The Mormon Church and Black People...

In article
<f6201bac-b711-4be0-8a3a-525e52419f86@i12g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, John
<ewsnet@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mar 30, 1:39 pm, 2...@vc.net ( R. L. Measures) wrote:
> > In article
>
> >
> > > There is no mention of any curse being lifted, or any skin colors
> > > being changed, in the revelation given to President Kimball. Why do
> > > you keep repeating this lie?
> >
> > it was de facto lifted because after Kimball's revelation blacks can
> > hold the high LdS priesthood.
>
> The revelation never says anything specific about blacks.

tapdancing
> >
> > > Its not in there, you can't find it, so don't keep saying it like its
> > > a fact. THere is nothing in that revelation about a curse being taken
> > > off, or implying that anyone's skin was going to change color.
> >
> > So the Curse of Cain is still on?
>
> If it makes you happy, and gives you reason to live, and despise the
> church, so be it. The problem is not mine to deal with. As far as I
> know, all worthy males are entitled to hold the Priesthood.

why waso't this the case prior to 1978?
>
> Come join us here in the present. The past, is just that, and I can't
> do anything about it, neither can you. Maybe you can organize some
> sort of attack on the Mainstream Christian churches, since the Lord
> withheld His priesthood from a number of groups of people throughout
> history. The reasons are His.
>
> JohnB

--
R.L. Measures. 805-386-3734, www.somis.org
 
In article <lDTHj.8276$gS1.838@trndny07>, "Diana" <dianaiad@noyoudont.com>
wrote:

> ".R. L. Measures" <2@vc.net> wrote in message
> news:2-3003081147460001@10.0.1.198...
> > In article <OuQHj.5637$A87.959@trnddc06>, "Diana" <dianaiad@noyoudont.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> ".R. L. Measures" <2@vc.net> wrote in message
> >> news:2-3003080736570001@10.0.1.198...
> >> > In article <uxMHj.1724$Eq.1352@trnddc05>, "Diana"
> >> > <dianaiad@noyoudont.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> ".R. L. Measures" <2@vc.net> wrote in message
> >> >> news:2-2903082007020001@10.0.1.198...
> >> >> > In article <HgCHj.247$zb3.77@trnddc01>, "Diana"
> >> >> > <dianaiad@noyoudont.com>
> >> >> > wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> ".R. L. Measures" <2@vc.net> wrote in message
> >> >> >> news:2-2903081415050001@10.0.1.198...
> >> >> >> <snip to here>
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> And the IRS hasn't enforced either one on churches.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > because the LdS church backed down in the Summer of 1978 by
> >> >> >> > claiming
> >> >> >> > that "God" had called off the supposed curse of dark skin.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> What were they supposed to have been backing down FROM, Rich?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > from prohibiting persons with African blood from holding the LdS
> >> >> > high
> >> >> > priesthood.
> >> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> (grin) twisty, Rich. And here I thought you were claiming that the
> >> >> church
> >> >> was backing down from the IRS threat.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > Not just the $6-billion tax exemption, the planned boycott of BYU's
> >> > football team. Another factor was bad press.
> >>
> >> Rich.
> >> The church has stood up to being shot at, being thrown out of states and
> >> the
> >> nation, having an ARMY sent after it---and you think we were going to be
> >> afraid of 'bad press?'
> >
> > The prospect of press coverage of victim testimony during well over
> > 1000 individual trials was the reason why another God's one true decided
> > to pay $2,000,000,000 to its butt-rammed altar-boys.
>
> Rich, THAT was the result of some very real lawsuits. Something the LDS
> church wasn't ever threatened with.

The subject is not lawsuits, it is bad press.

>Not to mention that the situations
> weren't even remotely similar.
> >>
> >> Not to mention that the tax exemption, however large it might have been,
> >> was
> >> in no danger--a fact that I have proven and you have ignored.
> >
> > I was not convinced that any church can bar blacks and retain its tax
> > exemption.
>
> I don't care whether YOU were convinced. The Supreme Court and the IRS was.
> Besides which, Rich, we didn't 'bar blacks' from the church, from
> membership, or from any ultimate blessings. Certain men were restricted from
> holding the priesthood, something that every church of every denomination
> has the absolute right to do--to choose who will be members of their
> priesthood.

do this today and bad press is guaranteed to cause considerable public
distress.


>
> >> Ad to a boycott of BYU's football team---the church has stood up to being
> >> shot at, etc., and you think we were going to be afraid of a FOOTBALL
> >> BOYCOTT???
> >
> > BYU has never faced a team whose players walked off.
>
> No, they never did. And they never would have, either.

you are clairvoyant?
>
> >> >> >> >> >> > ... ... ...

--
R.L. Measures. 805-386-3734, www.somis.org
 
In article <kNTHj.9661$oE1.8988@trndny09>, "Diana"
<dianaiad@noyoudont.com> wrote:

> ".R. L. Measures" <2@vc.net> wrote in message
> news:2-3003081353480001@10.0.1.198...
> > In article <6MmdnT4U0Oz4b3LanZ2dnUVZ_oCvnZ2d@giganews.com>, John Manning
> > <jrobertm@terra.com.br> wrote:
> <snip to>
> >>
> >> In my eyes there's nothing 'true' or 'godly' about racism. The fact that
> >> other people of that era were racists as well is no excuse. It only
> >> further shows that the LDS Church, weird as it is and was, was just as
> >> evil as other racists of the time.
> >
> Rich, since you agreed with this, would you kindly tell me why you aren't
> over on, say...alt.religion.christian.baptist yelling at THEM?

Two of my cousins are Baptist preachers.


> I mean,
> Babtists used to own slaves and were far more racist in the south than
> Mormons ever were. Yet I think that one could say that most of them have
> changed--

This happened over a century before the LdS church saw the light.

>and even they will admit that they did so because of far more
> pressure, political and moral, than has ever been leveled at the LDS church.
>
> Yet---all is praise for everybody who has changed their policies. All hail
> the racists who no longer are! How wonderful! Repentance is glorious,
> Forgiveness is universal...
>
> Unless of course one is a Mormon. Then of course no forgiveness is possible,
> and no matter what he or she does, it's evil.

The problem is that the LdS church never admitted error.

>Should they extend the
> priesthood to all male members? Why, THEY CHANGED BECAUSE OF PRESSURE! and
> are evil. Should they NOT do so? WHY, the evil RACISTS!
>
Hubristic refusal to admit error was and is the one true church's nemesis.

--
R.L. Measures. 805-386-3734, www.somis.org
 
".R. L. Measures" <2@vc.net> wrote in message
news:2-3003081537130001@10.0.1.198...
> In article <lDTHj.8276$gS1.838@trndny07>, "Diana" <dianaiad@noyoudont.com>
> wrote:
>
>> ".R. L. Measures" <2@vc.net> wrote in message
>> news:2-3003081147460001@10.0.1.198...
>> > In article <OuQHj.5637$A87.959@trnddc06>, "Diana"
>> > <dianaiad@noyoudont.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> ".R. L. Measures" <2@vc.net> wrote in message
>> >> news:2-3003080736570001@10.0.1.198...
>> >> > In article <uxMHj.1724$Eq.1352@trnddc05>, "Diana"
>> >> > <dianaiad@noyoudont.com>
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> ".R. L. Measures" <2@vc.net> wrote in message
>> >> >> news:2-2903082007020001@10.0.1.198...
>> >> >> > In article <HgCHj.247$zb3.77@trnddc01>, "Diana"
>> >> >> > <dianaiad@noyoudont.com>
>> >> >> > wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> ".R. L. Measures" <2@vc.net> wrote in message
>> >> >> >> news:2-2903081415050001@10.0.1.198...
>> >> >> >> <snip to here>
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> And the IRS hasn't enforced either one on churches.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > because the LdS church backed down in the Summer of 1978
>> >> >> >> > by
>> >> >> >> > claiming
>> >> >> >> > that "God" had called off the supposed curse of dark skin.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> What were they supposed to have been backing down FROM, Rich?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > from prohibiting persons with African blood from holding the
>> >> >> > LdS
>> >> >> > high
>> >> >> > priesthood.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> (grin) twisty, Rich. And here I thought you were claiming that the
>> >> >> church
>> >> >> was backing down from the IRS threat.
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > Not just the $6-billion tax exemption, the planned boycott of
>> >> > BYU's
>> >> > football team. Another factor was bad press.
>> >>
>> >> Rich.
>> >> The church has stood up to being shot at, being thrown out of states
>> >> and
>> >> the
>> >> nation, having an ARMY sent after it---and you think we were going to
>> >> be
>> >> afraid of 'bad press?'
>> >
>> > The prospect of press coverage of victim testimony during well over
>> > 1000 individual trials was the reason why another God's one true
>> > decided
>> > to pay $2,000,000,000 to its butt-rammed altar-boys.
>>
>> Rich, THAT was the result of some very real lawsuits. Something the LDS
>> church wasn't ever threatened with.
>
> The subject is not lawsuits, it is bad press.

Then why are you talking about lawsuits? Because, Rich, it was the lawsuits,
not the 'bad press,' that caused all those settlements.

Rich, give it up. YOu lost.
 
".R. L. Measures" <2@vc.net> wrote in message
news:2-3003081545320001@10.0.1.198...
> In article <kNTHj.9661$oE1.8988@trndny09>, "Diana"
> <dianaiad@noyoudont.com> wrote:
>
>> ".R. L. Measures" <2@vc.net> wrote in message
>> news:2-3003081353480001@10.0.1.198...
>> > In article <6MmdnT4U0Oz4b3LanZ2dnUVZ_oCvnZ2d@giganews.com>, John
>> > Manning
>> > <jrobertm@terra.com.br> wrote:
>> <snip to>
>> >>
>> >> In my eyes there's nothing 'true' or 'godly' about racism. The fact
>> >> that
>> >> other people of that era were racists as well is no excuse. It only
>> >> further shows that the LDS Church, weird as it is and was, was just as
>> >> evil as other racists of the time.
>> >
>> Rich, since you agreed with this, would you kindly tell me why you aren't
>> over on, say...alt.religion.christian.baptist yelling at THEM?
>
> Two of my cousins are Baptist preachers.

Ah. You are caving into pressure. I get it.
>
>
>> I mean,
>> Babtists used to own slaves and were far more racist in the south than
>> Mormons ever were. Yet I think that one could say that most of them have
>> changed--
>
> This happened over a century before the LdS church saw the light.

No, dear. They were forced to give up their SLAVES at gun point, but the
Baptists in the south kept up their racist policies for a very long time
indeed.


But you lost. Get over it and get on to another topic.
 
On Mar 30, 4:41 pm, "<<<~[A John 3:16 Whosoever]~>>>"
<kaseybec...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 30, 2:29 pm, "Diana" <diana...@noyoudont.com> wrote:
>
> > Besides which, Rich, we didn't 'bar blacks' from the church, from
> > membership, or from any ultimate blessings.
>
> Exactly what are "ultimate blessings" in the Mormon definition, Diana?
>
> > Certain men were restricted from
> > holding the priesthood, something that every church of every denomination
> > has the absolute right to do--to choose who will be members of their
> > priesthood.
>
> What Christian denominations do you think have a "priesthood" that is
> not pastoral, Diana? And which Christian denominations keep members
> from doing anything based on their race?

The racism that was written into the book of mormon and that became
institutionalized into mormonism was a product of 19th century
christian racism.
 
On Mar 30, 1:02 pm, John <ews...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 30, 1:39 pm, 2...@vc.net ( R. L. Measures) wrote:
>
> > In article
>
> > > There is no mention of any curse being lifted, or any skin colors
> > > being changed, in the revelation given to President Kimball. Why do
> > > you keep repeating this lie?
>
> > it was de facto lifted because after Kimball's revelation blacks can
> > hold the high LdS priesthood.
>
> The revelation never says anything specific about blacks.
>
>
>
> > > Its not in there, you can't find it, so don't keep saying it like its
> > > a fact. THere is nothing in that revelation about a curse being taken
> > > off, or implying that anyone's skin was going to change color.
>
> > So the Curse of Cain is still on?
>
> If it makes you happy, and gives you reason to live, and despise the
> church, so be it. The problem is not mine to deal with. As far as I
> know, all worthy males are entitled to hold the Priesthood.
>
> Come join us here in the present. The past, is just that, and I can't
> do anything about it, neither can you. Maybe you can organize some
> sort of attack on the Mainstream Christian churches, since the Lord
> withheld His priesthood from a number of groups of people throughout
> history. The reasons are His.
>
> JohnB

We should learn from the past.
 
In article <pLCdnWvKR4ngiG3anZ2dnUVZ_sninZ2d@giganews.com>, John Manning
<jrobertm@terra.com.br> wrote:

> Guy R. Briggs wrote:
> > 2@vc.net (
 
In article <dUUHj.1049$s27.210@trnddc02>, "Diana" <dianaiad@noyoudont.com>
wrote:

> ".R. L. Measures" <2@vc.net> wrote in message
> news:2-3003081537130001@10.0.1.198...
> > In article <lDTHj.8276$gS1.838@trndny07>, "Diana" <dianaiad@noyoudont.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> ".R. L. Measures" <2@vc.net> wrote in message
> >> news:2-3003081147460001@10.0.1.198...
> >> > In article <OuQHj.5637$A87.959@trnddc06>, "Diana"
> >> > <dianaiad@noyoudont.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> ".R. L. Measures" <2@vc.net> wrote in message
> >> >> news:2-3003080736570001@10.0.1.198...
> >> >> > In article <uxMHj.1724$Eq.1352@trnddc05>, "Diana"
> >> >> > <dianaiad@noyoudont.com>
> >> >> > wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> ".R. L. Measures" <2@vc.net> wrote in message
> >> >> >> news:2-2903082007020001@10.0.1.198...
> >> >> >> > In article <HgCHj.247$zb3.77@trnddc01>, "Diana"
> >> >> >> > <dianaiad@noyoudont.com>
> >> >> >> > wrote:
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> ".R. L. Measures" <2@vc.net> wrote in message
> >> >> >> >> news:2-2903081415050001@10.0.1.198...
> >> >> >> >> <snip to here>
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> And the IRS hasn't enforced either one on churches.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > because the LdS church backed down in the Summer of 1978
> >> >> >> >> > by
> >> >> >> >> > claiming
> >> >> >> >> > that "God" had called off the supposed curse of dark skin.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> What were they supposed to have been backing down FROM, Rich?
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > from prohibiting persons with African blood from holding the
> >> >> >> > LdS
> >> >> >> > high
> >> >> >> > priesthood.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> (grin) twisty, Rich. And here I thought you were claiming that the
> >> >> >> church
> >> >> >> was backing down from the IRS threat.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Not just the $6-billion tax exemption, the planned boycott of
> >> >> > BYU's
> >> >> > football team. Another factor was bad press.
> >> >>
> >> >> Rich.
> >> >> The church has stood up to being shot at, being thrown out of states
> >> >> and
> >> >> the
> >> >> nation, having an ARMY sent after it---and you think we were going to
> >> >> be
> >> >> afraid of 'bad press?'
> >> >
> >> > The prospect of press coverage of victim testimony during well over
> >> > 1000 individual trials was the reason why another God's one true
> >> > decided
> >> > to pay $2,000,000,000 to its butt-rammed altar-boys.
> >>
> >> Rich, THAT was the result of some very real lawsuits. Something the LDS
> >> church wasn't ever threatened with.
> >
> > The subject is not lawsuits, it is bad press.
>
> Then why are you talking about lawsuits? Because, Rich, it was the lawsuits,
> not the 'bad press,' that caused all those settlements.
>
> Rich, give it up. YOu lost.

The RCC settled in en masse to avoid going through c. 1000 individual
trials and having the downtown pukesville testimony of sodomized
altar-boys published in newspapers over a period of probably several years
as the cases slowly made their way to trial.

"The devil never harmed the church so much as when the church herself
adopted the vow of celibacy."
- - Peter Comestor (DOB ?, died c, AD1178 in Paris)

--
R.L. Measures. 805-386-3734, www.somis.org
 
In article <cWUHj.1050$s27.865@trnddc02>, "Diana" <dianaiad@noyoudont.com>
wrote:

> ".R. L. Measures" <2@vc.net> wrote in message
> news:2-3003081545320001@10.0.1.198...
> > In article <kNTHj.9661$oE1.8988@trndny09>, "Diana"
> > <dianaiad@noyoudont.com> wrote:
> >
> >> ".R. L. Measures" <2@vc.net> wrote in message
> >> news:2-3003081353480001@10.0.1.198...
> >> > In article <6MmdnT4U0Oz4b3LanZ2dnUVZ_oCvnZ2d@giganews.com>, John
> >> > Manning
> >> > <jrobertm@terra.com.br> wrote:
> >> <snip to>
> >> >>
> >> >> In my eyes there's nothing 'true' or 'godly' about racism. The fact
> >> >> that
> >> >> other people of that era were racists as well is no excuse. It only
> >> >> further shows that the LDS Church, weird as it is and was, was just as
> >> >> evil as other racists of the time.
> >> >
> >> Rich, since you agreed with this, would you kindly tell me why you aren't
> >> over on, say...alt.religion.christian.baptist yelling at THEM?
> >
> > Two of my cousins are Baptist preachers.
>
> Ah. You are caving into pressure. I get it.

Baptist seminaries used to teach a course in lynching.
> >
> >
> >> I mean,
> >> Babtists used to own slaves and were far more racist in the south than
> >> Mormons ever were. Yet I think that one could say that most of them have
> >> changed--
> >
> > This happened over a century before the LdS church saw the light.
>
> No, dear. They were forced to give up their SLAVES at gun point,

This is not about giving up slaves, it is about giving up on the
teaching of J. S. Jr. and Brigham Young regarding skin color.

but the
> Baptists in the south kept up their racist policies for a very long time
> indeed.

the remnants are still there.
>
>
> But you lost. Get over it and get on to another topic.

We still need to talk about what Brigham said in regard to flat noses
and dark skin.

--
R.L. Measures. 805-386-3734, www.somis.org
 
In article
<b5b5f145-b81d-4ca2-af0d-4b13563612ff@c26g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
"<<<~[A John 3:16 Whosoever]~>>>" <kaseybeck61@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mar 30, 2:40=A0pm, "Diana" <diana...@noyoudont.com> wrote:
>
> > Rich, since you agreed with this, would you kindly tell me why you aren't
> > over on, say...alt.religion.christian.baptist yelling at THEM? I mean,
> > Babtists used to own slaves and were far more racist in the south than
> > Mormons ever were. Yet I think that one could say that most of them have
> > changed--and even they will admit that they did so because of far more
> > pressure, political and moral, than has ever been leveled at the LDS churc=
> h.
>
> Are you really sure they will "admit" such a thing? How would you
> know? Have you asked Baptists if they changed their feelings about
> racism in the Baptist church because of "political and moral
> [pressure]"?
>
> > Yet---all is praise for everybody who has changed their policies. All hail=
>
> > the racists who no longer are! =A0How wonderful! Repentance is glorious,
> > Forgiveness is universal...
> >
> > Unless of course one is a Mormon. Then of course no forgiveness is possibl=
> e,
> > and no matter what he or she does, it's evil. Should they extend the
> > priesthood to all male members? Why, THEY CHANGED BECAUSE OF PRESSURE! and=
>
> > are evil. Should they NOT do so? WHY, the evil RACISTS!
>
> And once again we see a demonstration of Diana's "Mormons as martyra
> syndrome" at play. How many times are you going to play that card,
> Diana?

chortle

--
R.L. Measures. 805-386-3734, www.somis.org
 
In article
<cda883d1-a306-42ed-95d6-16cbd81d9a1e@e6g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
"\"john p\"" <john.phile@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mar 30, 1:02 pm, John <ews...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Mar 30, 1:39 pm, 2...@vc.net ( R. L. Measures) wrote:
> >
> > > In article
> >
> > > > There is no mention of any curse being lifted, or any skin colors
> > > > being changed, in the revelation given to President Kimball. Why do
> > > > you keep repeating this lie?
> >
> > > it was de facto lifted because after Kimball's revelation blacks can
> > > hold the high LdS priesthood.
> >
> > The revelation never says anything specific about blacks.
> >
> >
> >
> > > > Its not in there, you can't find it, so don't keep saying it like its
> > > > a fact. THere is nothing in that revelation about a curse being taken
> > > > off, or implying that anyone's skin was going to change color.
> >
> > > So the Curse of Cain is still on?
> >
> > If it makes you happy, and gives you reason to live, and despise the
> > church, so be it. The problem is not mine to deal with. As far as I
> > know, all worthy males are entitled to hold the Priesthood.
> >
> > Come join us here in the present. The past, is just that, and I can't
> > do anything about it, neither can you. Maybe you can organize some
> > sort of attack on the Mainstream Christian churches, since the Lord
> > withheld His priesthood from a number of groups of people throughout
> > history. The reasons are His.
> >
> > JohnB
>
> We should learn from the past.

IME, TBMs are quick to deny their ugly past.

--
R.L. Measures. 805-386-3734, www.somis.org
 
On Mar 30, 2:40 pm, "Guy R. Briggs" <netz...@GeoCities.com> wrote:

<snip>
> > As I understand it, according to the Book of Mormon,
> > polygamy is a sin.
>
> Non sequitur, but correct. A sin /except/ when it's commanded by God,
> through a living prophet, for a specific purpose.

Okay.....what specific and verifiable action would you refuse to do,
even if commanded by the prophet of the Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter-day Saints?

<snip to end>

Duwayne Anderson
Author of "Farewell to Eden: Coming to terms with Mormonism and
science"
American Quarter Horse: The ultimate all-terrain vehicle
 

Similar threads

D
Mormon Missionaries: "No, the Church NEVER taught that black peopleare cursed!"
Replies
2
Views
14
Don't Taze Me, Bro!
D
D
Did the Mormons Bribe Rev. Al Sharpton in order to keep him quiet?????
Replies
0
Views
14
Darrick
D
D
Did the Mormons Bridge Al Sharpton to keep him quiet????????????????????????????????????????????????
Replies
6
Views
60
Stormin Mormon
S
D
Did the Mormons bridge Rev. Al Sharpton???????????????????????????
Replies
1
Views
11
Bret Cahill
B
D
Did the Mormons Bribe the Rev. Al Sharpton??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Replies
1
Views
11
bushlyed@yahoo.com
B
Back
Top