Did Elder Snow Misrepresent the Truth on National TV

[_solomarineris]

So what do you make of his statement?

I thought His answer was pretty good.
What else did you want him to tell; "Oh yea we F@#*ked up on this one".

[_Fence Sitter]

So what do you make of his statement?

I thought His answer was pretty good.
What else did you want him to tell; "Oh yea we F@#*ked up on this one".

Yes that is exactly what I want him to say.
I know it will not happen.
I'd settle for "We were wrong".

[_ldsfaqs]

When Elder Snow misrepresnded (I'm being kind) church doctine...he should have read up on first Presidency pronouncments....for clearly...before 1978...the church KNEW full well the reasons for the ban...

Here is a letter from the first presidency stating that it was not a policy but church doctrine..in fact a commandment from God Himself:



August 17, 1949

The attitude of the Church with reference to Negroes remains as it has always stood. It is NOT a matter of the declaration of a POLICY but of DIRECT COMMANDMENT FROM THE LORD, on which is FOUNDED THE DOCTRINE of the Church from the days of its organization, to the effect that Negroes may become members of the Church but that they are not entitled to the priesthood at the present time. The prophets of the Lord have made several statements as to the operation of the principle. President Brigham Young said: “Why are so many of the inhabitants of the earth cursed with a SKIN OF BLACKNESS? It comes in consequence of their fathers rejecting the power of the holy priesthood, and the law of God. They will go down to death. And when all the rest of the children have received their blessings in the holy priesthood, then that curse will be removed from the seed of Cain, and they will then come up and possess the priesthood, and receive all the blessings which we now are entitled to.”

President Wilford Woodruff made the following statement: “The day will come when all that race will be redeemed and possess all the blessings which we now have.” The position of the Church regarding the Negro may be understood when another doctrine of the Church is kept in mind, namely, that THE CONDUCT OF SPIRITS IN THE PREMORTAL EXISTENCE has some determining effect upon the conditions and circumstances under which these spirits take on mortality and that while the details of this principle have not been made known, the mortality is a privilege that is given to those who maintain their first estate; and that the worth of the privilege is so great that spirits are willing to come to earth and take on bodies no matter what the handicap may be as to the kind of bodies they are to secure; and that among the handicaps, failure of the right to enjoy in mortality the blessings of the priesthood is a handicap which spirits are willing to assume in order that they might come to earth. Under this principle there is no injustice whatsoever involved in this deprivation as to the holding of the priesthood by the Negroes.

George Albert Smith
J. Reuben Clark
David. O. McKay

1. Please tell me in this OFFICIAL pronouncement, what is actually "racist"???

2. I see two "assumptions" made from scripture that MAY or MAY NOT apply to the issue, and then I see statements of hope that the Priesthood WOULD eventually be given and that by not having it there is no handicap.

3. The very fact that "assumptions" were made into official pronouncement's as "reasons" for the ban, proves unequivocally that the Church did not know and still doesn't officially know the reasons for the ban.

4. If you actually READ the pronouncement with basic ENGLISH understanding, you would know that the "Commandment" and "Doctrine" that was being referred to is that those of African Lineage were not to have the Priesthood YET.

There is no "doctrine" claim as to the assumptions. They added the assumptions to TRY and ATTEMPT to "explain" the doctrine. But obviously, since it hadn't been revealed, we all know they failed.

Oh, lo and behold, there are actually "human beings" in the Church, that sometimes give opinions on things that they don't really know the answer for. Not being valiant in pre-mortality, or not following the laws of God, according to their understandings of scripture at the time were reasonable "assumptions" of the reasons why the ban existed. False assumptions, but still.....

Further, you people ignore the entire history of the issue and cherry pick it. You ignore the majority of the saints leader or not who didn't actually know the reason for the ban. Sure, THERE WHERE beliefs by many stated..... But beliefs are not doctrines. The only doctrine of the Church was the ban. There NEVER was a doctrine on the WHY. Use your brains..... Statments of maybe some where valient, or there was some law broken way back are clearly just assumptions. They don't have the same weight of doctrine like other things.....

AND GUESS WHY???

Because the scriptures simply don't say that "blacks were denied the priesthood BECAUSE of these reasons".

In case you people didn't know, actual DOCTRINE of the Church only comes from Revealed scripture, and official revealed doctrine. The ONLY "doctrine" that isn't spelled out that the Church believes in and follows, and has always been the same is that we have a Mother in Heaven.

Assumptions on the Priesthood ban never arose to "doctrine" level.

And FYI..... I was in this Church before the ban was lifted, and the Church was so non-racist that I didn't even know of the ban until it was lifted. It and the Catholic Church were the ONLY non-racist religion and people I had been around. All other religions, and many of the general public WERE racist, but not the Mormons and Catholics.

Further, what was said earlier by I'm guessing an LDS member, he is correct. There were MANY in the Church who believed and told others that they didn't know the reasons for the ban. But yes, you are right. There WERE ALSO those who believed they knew the reasons for the ban.

And guess what???

That's a CLEAR indicator that the "assumptions" whatever assumption it was, was NEVER "doctrine" of the Church. Because guess what..... Members know the basic doctrines of the Church. They only argue and disagree on "fringe issues". Reasons for the ban was clearly a "fringe issue" for which there was no official doctrine on.

Get a clue people..... I rejoined this Church because I finally realized that it and it's people WAS NOT "racist" as claimed and seemed obvious at first. It's just a big lie.... and you gullible fall for it, and don't learn more.

[_ldsfaqs]

Yes that is exactly what I want him to say.
I know it will not happen.
I'd settle for "We were wrong".

Problem is.... They DID say "they were wrong".... about some of the assumptions. But, you don't care about the truth and are only interested in bashing. You want them to say they were wrong about there being a ban in the first place.

Ever consider that maybe it's YOU who are wrong???
Ever consider that maybe God impliment the ban for a reason??? Ever consider that it wasn't because of racism in the Church (oh those racist Abolitionist Mormons), but it was because of the racism in the world, the slavery etc. toward the black African????

Use your brain.... Racists aren't abolitionists. Racists don't teach love and tolerance of your follow men, no matter the color, etc.

Cherry picking history, and misrepresenting it is not "truth". When are you people going to learn that???

[_DrW]

When Elder Snow misrepresnded (I'm being kind) church doctine...he should have read up on first Presidency pronouncments....for clearly...before 1978...the church KNEW full well the reasons for the ban...

Here is a letter from the first presidency stating that it was not a policy but church doctrine..in fact a commandment from God Himself:

August 17, 1949

The attitude of the Church with reference to Negroes remains as it has always stood. It is NOT a matter of the declaration of a POLICY but of DIRECT COMMANDMENT FROM THE LORD, on which is FOUNDED THE DOCTRINE of the Church from the days of its organization, to the effect that Negroes may become members of the Church but that they are not entitled to the priesthood at the present time. The prophets of the Lord have made several statements as to the operation of the principle. President Brigham Young said: “Why are so many of the inhabitants of the earth cursed with a SKIN OF BLACKNESS? It comes in consequence of their fathers rejecting the power of the holy priesthood, and the law of God. They will go down to death. And when all the rest of the children have received their blessings in the holy priesthood, then that curse will be removed from the seed of Cain, and they will then come up and possess the priesthood, and receive all the blessings which we now are entitled to.”

President Wilford Woodruff made the following statement: “The day will come when all that race will be redeemed and possess all the blessings which we now have.” The position of the Church regarding the Negro may be understood when another doctrine of the Church is kept in mind, namely, that THE CONDUCT OF SPIRITS IN THE PREMORTAL EXISTENCE has some determining effect upon the conditions and circumstances under which these spirits take on mortality and that while the details of this principle have not been made known, the mortality is a privilege that is given to those who maintain their first estate; and that the worth of the privilege is so great that spirits are willing to come to earth and take on bodies no matter what the handicap may be as to the kind of bodies they are to secure; and that among the handicaps, failure of the right to enjoy in mortality the blessings of the priesthood is a handicap which spirits are willing to assume in order that they might come to earth. Under this principle there is no injustice whatsoever involved in this deprivation as to the holding of the priesthood by the Negroes.

George Albert Smith
J. Reuben Clark
David. O. McKay

1. Please tell me in this OFFICIAL pronouncement, what is actually "racist"???

“Why are so many of the inhabitants of the earth cursed with a SKIN OF BLACKNESS? It comes in consequence of their fathers rejecting the power of the holy priesthood, and the law of God. They will go down to death. And when all the rest of the children have received their blessings in the holy priesthood, then that curse will be removed from the seed of Cain, and they will then come up and possess the priesthood, and receive all the blessings which we now are entitled to.”

ldsfaqs,

Sometimes I simply cannot believe that any rational adult would say some of the things you say on this board. This is one of those times.

How is falsely claiming that God said SKIN of BLACKNESS is a CURSE not racist?

It is not only blatantly racist, it demonstrates that the the individual making the claim is delusional, or lying, or both.

[_moksha]

We know that it was inspired, and we know that the former reasons given are wrong, and we know it certainly wasn't racist, but we have no idea why it was instituted in the first place.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

We know it wasn't inspired and we know it was wrong. We know it was very racist and also rather blasphemous invoking the name of God to justify our bigotry. However, we are left with anonymous cowards to step forth on the internet and set the record straight for our collective redemption. This action was clearly wrong, but now that further light and knowledge have entered the world starting in 1978, it is up to us anonymous cowards to proclaim it.

Sometimes truths are left unspoken till some wacko members break the chain of command and speak up. Even when our voices seem impotent there are still strap-ons.

[_DrW]

We know that it was inspired, and we know that the former reasons given are wrong, and we know it certainly wasn't racist, but we have no idea why it was instituted in the first place.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

We know it wasn't inspired and we know it was wrong. We know it was very racist and also rather blasphemous invoking the name of God to justify our bigotry. However, we are left with anonymous cowards to step forth on the internet and set the record straight for our collective redemption. This action was clearly wrong, but now that further light and knowledge have entered the world starting in 1978, it is up to us anonymous cowards to proclaim it.

Sometimes truths are left unspoken till some wacko members break the chain of command and speak up. Even when our voices seem impotent there are still strap-ons.

moksha,

As I have said before. Please do not leave us.

(Now, if you could just explain what a "voice strap-on" really is.)

[_Drifting]

Moksha, if it was wrong and uninspired yet the First Presidency wrote a letter stating it ws right and inspired. How can Mormons trust anything the First Presidency says?

[_ldsfaqs]

by the way.... I made a mistake (late night tired, & too much anti-mormonism on the brain).

I indicated in the first above post that "being less valiant" was one of the assumptions made in the official pronouncement. That however is false.... The Official Announcement ONLY states that the pre-mortal life has "some bearing" on our mortal existance. They don't indicate "why". Assumptions outside of the official pronouncement on the "less valient" idea are just that, even more assumption.

[_ldsfaqs]

1. Please tell me in this OFFICIAL pronouncement, what is actually "racist"???

“Why are so many of the inhabitants of the earth cursed with a SKIN OF BLACKNESS? It comes in consequence of their fathers rejecting the power of the holy priesthood, and the law of God. They will go down to death. And when all the rest of the children have received their blessings in the holy priesthood, then that curse will be removed from the seed of Cain, and they will then come up and possess the priesthood, and receive all the blessings which we now are entitled to.”

ldsfaqs,

Sometimes I simply cannot believe that any rational adult would say some of the things you say on this board. This is one of those times.

How is falsely claiming that God said SKIN of BLACKNESS is a CURSE not racist?

It is not only blatantly racist, it demonstrates that the the individual making the claim is delusional, or lying, or both.

You need to learn the difference between interpretation of scripture and social convention and actual racism.

To "some" people the scripture seems to indicate that those of African lineage (blacks) were under a curse. That's not racism, that's simply repeating what they believe the scripture states.

No ones questioning that it was a "wrong" belief, but "racism" is a far different story and charge, a false one at that.

Do you think you're the ONLY ONE to look at statements and like a child and think they're racism???
I left the Church because I too thought it was racist in it's past. OOOO aahhh..... You're so special! So, who's the actual "rational adult"??? Your thinking like a child in judgment of things, ignoring history and context, as well as using modern social convention and liberal political correctness is YOU being a "rational adult"??? You're not the first to think YOU'RE the only one being "rational" while Mormons were/are racist!

Sorry, but there is simply MORE to the story..... Which mean's you're NOT the "rational adult" you think you are, and also means you aren't telling the truth. I know, because I've been there. Mock as you in your childishness will, but I know what the actual truth is.