Why don't we listen to the prophets!!!

[volgadon]

I find myself in a similar position. Neither possibility (of the two more popular ones offered), that it was instituted by God for his own purposes or he allowed it to happen for his own purposes shakes my faith in the Gospel and is why I tend not to get too invested in debates over the matter.

We see eye to eye. They are equally valid possibilities. All in all, I tend to feel a little like Job's friends, when the topic of the reason for the ban comes up. I usually avoid those topics.

My technicality was just that, I wasn't trying to use you as an aha to prove one position over the other. And I doubt pointing out it was lineage not skin color is going to make the OP's friend change his position. *shrug*

I wanted to state my position, for OP's sake. I'm not advocating the position that God goofs up, I'm advocating love and understanding towards his friend.* But what do I know? I'm probaby a closet apostate-in-the-making, or on the slippery linoleum slope to apostasy, with socks on my feet...

*Again, directed at the OP.

Edited April 6, 2011 by volgadon

[volgadon]

When Christ was on the earth he said not to give the priesthood to the Jews, and even to not preach to them.

I suspect you mean gentiles. Christ preached almost solely to the Jews, and recognised that the Jews have the priesthood.

[new-to-the-show]

"I suspect you mean gentiles."

Oops. Yes. Thank you. Christ avoided the Gentiles until the time was right.

[Dravin]

I'm advocating love and understanding towards his friend.

I'm willing to give the OP the benefit of love if not understanding. Sometimes having the first one gets in the way of the second one. Kinda like a parent who sees a child doing something they see as dangerous, the first instinct is to stop the behavior and understanding as a goal kinda falls by the wayside in the rush. Of course I am in an optimistic mood tonight for some reason, don't worry, it'll pass.

[volgadon]

I'm willing to give the OP the benefit of love if not understanding. Sometimes having the first one gets in the way of the second one. Kinda like a parent who sees a child doing something they see as dangerous, the first instinct is to stop the behavior and understanding as a goal kinda falls by the wayside in the rush. Of course I am in an optimistic mood tonight for some reason, don't worry, it'll pass.

Of course. I should probably have said displaying more love... However, lets assume that his friend is on the slippery slope to apostasy. By attempting to understand, one can glimpse the real issue, not only the tip of the iceberg.

[skippy740]

Try reading this thread in its entirety:

http://www.lds.net/forums/lds-gospel-discussion/38104-racism-scriptures.html

BlacksInTheScriptures.com

Here’s MY take (“gospel and history of the church according to skippy740”):

There is a difference between the doctrines of the church, and the practices of the church. Did any latter day prophet lead the church astray by teaching false doctrines? No. You could say that there were false theories (Adam-God theory and other things). Did they lead the church astray from the core principles of the gospel? No. Was withholding the priesthood from Blacks have a doctrinal basis? No. It was a practice that was assumed “doctrinal”.

What are the doctrines of the church? The 4th Article of Faith – Faith, repentance, baptism, receive the Holy Ghost. It was also the first thing that Christ taught the Nephites when he visited them in 3 Nephi 11. (“Any more or less than this cometh of evil and is not of me.”)

Polygamy is a perfect example of the difference between doctrines and practices. Here was a true, revealed, doctrinal practice that was stopped. Did the fact that the practice ended change the doctrine? No. My own theory behind this is that the Lord knew about the persecution of the Saints, at the time and the near future. The Lord saw to it that there was a “planned concession” to help make Utah a state. So, the Lord seeing the future of His people, commanded polygamy so it can be ended later.

How about the Law of Consecration? Here’s another revealed law of the Lord’s people… and it was ended because the people weren’t (aren’t) ready for it. Did this change the doctrine? No. But the practice isn’t being “enforced” (for lack of a better word).

The doctrines of the church are eternal, never changing and no respector of persons. The practices may be changed and adjusted.

It’s important to remember that the church wasn’t restored perfectly all at one time. Tithing wasn’t a requirement until the turn of the 20th century. Neither was the Word of Wisdom. The church we see today in terms of organization is NOT the same in terms of practice and organization as was in Joseph Smith’s time. The church has and does evolve – often requiring more of its members over time.

Why wasn’t everything done on day 1? To help adapt to the weaknesses of the Lord’s people. It’s better to have a small band of faithful, smoking and swearing latter day saints… than none. The Lord says “Come unto me with your weakness, so that your weakness may become strength.” He didn’t say be strong and perfect FIRST before coming to Him. The Lord does the best with what he’s got.

Thinking back to President Hinckley’s talk back in 1999 about missionary work: “Think of the risk the Lord took when he called you.” [Feed my lambs, feed my sheep] Same principle applied in the early days of the church.

But the bigger question is this: How do we follow a Prophet who may not be perfect, right? Before joining the church, as missionaries, we ask investigators to pray about the things we teach so we can get our own witness. That process never stops. We are to always study things out in our minds and ask the Lord if it be right (D&C 9). I remember hearing somewhere that “Saint” means Student. I don’t remember exactly where I heard that, but it sounds great to me.

If we follow the prophet and the doctrines he teaches, we will be fine at the Judgment Bar of God.

Just my thoughts – and ONLY my thoughts.

skippy740

[Dravin]

Of course. I should probably have said displaying more love... However, lets assume that his friend is on the slippery slope to apostasy. By attempting to understand, one can glimpse the real issue, not only the tip of the iceberg.

Oh, I completely agree. I'm just enjoying hearing myself talk tonight. If the OP went with his initial impression he may have born powerful testimony that God doesn't make mistakes and his friend may have been touched and agreed, but as it was not the actual issue it wouldn't change his friend from the path he is on (regardless of if one wants to term the path good, bad, or neutral). It's like how sometimes missionaries think they have an investigator's issue pegged and design the perfect lesson to address the issue only to get 5 minutes in and hear, "No, I understand that, what I don't get is this other thing."

[skippy740]

Here's some additional information from my good friend Marvin Perkins:

"In discussing how leaders of the church could be so wrong in their views on blacks in general and blacks in the priesthood in particular, they suggested that the leadership is not infallible. How does this square with believing revelations from any sitting prophet?

Jesus Christ was the only person to live on earth that was without sin. That means that every other person that lived on earth would be imperfect. In Luke 2:52 we learn that even though perfect, Christ did not attain all of His knowledge at once, but grew in wisdom and stature. And He, in restoring His Church to earth, helped us to understand that the leaders would make mistakes, not seek Him at times and sin. And that those mistakes would be made known, they’d be instructed when they sought Him, and that they would be chastened to repent when they sinned. (See D&C 1:24-28) So with all of this in mind, the pattern of the Lord is for us to hear the words of the prophets and deem them worthy enough to study them out and pray to God to have Him confirm His truths through the Holy Ghost. This was the same in the Bible as well. See the attached document for other Bible, Book of Mormon and modern-day prophets who have made errors. Also contained is the pattern for finding truth.

And if it was revelation not to allow blacks the priesthood, how is it revelation now that they can have the priesthood? Does revelation change just because the times change?"

It was not revelation not to allow Blacks to hold the priesthood. No one has ever been able to produce a revelation or directive from the Lord that stated that the Lord restricted the priesthood from Blacks. In the 2nd and 3rd segment of the Blacks in the Scriptures DVD series (disc 2) it is clearly shown that God commanded just the opposite, for all men who would embrace the gospel to be ordained and sent forth to preach.

We see something very similar in the New Testament as the resurrected Savior commands the gospel to be taken to all. (See Matthew 28:18-20) However, because of their hatred towards, and man made laws not to keep company with Gentiles, they refused to obey the Savior’s final command before He ascended to heaven. Then in Acts 10, Peter receives the revelation, (being told now a second time) and then they begin to take the gospel to all. This is the same scenario as in the restored church. The Lord commanded Joseph Smith to give priesthood to all men and he did just that. Brigham Young started the restriction himself officially in 1852 once they were out in the Salt Lake Valley, despite what the Lord had commanded several times earlier. The 1978 revelation was consistent with that which the Lord had given through revelation at least 12 times to Joseph Smith in His instructions of how to set up His restored gospel.

Let us know how we can help further,

Marvin and Bishop Bethel

Marvin Perkins

Blacks In The Scriptures

BlacksInTheScriptures.com

"All it takes for evil to flourish is for good men to do nothing"

[new-to-the-show]

In "Blacks and the Mormon Priesthood", Martins talks about a lot of the different reasons people give for blacks not having the priesthood. He delves into the folklore. Essentially by the end he admits that he doesn't know why blacks didn't get the priesthood, because none of the reasons given don't make much sense.

That blacks are all descendants of Cain and therefore unworthy doesn't follow any other principle in the gospel, that is was a practice that the Lord allowed doesn't seem to fit with the callings of prophets, seers, and revelators who speak to God daily, and that the white members of the church weren't ready doesn't match Heavenly Father not being a respecter of persons (Acts 10:34). We don't know why, and I for one will believe Martins because he's the first black missionary.

[Guest tbaird22]

heres what you do.. walk up and tell him his salvation is his problem and your salvation is your problem. Walk away like nothing ever happened.

Upon further problems tell him to read :

Mormonism and racial issues/Blacks and the priesthood - FAIRMormon

[skippy740]

Darius Gray goes into quite a bit of the history and pinpointing this exact issue on Disc 2 of Blacks in the Scriptures.

[skippy740]

Now, this guy thinks that it was WRONG to grant the priesthood to the blacks? He has some issues.

He said that the Lord may allow (I'm trying to be careful here) "practicing and unrepentant gays" to hold the priesthood?

The 1st is a racial issue and God is no respector of persons against things that are NOT in the control of the individual. See Article of Faith 2.

The 2nd is directly against God's plan of happiness and doctrines for families. This position, because of the foundation of God's plan (which is "to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man" and families are at the foundation) will NOT ever be changed.

[Dravin]

Who is "this guy"? Darius Gray?

[Guest Godless]

I think you guys scared off the OP with your blasphemous posts.

[FunkyTown]

I think you guys scared off the OP with your blasphemous posts.

With the OPs long history of thoughtful, introspective posts, he certainly wasn't a wolf in sheep's clothing hoping to get on and stir up controversy.

[The_Phoenix]

Here we go.

I don't have the energy to debate this again, I have done so too many times. All I wil say is you cannot separate men (even Prophet's) from the times in which they live.

[FunkyTown]

I don't have the energy to debate this again, I have done so too many times. All I wil say is you cannot separate men (even Prophet's) from the times in which they live.

Can I at least point out the inherent absurdity of putting a debateable opinion on a thread full of debate, prefaced with "I don't have the energy to debate this again."

That's like walking up to a 300 pound body-builder and saying "I don't have the energy to get in to a fight with you, but..." and then punching him in the face.

[Blackmarch]

Hey guys! This is my first post here. I found this board because I need a place to vent. A few weeks ago in elders quorum we started talking about the priesthood ban on blacks. During the discussion one of the guys there suggested that it was wrong of the brethren to do so. I told him that the Lord would not lead the church astray and that if he commanded the prophets to ban blacks from holding the priesthood, it was RIGHT. He actually responded by giving me some quotes by Pres. Young and Elder McConkie about black skin being the curse of Cain and blacks not being valiant in the pre-existence as if these statements somehow proved that the Lord's annointed were misguided or wrong!!!! He even suggested that the church may change it's policy on gays the same way it did for blacks!!!!!!!!!!!! I'm really afraid for my friend's salvation. I fear he's on the road to apostacy. How can I convice him that GOD DOSN"T MAKE MISTAKES?

You pray really really hard, take a few deep breaths and calm down, and don't worry about it too much. If you can't find any scriptures on it then don't worry about it. (I can't find any)

Brigham young may or may not have been wrong, yet the Lord respected his decision. So apparently it wasn't so wrong as to lead people astray.. supposing there was anything wrong with it. Also we don't know why God allowed it to continue, God hasn't told us.

[Suzie]

Hey guys! This is my first post here. I found this board because I need a place to vent. A few weeks ago in elders quorum we started talking about the priesthood ban on blacks. During the discussion one of the guys there suggested that it was wrong of the brethren to do so. I told him that the Lord would not lead the church astray and that if he commanded the prophets to ban blacks from holding the priesthood, it was RIGHT. He actually responded by giving me some quotes by Pres. Young and Elder McConkie about black skin being the curse of Cain and blacks not being valiant in the pre-existence as if these statements somehow proved that the Lord's annointed were misguided or wrong!!!! He even suggested that the church may change it's policy on gays the same way it did for blacks!!!!!!!!!!!! I'm really afraid for my friend's salvation. I fear he's on the road to apostacy. How can I convice him that GOD DOSN"T MAKE MISTAKES?

You need to study a little more Church history on this topic. You will be surprised at what you may find.

[The_Phoenix]

Can I at least point out the inherent absurdity of putting a debateable opinion on a thread full of debate, prefaced with "I don't have the energy to debate this again."

That's like walking up to a 300 pound body-builder and saying "I don't have the energy to get in to a fight with you, but..." and then punching him in the face.

You may, but you will see I have nothing more to say on the topic. So you guys debate away. Heck I am seriously thinking of not going back to church now that my Ward is gone. So it would seem hypocritical to debate much of anything anymore. But don't rule it out, on other topics.

Edited April 6, 2011 by The_Phoenix

[rameumptom]

At the LDS website blaclds.org there are articles that explain that Pres David O McKay and other prophets had the topic of the curse of Cain researched, and found that it was not based upon any revelation.

Instead, it is believed that Pres Young made the call based upon concerns of the day. There was a black elder in Winter Quarters, who attempted to start his own version of the religion by inviting white sisters to join him in a polygamous venture. Many of the members were concerned regarding blacks and whites inter-marrying, especially in the temple. One leading elder explained to Pres Young the Protestant belief in the curse of Cain, and supported it in the scriptures (book of Abraham, etc). Pres Young accepted this, and imposed a priesthood ban on blacks. This did not apply to those who already were ordained by Joseph Smith, such as Elijah Abel, who continued serving as a 70 in the Church for many years to come.

The Church's current stance is: we do not know how or why the ban was set in place. We do know that it was ended by revelation.

God does not make mistakes. However, he works with imperfect people. He will not let the entire program go astray, but will allow us to struggle and learn through our mistakes, even as a Church. Prophets are not infallible. Those key doctrines they give us are true. However, that does not mean all things that come from the prophets are perfect. We can see this on past policies that have failed from Joseph Smith to the modern prophets.

For example, Joseph Smith set up the Kirtland Saving Society, and it failed. Brigham Young set up the handcart companies, leading to the Willie and Martin expeditions that killed dozens. President Hinckley was very involved in purchasing what are now known to be forgeries, and was almost killed by forger and bomber Mark Hofmann, but fortunately Hoffman's bomb went off before Pres Hinckley could be injured. The idea to shorten missions to 18 months did not last long.

None of these would lead the Church astray. But it does show that prophets can and do make mistakes and wrong decisions. Brigham Young was a major speculator, and he even knew it. One General Conference he preached the entire morning. After lunch he returned and said, "this morning you heard from Brother Brigham. This afternoon you'll hear what the Lord wants you to know." He was wrong on Adam-God theory, polygamy being required for exaltation, God progressing eternally in knowledge, and a few other things. This is not a large set of items, considering all the discourses he gave and years he served as prophet.

Pres Packer recently stated that the prophets use the same Holy Spirit as the rest of the members. They have to struggle to gain answers just like the rest of us. It is an imperfect method because imperfect people are striving to be close to the Spirit every day, and make decisions that are sometimes tainted by our personal beliefs, fears, and ideas.

They will not lead us to a point where we lose our exaltation. But they will make mistakes along the way.

[Sundays_Warrior]

I don't know how I can make this any more clear: I UNDERSTAND THAT PROPHETS ARE IMPERFECT MEN. I know they make mistakes. But how is it possible that the preisthood ban was one of these mistakes? it lasted for well over 100 years!!! If there was anything wrong with the ban, or with the statements made by the PROPHETS, then why didnt the Lord give them the revelation to end the ban? Just like your story about Brigham Young correcting himself when he recieved more revalation. If anything can be changed then is there any such thing as doctrine? If a century of direct revelation and a clear policy can just be thrown out the window, then what cant??? The Lord had his reasons to take away the ban, but he had reasons to put it in place AND WE CANT IGNORE THOSE REASONS! Explain to me how you can question such clear doctine without questioning the preisthood athority from which it comes? I chose to stand with the God's anointed servents!!!!

[rameumptom]

Because the membership and the world were not ready for the ban to be lifted. God allowed it to remain in place until the Utah Church became an international church, and Civil Rights had been managed by the country.

Can you imagine how the Church's missionary work in the South and other areas would have been harmed if we had fully integrated churches? Even today, many Protestant churches in the south and elsewhere are not integrated.

Pres McKay actually lifted the ban on those with dark skin from Indonesia. He did pray regarding lifting the entire ban, but the Lord told him it wasn't time yet.

However, a temple was built in Brazil. Many members there had genealogies of black and white ancestry. Pres Kimball knew that as the Church grew, it would now begin to have a struggle with determining who was/wasn't eligible for the priesthood. So he gathered with the First Presidency and 11 of the 12 apostles (Elder Peterson was not present, and he happened to be very against lifting the ban). Elder McConkie later stated that everything he and others had said on the subject was flat out wrong, and we needed to move forward with this new revelation.

Sadly, we had years of members trying to justify the curse of Cain myth with the scriptures. Today, you won't find a single LDS scholar who reads any type of skin curse or priesthood curse into this. The curse on Pharaoh in the Book of Abraham or on the Canaanites in the Book of Moses, are problematic. First, the BoA only talks about Pharaoh, not anyone else. Second, we now know that the Canaanites were not black, but Semitic.

Our personal biases can slow down the Lord's work.

[Suzie]

I don't know how I can make this any more clear: I UNDERSTAND THAT PROPHETS ARE IMPERFECT MEN. I know they make mistakes. But how is it possible that the preisthood ban was one of these mistakes? it lasted for well over 100 years!!! If there was anything wrong with the ban, or with the statements made by the PROPHETS, then why didnt the Lord give them the revelation to end the ban? Just like your story about Brigham Young correcting himself when he recieved more revalation. If anything can be changed then is there any such thing as doctrine? If a century of direct revelation and a clear policy can just be thrown out the window, then what cant??? The Lord had his reasons to take away the ban, but he had reasons to put it in place AND WE CANT IGNORE THOSE REASONS! Explain to me how you can question such clear doctine without questioning the preisthood athority from which it comes? I chose to stand with the God's anointed servents!!!!

Did you read this thread in its entirely? :

http://www.lds.net/forums/lds-gospel-discussion/36633-issues-brigham-young.html

I would love to answer all those questions but they are discussed in that thread already. It would be nice if you can read it all and then reply there.

[skippy740]

Who is "this guy"? Darius Gray?

I'm sorry, I was meaning the person being referenced in the OP.