Jul 21, 2011 -- 2:17AM, Habala?! wrote:

The problem is that there are plethora of quotes from church leaders, including J.S. that state that slavery and/or the priesthood ban are all God's will. I, for one, was raised to believe that the ban was part of a curse that God put upon the seed of Cain and that it was not wrong at all, unjust as it may seem. My friends, family and I grew up believing that quite openly here in West Jordan, Utah.

As President Gordon Hinckley said, "Anyone who has racial hatred in their heart is not a true disciple of Christ".  The whole idea of the ban was a comedy of errors with tragic results.  How could the plethora of quotes be wrong?  They simply were.  God's love extends beyond race and nationalism.

Jul 21, 2011 -- 2:17AM, Habala?! wrote:

Then again, we are the city that keeps electing Chris Buttars...

Could it be that Chris Buttars was less valiant in the pre-existence or is perhaps Cain himself? ;-)

.

Jul 21, 2011 -- 6:33PM, moksha8088 wrote:

Jul 21, 2011 -- 2:17AM, Habala?! wrote:

The problem is that there are plethora of quotes from church leaders, including J.S. that state that slavery and/or the priesthood ban are all God's will. I, for one, was raised to believe that the ban was part of a curse that God put upon the seed of Cain and that it was not wrong at all, unjust as it may seem. My friends, family and I grew up believing that quite openly here in West Jordan, Utah.

As President Gordon Hinckley said, "Anyone who has racial hatred in their heart is not a true disciple of Christ".  The whole idea of the ban was a comedy of errors with tragic results.  How could the plethora of quotes be wrong?  They simply were.  God's love extends beyond race and nationalism.

When I was LDS I could not have held your viewpoint. The way I saw it was if the priesthood ban was wrong then the prophets led the chuch astray. That is not supposed to be possible. How do you reconcile that? I know that they are fallible men, but they insisted that the horrid treatment of African slaves and their descendants was the will of the Lord.

Jul 21, 2011 -- 6:33PM, moksha8088 wrote:

Jul 21, 2011 -- 2:17AM, Habala?! wrote:

Then again, we are the city that keeps electing Chris Buttars...

Could it be that Chris Buttars was less valiant in the pre-existence or is perhaps Cain himself? ;-)

.

Even though I don't post often I am there lurking and I always enjoy your posts. I busted up laughing when I read this. I've always suspected that Buttars was some kind of undead monster feeding on the flesh of the living between legislative sessions. I can just picture him and Gayle Ruzicka meeting every Sunday to feast upon the "gentiles".

Jul 23, 2011 -- 4:26PM, Ironhold wrote:

I've honestly lost track of the number of times that someone here on BNet has yelled at me

in the last 5 years?

HIGHLY unlikely

Jul 15, 2011 -- 2:14PM, Kalzera wrote:

Hello fellow B-netters! I'm primarily addressing this to those of an LDS persuasion, but anyone with insight should feel free to answer.

I've looked into the LDS Church intently, and continue to do so, but from the perspective of both a Bahá'í - someone who believes we should respect all religions and look for what aspects of the truth exist within them - and an academic/university student.

I've noticed that there are a few doctrines of the LDS Church that troubles the minds of most other Christians, such as God the Father and Jesus being deities of flesh and bone, the concepts of the Trinity being "Three Gods united in Purpose," etc.  

I'm generally wondering if the President of the Church, being a Prophet, has the ability to sort of "recant" these things, or change them. To Bahá'ís, our UHJ is infallible as an organization when it creates laws. However, it also has the ability to retract previous statements and "update" laws as cultural circumstances deem necessary. I'm wondering if a similar concept exists within the LDS Church, that President-Prophets of the Church have the ability to "correct" (or whatever euphemism might be used) previously revealed Church doctrine.

So, for example, could a President of the Church, at sometime in the future, say "Hey guys, as it turns out we actually believe in the mainstream Christian trinity?" Or "Hey guys, as it turns out God is actually incorpreal"? 

The major reason I ask is that the LDS Church has changed stances on polygamy and Blacks in the priesthood, so I'm wondering if it might reign in its theology to be more in line with the rest of Christianity as it continues to define itself as a "mainstream" and "Christian" church.

Thanks for your time in responding, and I hope nothing comes across as "offensive." Honest questions from a curious mind. And if this question has been addressed before, or if there are sites on the web that might answer it, I'll happily accept directions.  
 

Yes, they have "continuous revelation" which means that god is always talking to an LDS somewhere called a "prophet".  They have reversed many decisions through their history and they do so through this "continuous revelation".

Personally, I believe truth is truth.  It is objective, so while "continuous revelation" could be possible, truth cannot change.  If that is true-some of these prophets (who contradict other prophets) cannot be prophets, or they would never change the prophecy. 

Aug 8, 2011 -- 6:59PM, Ironhold wrote:

You realize that Christianity as a whole has a rather long history of contradicting itself, right?

For example, Paul warned Timothy that anyone who forbade marriage or forbade the eating of meat was apostate, but the RCC has had such prohibitions in place since the Middle Ages.

You realize that I'm not a Catholic or any sect of Christian right?  I could really care less.  Nor does it lessen the impact to LDS that it is so flakey with its teachings-and clearly much moreso than any christian sect I've run across. 

On the one hand-it's good they realize their teachings are quite fallable and thus willing to change them when society puts pressure on them-like it did with polygamy a hundred years ago, or with blacks 30 years ago....  However, it also waters down that whole "word of god" claim that LDS tries to share with other sects.... Or you have a very fallable god, take your pick.  But most christians try to claim  their god is perfect.  And by definition, perfection is a static thing-you can't become MORE perfect-you're either perfect or you're not.  So the LDS god is kind of a clutzy, half drunk god that keeps making mistakes.  Or LDS caters to what markets LDS best in society and thus changes what god says via "continuous revelation".  Take your pick lol.

And to my knowledge, most Christianity usually splits when they change their minds on stuff.  For example, the last major change of I know of in Catholicism was what we call "Vatican II".  A lot of which had to do with how they saw Jews if I'm not mistaken.  But no, sorry, nobody else constantly revises their teaching to fit society in a corporate marketing style way like mormons.

Just look at how their paintings of Jesus have changed.... these days, it looks like a McDonalds advertisement-they make sure to get every color, every race, girls, etc. into the photo with perhaps some birds on his shoulder.  The old paintings only showed white skin lol.