LDS LDS: No Official Apology for Racism of the Past

Ironhold · Nov 26, 2015

drstevej said:
So Brigham Young was not a racist?

BRIGHAM YOUNG Journal of Discourses (Vol. 7, pg. 290-291)

Believe it or not, there's a debate ongoing as to whether or not he was talking about the issue of slave owners forcing themselves upon their slaves.

Ironhold · Nov 26, 2015

Hammster said:
Do you not draw your theology from your leadership, starting with Joseph Smith??

And where does your denomination draw its theology from?

drstevej · Nov 26, 2015

Ironhold said:
Believe it or not, there's a debate ongoing as to whether or not he was talking about the issue of slave owners forcing themselves upon their slaves.

That is not the case here....

Brigham Young said:
If the White man who belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain,

Hammster · Nov 26, 2015

Ironhold said:
And where does your denomination draw its theology from?

That neither answered my question, nor is it the subject here. Why are you deflecting?

Ironhold · Nov 26, 2015

Hammster said:
That neither answered my question, nor is it the subject here. Why are you deflecting?

It's not a deflection, dude.

I'm trying to figure out what your personal standards are and how your denomination stacks up against them.

drstevej · Nov 26, 2015

Ironhold said:
It's not a deflection, dude.

I'm trying to figure out what your personal standards are and how your denomination stacks up against them.

That is neither the topic of the thread or the purpose of this subforum. Please stay on topic (See Post #1)

Hammster · Nov 26, 2015

Ironhold said:
It's not a deflection, dude.

I'm trying to figure out what your personal standards are and how your denomination stacks up against them.

That's not what's in question. That's not the purpose of the forum. We do have one where you can question my beliefs. This one, however, has led to a change in your church's teaching. And I'm still waiting to an answer to any of the questions I've asked.

Ironhold · Nov 27, 2015

Hammster said:
That's not what's in question. That's not the purpose of the forum. We do have one where you can question my beliefs. This one, however, has led to a change in your church's teaching. And I'm still waiting to an answer to any of the questions I've asked.

You've been answered, but in case it was not in enough detail:

The church is not "invalidated" because subsequent leaders amend or retire the teachings of previous leaders. Not only is this in keeping with the church's concept of continuing revelation (in which God reserves the right to reveal more to people as they have the ability to comprehend it), it is also in keeping with Biblical practices as there are numerous examples of religious leaders - including Jesus himself - amending or even retiring older laws and concepts handed down by past leaders.

justlookinla · Nov 27, 2015

Ironhold said:
You've been answered, but in case it was not in enough detail:

The church is not "invalidated" because subsequent leaders amend or retire the teachings of previous leaders. Not only is this in keeping with the church's concept of continuing revelation (in which God reserves the right to reveal more to people as they have the ability to comprehend it), it is also in keeping with Biblical practices as there are numerous examples of religious leaders - including Jesus himself - amending or even retiring older laws and concepts handed down by past leaders.

Wouldn't this mean that truth today may or may not be truth tomorrow?

Ironhold · Nov 27, 2015

justlookinla said:
Wouldn't this mean that truth today may or may not be truth tomorrow?

Let's consider this.

Kosher and circumcision were among the bigger things God required in the Old Testament, correct?

But the Apostles did away with both, one because of a vision.

Did that change the truth in any fashion?

Answer that, and you'll have the answer to the question you just asked me.

justlookinla · Nov 27, 2015

Ironhold said:
Let's consider this.

Kosher and circumcision were among the bigger things God required in the Old Testament, correct?

But the Apostles did away with both, one because of a vision.

Did that change the truth in any fashion?

Answer that, and you'll have the answer to the question you just asked me.

No, I won't.

Hammster · Nov 27, 2015

Ironhold said:
You've been answered, but in case it was not in enough detail:

The church is not "invalidated" because subsequent leaders amend or retire the teachings of previous leaders. Not only is this in keeping with the church's concept of continuing revelation (in which God reserves the right to reveal more to people as they have the ability to comprehend it), it is also in keeping with Biblical practices as there are numerous examples of religious leaders - including Jesus himself - amending or even retiring older laws and concepts handed down by past leaders.

This isn't a continuing revelation. This is reversing course. So how can you be sure that doctrines you hold dear won't be completely changed by "continuing revelation"?

drstevej · Nov 27, 2015

Ironhold said:
Let's consider this.

Kosher and circumcision were among the bigger things God required in the Old Testament, correct?

Racism isn't kosher.

Hammster · Nov 27, 2015

Ironhold said:
Let's consider this.

Kosher and circumcision were among the bigger things God required in the Old Testament, correct?

But the Apostles did away with both, one because of a vision.

Did that change the truth in any fashion?

Answer that, and you'll have the answer to the question you just asked me.

They weren't done away with. They were law which was fulfilled in Christ.

So now explain how that's the same thing.

jimmyjimmy · Nov 27, 2015

drstevej said:
Racism isn't kosher.

Nice one, Steve!

Hammster · Nov 27, 2015

Ironhold said:
Apologetics website Black LDS.org records Bruce R. McConkie as saying:

“Forget everything I have said, or what … Brigham Young … or whomsoever has said … that is contrary to the present revelation. We spoke with a limited understanding and without the light and knowledge that now has come into the world.” [Bruce R. McConkie, “New Revelation on Priesthood,” in Priesthood, no editor given, but presumably edited by McConkie (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1981), 126-137, esp. 126-127.]

The original statement was made in 1978.

So how's this grab you?

Perhaps this is a better starting question. What exactly was this limited understanding that both he and Young had?

fatboys · Nov 27, 2015

drstevej said:
This is the thread topic:
No Official Apology for Racism of the Past

Have Mormons acknowledged the racism of it's leaders?

Have the Mormons ever apologized for the sin of racism?

And what do you think majority of blacks would say of you or any mainstream Christian denomination? Critics of the LDS are hypocrites. Just because you think LDS are racist does not make it so. Those who begin the denomination you belong to are just as much a racist as Brigham Young

Hammster · Nov 27, 2015

fatboys said:
And what do you think majority of blacks would say of you or any mainstream Christian denomination? Critics of the LDS are hypocrites. Just because you think LDS are racist does not make it so. Those who begin the denomination you belong to are just as much a racist as Brigham Young

Of course, this does not address the OP.

jimmyjimmy · Nov 27, 2015

fatboys said:
are just as much a racist as Brigham Young

Hammster said:
Of course, this does not address the OP.

At least we have an admission of racism, but you are right, they are still not addressing the OP.

Hammster · Nov 27, 2015

thatbrian said:
At least we have an admission of racism, but you are right, they are still not addressing the OP.

I missed that part. Good call.

LDS LDS: No Official Apology for Racism of the Past

Member

Member

"The crowd always chooses Barabbas."

Psalm 144:1

Member

"The crowd always chooses Barabbas."

Psalm 144:1

Member

Regular Member

Member

Regular Member

Psalm 144:1

"The crowd always chooses Barabbas."

Psalm 144:1

Pardoned Rebel

Psalm 144:1

Senior Veteran

Psalm 144:1

Pardoned Rebel

Psalm 144:1

Similar threads