Skin Colour in heaven?

[Rivendale]

So, my money is on our brethren in the Lord, deep down, still quietly believing that white skin is celestial (if only for the already justified reason of having the symbolism of purity). Who wouldn't want to be pure for heaven's sake? But, this is obviously gospel meat, not meant for real gospel neophites.

If you are a believer in Christ’s resurrection it’s interesting to consider this:

https://studyingprayer.com/2013/04/02/1 ... -pictures/

Jesus, after his resurrection apparently looked like the person he was before he was crucified. I don’t think he was a white Caucasian male.

One might assume that as glory is added upon an individual, including Christ after his resurrection, that the eternal being we are embryonic beginnings of will mature and grow in some form or fashion similar to our physical growth while in this earthly form.We may, at that time, not find much to get too excited about…except for the fact we are developing into eternal beings.

That would be pretty cool.

Just speculatin’.

Regards,
MG

No he wasn't...."First, it is worth noting that there are a number of passages that mention that people did not recognize Jesus do have simple and reasonable explanations. The three main places where it is mentioned are in John 20:14, John 21:4, and Luke 24:15-16. In the first passage, John 20:14, Jesus appears to Mary near the tomb and she does not recognize him at first, until he says her name. The argument goes that Mary did not recognize him because she was weeping, it was early in the morning, and Jesus may have been far away (see 20:1, 15-16). In John 21:4 Jesus meets seven of the disciples while they are fishing and calls to them from the shore. The text mentions that the disciples were about 100 yards from the shore (verse 8) and, again it was early in the morning (verse 4). It is argued that at a distance of 100 yards with bad lighting, the disciples would not have recognized Jesus. In the third passage, Luke 24:15-16, Luke specifically mentions that "their eyes were kept from recognizing him."

[MG 2.0]

If you are a believer in Christ’s resurrection it’s interesting to consider this:

https://studyingprayer.com/2013/04/02/1 ... -pictures/

Jesus, after his resurrection apparently looked like the person he was before he was crucified. I don’t think he was a white Caucasian male.

One might assume that as glory is added upon an individual, including Christ after his resurrection, that the eternal being we are embryonic beginnings of will mature and grow in some form or fashion similar to our physical growth while in this earthly form.We may, at that time, not find much to get too excited about…except for the fact we are developing into eternal beings.

That would be pretty cool.

Just speculatin’.

Regards,
MG

No he wasn't...."First, it is worth noting that there are a number of passages that mention that people did not recognize Jesus do have simple and reasonable explanations. The three main places where it is mentioned are in John 20:14, John 21:4, and Luke 24:15-16. In the first passage, John 20:14, Jesus appears to Mary near the tomb and she does not recognize him at first, until he says her name. The argument goes that Mary did not recognize him because she was weeping, it was early in the morning, and Jesus may have been far away (see 20:1, 15-16). In John 21:4 Jesus meets seven of the disciples while they are fishing and calls to them from the shore. The text mentions that the disciples were about 100 yards from the shore (verse 8) and, again it was early in the morning (verse 4). It is argued that at a distance of 100 yards with bad lighting, the disciples would not have recognized Jesus. In the third passage, Luke 24:15-16, Luke specifically mentions that "their eyes were kept from recognizing him."

What I gathered was that when Jesus was resurrected, some folks recognized him and other’s didn’t. But for those who did recognize him it seems that they saw him as he was before he was crucified. Including whatever characteristics he had as a result of his ethnicity.

Regards,
MG

[drumdude]

It seems to me inescapable that skin color is very important to Mormon God. There was no other basis for the priesthood ban, it was only based on skin color.

It would be reasonable to assume that everyone has light skin in heaven because the Book of Mormon says dark skin is a curse.

[Rivendale]

It seems to me inescapable that skin color is very important to Mormon God. There was no other basis for the priesthood ban, it was only based on skin color.

It would be reasonable to assume that everyone has light skin in heaven because the Book of Mormon says dark skin is a curse.

I can't think of "whiter" or more patriarchal religion than Mormonism.

[IHAQ]

It seems to me inescapable that skin color is very important to Mormon God. There was no other basis for the priesthood ban, it was only based on skin color.

It would be reasonable to assume that everyone has light skin in heaven because the Book of Mormon says dark skin is a curse.

I think you have a point. Generally over the years, and certainly within scriptures, the Church has promoted the white supremacist mantra that dark skin = inferiority. The Book of Mormon (still) includes the doctrine that dark skin was used as a sign of a curse from God, and that white skin = righteousness.