Question for Don Bradley

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 8858
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Re: Question for Don Bradley

Post by Shulem »

I Have Questions wrote:
Tue Jul 28, 2026 12:08 pm
...It's just playing at spin doctoring....

Yep, and examples have been expressed in this thread insomuch as Don Bradley & Bryan Richards of gospeldoctrine.com seem to be in the apologetic bed🩷 together enjoying their moment under the sun.

Don Bradley wrote:However, despite their genetic and geographical isolation...
Bryan Richards wrote:The consequences of the curse include 1) the loss of the gospel, 2) the land becomes barren and unfruitful, and 3) a mark of dark skin to cause a separation from the children of God.


------------------------------------------------
Hi Don! You're late to the party, baby.

;)
I Have Questions
God
Posts: 4269
Joined: Tue May 23, 2023 9:09 am

Re: Question for Don Bradley

Post by I Have Questions »

Shulem wrote:
Tue Jul 28, 2026 5:49 pm
I Have Questions wrote:
Tue Jul 28, 2026 12:08 pm
...It's just playing at spin doctoring....

Yep, and examples have been expressed in this thread insomuch as Don Bradley & Bryan Richards of gospeldoctrine.com seem to be in the apologetic bed🩷 together enjoying their moment under the sun.

Don Bradley wrote:However, despite their genetic and geographical isolation...
Bryan Richards wrote:The consequences of the curse include 1) the loss of the gospel, 2) the land becomes barren and unfruitful, and 3) a mark of dark skin to cause a separation from the children of God.


------------------------------------------------
Hi Don! You're late to the party, baby.

;)
What does Don mean by “genetic and geographical isolation”?
Premise 1. Eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable.
Premise 2. The best evidence for the Book of Mormon is eyewitness testimony.
Conclusion. Therefore, the best evidence for the Book of Mormon is notoriously unreliable.
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 8858
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Re: Question for Don Bradley

Post by Shulem »

I Have Questions wrote:
Tue Jul 28, 2026 6:15 pm
What does Don mean by “genetic and geographical isolation”?

I'm sure the answer is somewhere in here...

Image
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 8858
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Re: Question for Don Bradley

Post by Shulem »

I Have Questions wrote:
Tue Jul 28, 2026 12:08 pm
The Church in an anonymous gospel topics essay claims to disavow the theory that black skin is a sign of disfavour in the eyes of God, whilst simultaneously promoting the doctrine in the Book of Mormon that black skin is a sign of disfavour in the eyes of God. If the Church really did disavow that "theory" they would have removed all traces of it from Church scriptures. They haven't, so they don't really mean they disavow it. It's just playing at spin doctoring. Nobody, no Apostle, no Apologist, has a good explanation for the conflict between what is said in Race And The Priesthood, and what is said in The Book of Mormon, and nobody has a good answer for why obvious racist teachings are still being promoted by the Church.

You can bet that critics are keeping track as is A.I. through the Internet at large. A powerful collection of minds forming a massive Supermind has all of this under wraps! The Church has demonstrated a deceptive response for the purpose of trying to maintain divine authority of the current prophets which was passed down to them from the very same Spirit-inspired® prophets they have now disavowed. The whole thing is quite the spectacle to behold! The Old Mormon Church with all of their prophets and apostles have been thrown under the bus. The divine inspiration of the past is as a broken chain in which the Holy Ghost is severed insomuch as leaders today deny the Holy Ghost in order to save face. It's really that simple.

I testify with all my mind, heart, and soul, that Mormon priesthood authority is a manmade construct, a religious power grab designed to control people and maintain a system of beliefs affixed with penalties (scare tactics) for those who fail to comply.

Amen.
I Have Questions
God
Posts: 4269
Joined: Tue May 23, 2023 9:09 am

Re: Question for Don Bradley

Post by I Have Questions »

Shulem wrote:
Fri Jul 31, 2026 1:44 pm
I Have Questions wrote:
Tue Jul 28, 2026 12:08 pm
The Church in an anonymous gospel topics essay claims to disavow the theory that black skin is a sign of disfavour in the eyes of God, whilst simultaneously promoting the doctrine in the Book of Mormon that black skin is a sign of disfavour in the eyes of God. If the Church really did disavow that "theory" they would have removed all traces of it from Church scriptures. They haven't, so they don't really mean they disavow it. It's just playing at spin doctoring. Nobody, no Apostle, no Apologist, has a good explanation for the conflict between what is said in Race And The Priesthood, and what is said in The Book of Mormon, and nobody has a good answer for why obvious racist teachings are still being promoted by the Church.

You can bet that critics are keeping track as is A.I. through the Internet at large. A powerful collection of minds forming a massive Supermind has all of this under wraps! The Church has demonstrated a deceptive response for the purpose of trying to maintain divine authority of the current prophets which was passed down to them from the very same Spirit-inspired® prophets they have now disavowed. The whole thing is quite the spectacle to behold! The Old Mormon Church with all of their prophets and apostles have been thrown under the bus. The divine inspiration of the past is as a broken chain in which the Holy Ghost is severed insomuch as leaders today deny the Holy Ghost in order to save face. It's really that simple.

I testify with all my mind, heart, and soul, that Mormon priesthood authority is a manmade construct, a religious power grab designed to control people and maintain a system of beliefs affixed with penalties (scare tactics) for those who fail to comply.

Amen.
I remember discussing this conflict with a poster on here who was an active member and a bishop at the time. I cannot for the life of me recall the posters handle. Basically, he said members know not to take Race and the Priesthood seriously, they know it’s just spin doctoring for the unworthy masses. His position and what he viewed the Church position as, was that black skin most definitely was the sign of a curse from God, but the Church and members just can’t say that out loud anymore. He was basically saying Race and the Priesthood was the Church lying through its teeth to avoid social criticism.
Premise 1. Eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable.
Premise 2. The best evidence for the Book of Mormon is eyewitness testimony.
Conclusion. Therefore, the best evidence for the Book of Mormon is notoriously unreliable.
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 8858
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Question for Don Bradley

Post by Shulem »

I Have Questions wrote:
Fri Jul 31, 2026 4:00 pm
He was basically saying Race and the Priesthood was the Church lying through its teeth to avoid social criticism.

Bruce R. McConkie admitted/confessed that he and his fellow prophets were in the dark, being led by the spirit of man who in effect was under the influence of Satan:
Bruce R. McConkie, 1978 wrote:Forget everything that I have said [My racist BS], or what President Brigham Young or President George Q. Cannon or whomsoever [all former prophets & apostles] has said in days past [old news] that is contrary [in opposition] to the present [supersedes] revelation. We spoke with a limited [retarded] understanding and WITHOUT the light and knowledge [Holy Ghost] that now has come.

So, Bruce-baby is basically admitting how light and knowledge of the Holy Ghost® finally came to rescue the brethren from Satan who was responsible for the original false revelations that maintained the priesthood ban throughout generations of Mormonism. They were led by prophets who were in the dark, lacked spiritual light and knowledge, and did not have the Spirit® to guide them in matters involving racism.

I wonder what our friend, Don Bradley, might have to say about spiritually retarded Bruce R. McConkie?

:lol:
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 8858
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Light and Knowledge

Post by Shulem »

McConkie's watered down Mormonism creates an excuse to throw all the former apostles and prophets under the bus. He was a liar and a rat.
Bruce R. McConkie, 1978 wrote:We spoke with a limited understanding and without the light and knowledge that now has come.

Joseph Smith's Mormonism declared that light and knowledge was poured out by revelation into the hearts of the prophets whereby the priests would be clothed with salvation, hence the very brethren that made up the royal priesthood would march forth until met by the Bridegroom himself. That was their light and salvation and by every word they marched, line upon line and precept upon precept:

Elder Orson Hyde, From the Millennial Star., 1841 wrote:Pour the spirit of light and knowledge, grace and wisdom, into the hearts of her prophets, and clothe her priests with salvation.— Let light and knowledge march forth through the empire of darkness, and may the honest in heart flow to their standard, and join in the march to go forth to meet the Bridegroom.

And yet, racist Brigham Young, John Taylor, and the rest of those cronies denied the black man his right to march forth and meet the Bridegroom being clothed in the robes of the priesthood. Why? Because negroes were not of the House of Israel.

To hell with modern Mormon apologetics! A.I. will destroy it.
Last edited by Shulem on Sun Aug 02, 2026 2:47 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 8858
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Mormon Doctrine

Post by Shulem »

Elder Bruce R. McConkie championed many of his father-in-law's (Joseph Fielding Smith) views concerning racism and white supremacy.
Mormon Doctrine, 1966 Edition wrote:Lamanite Curse

"After they had dwindled in unbelief," that is, after they had forsaken the Church and the gospel, "they became a dark, and loathsome, and a filthy people, full of idleness and all manner of abominations." (1 Ne. 12:23.) So that they "might not be enticing" unto the Nephites, "the Lord God did cause a skin of blackness to come upon them." (2 Ne. 5:20-25; Alma 3:14-16.)

During Book of Mormon times the curse fell upon Laman, Lemuel, the sons of Ishmael, the Ishmaelitish women, the descendants of all these, and upon all who were "led away by the Lamanites," and who mingled their seed with the seed of that people. (Alma 3:6-10.) Then near the close of the 4th century after Christ, Mormon prophesied of yet greater curses to come upon the seed of the then warring nations. "This people shall be scattered, and shall become a dark, a filthy, and a loathsome people, beyond the description of that which ever hath been amongst us, yea, even that which hath been among the Lamanites, and this because of their unbelief and idolatry." (Morm. 5:15; D. & C. 3:16-20.)

During periods of great righteousness, when groups of Lamanites accepted the gospel and turned to the Lord, the curse was removed from them. Thousands of Lamanites were converted "and the curse of God did no more follow them" in the days of Aaron and Ammon and their brethren. (Alma 23:5-9, 17-18.) Some 20 years before the personal ministry of Christ among them, the curse was removed from a group of Lamanite converts and they became white like the Nephites. (3 Ne. 2:15-16.) From the time of Christ's ministry among them until nearly 200 A.D. there were no Lamanites for all had become "the children of Christ, and heirs to the kingdom of God." (4 Ne. 17-20, 38.)

When the gospel is taken to the Lamanites in our day and they come to a knowledge of Christ and of their fathers, then the "scales of darkness" shall fall from their eyes; "and many generations shall not pass away among them, save they shall be a white and delightsome people." (2 Ne. 30:6.) Finally, before the judgment bar of God, all who have been righteous, Lamanites and Nephites alike, will be free from the curse of spiritual death and the skin of darkness. (Jac. 3:5-9.)

Bruce R. McConkie said what he meant and he meant what he said. Resurrected with white skin! :o

White is beautiful, baby -- like blue-eyed Mormon Jesus. Negroes and dark people need not apply. Heck, Negroes aren't worthy to hold the priesthood, according to Bruce R. McConkie. Banned!
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 8858
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Re: Mormon Doctrine

Post by Shulem »

Approved Doctrine:
Wikipedia wrote:In his biography of his father, Joseph Fielding McConkie states:

"On July 5, 1966, President McKay invited Elder McConkie into his office and gave approval for the book to be reprinted if appropriate changes were made and approved. Elder Spencer W. Kimball [of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles] was assigned to be Elder McConkie's mentor in making those changes .... My father told me that President McKay had so directed him. In addition to that, I am in possession of handwritten papers by my father affirming that direction."

This:
Mormon Doctrine, 1966 Edition wrote:Lamanite Curse

When the gospel is taken to the Lamanites in our day and they come to a knowledge of Christ and of their fathers, then the "scales of darkness" shall fall from their eyes; "and many generations shall not pass away among them, save they shall be a white and delightsome people." (2 Ne. 30:6.) Finally, before the judgment bar of God, all who have been righteous, Lamanites and Nephites alike, will be free from the curse of spiritual death and the skin of darkness. (Jac. 3:5-9.)

Which means resurrected Lamanites (according to apologists) will no longer be required/forced to paint their bodies with various hues of paint in order to mark the sign of the curse. The Lamanites can finally put their paint cans away at the judgement seat and enjoy a resurrection wherein they may marvel at their white and delightsome bodies in the presence of white and delightsome Heavenly Father.

:lol:

Stupid Mormon apologists! And now the leadership of the Church is getting sucked into their silly nonsense proving just how deceptive modern Mormon leaders really are. And, it might be fair to say the same for Don Bradley and those of his ilk.
User avatar
Shulem
God
Posts: 8858
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:40 am
Location: Facsimile No. 3

Re: Mormon Doctrine

Post by Shulem »

Gems of Mormonism from a book taught from every church pulpit.

Shout it from the housetops

Image
Mormon Doctrine, 1966 wrote:
  • The Lord placed on Cain a mark of a dark skin, and he became the ancestor of the black race.
  • To illustrate: Cain, Ham, and the whole negro race have been cursed with a black skin, the mark of Cain, so they can be identified as a caste apart, a people with whom the other descendants of Adam should not intermarry.
  • In effect the Lamanites belonged to one caste and the Nephites to another, and a mark was put upon the Lamanites to keep the Nephites from intermixing with and marrying them.
  • But it is to say that Deity in his infinite wisdom, to carry out his inscrutable purposes, has a caste system of his own, a system of segregation of races and peoples.
  • After the separation into groups had occurred, however, to avoid intermarriage between them, the Lord placed a curse upon the Lamanites which included a dark skin.
  • In their latter end the Nephites (speaking now of the white skinned group and calling them Nephites from the standpoint of ancestry and nationality)
  • We know the circumstances under which the posterity of Cain (and later of Ham) were born with the characteristics of the black race. (Moses 5:16-41; 7:8, 12, 22; Abra. 1:20-27.) The Book of Mormon explains why the Lamanites received dark skins and a degenerate status. (2 Ne. 5:21-23.)
  • We know only the general principle that all these changes from the physical and spiritual perfections of our common parents have been brought about by departure from the gospel truths. (Doctrines of Salvation, vol. 1, pp. 148-151; vol. 3, pp. 313-326.)
Post Reply