammatical mistakes in the original test, but I digress)?

Oh My God! It is so confusing the amount of mental energy some are willing to put themselves through to try to make everything fit into its little box.

Circular reasoncing creates circular reasoning.

Thank-you Tobin for your enlightenment.

Try this thought on. Maybe books like the Bible (and Book of Mormon) were written by people and those people often hold incorrect views that make their way into those books that they write (no matter how inspired the book may be). Then with a little more thought, you might recognize this happens, identify it in the writing and discount and reject such views while embracing the rest of the inspired text.

[_Equality]

So the Book of Mormon was not racist, the Nephites were? Or is it that if there be mistakes they be the mistakes of men? or was/is Joseph Smith correct when he proclaimed the book to be the most correct book on the face of the earth? (despite all of the horrendous grammatical mistakes in the original test, but I digress)?

Oh My God! It is so confusing the amount of mental energy some are willing to put themselves through to try to make everything fit into its little box.

Circular reasoncing creates circular reasoning.

Thank-you Tobin for your enlightenment.

Try this thought on. Maybe books like the Bible (and Book of Mormon) were written by people and those people often hold incorrect views that make their way into those books that they write (no matter how inspired the book may be). Then with a little more thought, you might recognize this happens, identify it in the writing and discount and reject such views while embracing the rest of the inspired text.

Why doesn't God just "inspire" the people with incorrect views not to include the incorrect views? If God can communicate with mortals and give them "inspiration" why is he limited so that he can't correct their incorrect views? Doesn't make any sense. It's like if my kid writes a history paper and gives it to me to review, and I correct half his errors but leave the other half in the paper without correction. Is it my kid's fault or mine that the errors are printed in the final paper he submits?

[_Tobin]

Try this thought on. Maybe books like the Bible (and Book of Mormon) were written by people and those people often hold incorrect views that make their way into those books that they write (no matter how inspired the book may be). Then with a little more thought, you might recognize this happens, identify it in the writing and discount and reject such views while embracing the rest of the inspired text.

Why doesn't God just "inspire" the people with incorrect views not to include the incorrect views? If God can communicate with mortals and give them "inspiration" why is he limited so that he can't correct their incorrect views? Doesn't make any sense. It's like if my kid writes a history paper and gives it to me to review, and I correct half his errors but leave the other half in the paper without correction. Is it my kid's fault or mine that the errors are printed in the final paper he submits?

People aren't God's sock puppets and are therefore imperfect. God still uses imperfect people to achieve his purposes. We should recognize this nature and be a bit more realistic about it.

[_moksha]

You can not just read things in the Bible or Book of Mormon and simply accept them at face value.

Oh dear.

Either God changed the Lamanites skin colour to denote them as less righteous (Making God racially discriminatory) or the Nephites mistakenly thought God did it.

In truth, skin color changes for an entire group of people do not occur in either manner. It took Sauron and Saruman a long time to create their Orcs. You need to consider a greater depth to the story's timeline.