Mormon prejudice against blacks

[osirica]

Or maybe you all need to accept that these writings are the writings of a false prophet. Stop saying "oh everyone else was doing it too". To you, Smith was a prophet of God, he was according to Mormonism, beyond the scope of "following along" with heretical lies. Elijah, a prophet (considered below SMith in importance) was ALONE against the Jewish apostaphy of the old testament. his life was in danger. He did not excuse or encourage the lying. Yet Smith, following along with racist dogma, encouraged the sin by writing these (among other) verses in the scriptures that Mormons claim to be inspired by God:

2 Ne. 5: 21

21 And he had caused the acursing

[Gordon]

Or maybe you all need to accept that these writings are the writings of a false prophet. Stop saying "oh everyone else was doing it too". To you, Smith was a prophet of God, he was according to Mormonism, beyond the scope of "following along" with heretical lies. Elijah, a prophet (considered below SMith in importance) was ALONE against the Jewish apostaphy of the old testament. his life was in danger. He did not excuse or encourage the lying. Yet Smith, following along with racist dogma, encouraged the sin by writing these (among other) verses in the scriptures that Mormons claim to be inspired by God:

2 Ne. 5: 21

21 And he had caused the acursing

[YH8]

These verses are lies, these verses were not inspired by God, no matter how you try to "re-interpret them" to sound less racist sounding in their "true" meaning.

Their true meaning? Why are you the one that knows the true meaning?

[juliann]

These verses are lies, these verses were not inspired by God, no matter how you try to "re-interpret them" to sound less racist sounding in their "true" meaning.

You mean like these verses?

Job 30:26, 30,  When I looked for good, then evil came [unto me]: and when I waited for light, there came darkness. . . . My skin is black upon me

Daniel 12:10  Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand.

Psalms 51:7  Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean: wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow.

Nahum 2:10 She is empty, and void, and waste: and the heart melteth, and the knees smite together, and much pain [is] in all loins, and the faces of them all gather blackness.

[YH8]

These verses are lies, these verses were not inspired by God, no matter how you try to "re-interpret them" to sound less racist sounding in their "true" meaning.

You mean like these verses?

Job 30:26, 30,

[osirica]

OK

Since you cannot/will not accept JS as a prophet, then we cannot have the same discussion - we do not agree on the premise that what was written came from the Lord.

It's that simple.

Well that's just it now isn't it?

Obviously you don't believe that anything that anyone on earth says "is from the lord" is actually from the lord. If that were the case, a demon could lie to you and trick you. A false prophet could fool you without any trouble. So at some point you say "is this REALLy true"?

And well, here we are, discussing the Truth and how the Mormon scriptures measure up.

Obviously those two verses do not measure up. God did not change the color of Cain, nor did he create Black people from any artificial change. We know it's biologically impossible for Black people to come from solely white ancestors. We know that the native Americans are not in any way related to middle easterners, and we also know that their skin color did not come from any curse.

Yet there are those verses. And the quesiton arises, why was smith obsessed with skin color? God obviously wasn't, as you see in the Bible no one was cursed with some racial skin color change. That obsession of Smith's is evidence that he is false. So yes, you are right, it's that simple.

For me, God, and the apostles, you discern what the prophet is saying to determine if they are true or false. That is our instruction by God to do so. Of course if you choose not to do that, well you are already in error with God. It's that simple.

[Gordon]

OK

Since you cannot/will not accept JS as a prophet, then we cannot have the same discussion - we do not agree on the premise that what was written came from the Lord.

It's that simple.

Well that's just it now isn't it?

Obviously you don't believe that anything that anyone on earth says "is from the lord" is actually from the lord. If that were the case, a demon could lie to you and trick you. A false prophet could fool you without any trouble. So at some point you say "is this REALLy true"?

And well, here we are, discussing the Truth and how the Mormon scriptures measure up.

Obviously those two verses do not measure up. God did not change the color of Cain, nor did he create Black people from any artificial change. We know it's biologically impossible for Black people to come from solely white ancestors. We know that the native Americans are not in any way related to middle easterners, and we also know that their skin color did not come from any curse.

Yet there are those verses. And the quesiton arises, why was smith obsessed with skin color? God obviously wasn't, as you see in the Bible no one was cursed with some racial skin color change. That obsession of Smith's is evidence that he is false. So yes, you are right, it's that simple.

For me, God, and the apostles, you discern what the prophet is saying to determine if they are true or false. That is our instruction by God to do so. Of course if you choose not to do that, well you are already in error with God. It's that simple.

E: Obviously you don't believe that anything that anyone on earth says "is from the lord" is actually from the lord. If that were the case, a demon could lie to you and trick you. A false prophet could fool you without any trouble. So at some point you say "is this REALLy true"?

Isn't that what the HG is supposed to prevent? Isn't he supposed to teach all truth regarding the Lord? Isn't he supposed to prevent Satan from 'tricking' us? If not, then what he is here to do?

E: Obviously those two verses do not measure up. God did not change the color of Cain, nor did he create Black people from any artificial change. We know it's biologically impossible for Black people to come from solely white ancestors. We know that the native Americans are not in any way related to middle easterners, and we also know that their skin color did not come from any curse.

You know this to be fact do you? Would you like to fill us in on your source?

[juliann]

Obviously those two verses do not measure up. God did not change the color of Cain, nor did he create Black people from any artificial change. We know it's biologically impossible for Black people to come from solely white ancestors. We know that the native Americans are not in any way related to middle easterners, and we also know that their skin color did not come from any curse.

Argue with the experts and then explain why the Bible uses black/dark/white in the same manner as the BOM. Wood says that that the Christian justification of slavery would come "crashing down" without a belief in a curse and "could be sustained only on the assumption that God either changed the color of Ham's skin instantly or that of his descendants in a relatively brief period. This was orthodox Christian thinking."

Forrest G. Wood. The Arrogance of Faith: Christianity and Race in America from the Colonial Era to the Twentieth Century (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1990), 88.

Unfortunately, the Bible says none of this without a lot of help and neither does the BOM. But don't let that stop the race-baiting! Just remember that people in glass churches shouldn't throw Bibles.

Yet there are those verses. And the quesiton arises, why was smith obsessed with skin color?  God obviously wasn't, as you see in the Bible no one was cursed with some racial skin color change. That obsession of Smith's is evidence that he is false. So yes, you are right, it's that simple.

Well...there we have it. It is that simple with your logic! All religions that justified slavery by using the Bible is false!

[onthepath]

If blacks generally could not hold the priesthood or enter the temple before 1978, then they couldn't be endowed or sealed to families, right?

That kind of sounds like the pews weren't segregated but heaven was?

[osirica]

Ruin Osirica's party with these verses:

Job 30:26, 30, When I looked for good, then evil came [unto me]: and when I waited for light, there came darkness. . . . My skin is black upon me

Darkness has nothing to do with race or skin color. It says he waited for light... not waited for his skin color to turn to "white".

Black in this regard has nothing to do with race. The word used here is "shachar" NOT Kushite. The word for Black here is NOT a word for a natural skin color. Secondly, the "curse" is not that his skin is black, but that it is diseased, and there are black bruises all over it from the disease. Read the ENTIRE book of Job. And thiss word "shachar" is the ONLY time it is used in the ENTIRE bible to describe Job's skin disease. Other times it is used to talk about the rising sun or searching.

Daniel 12:10 Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand.

White here does not refer to skin color at all, you know it, I know it. It is not referring to a racial skin color. After all if many shall be purified and made white... what color were they BEFORE hand? Secondly, no one here has been in history changed from "some other color" to white. So you can throw that out.

Psalms 51:7 Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean: wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow.

Again, the idea of one being "not white" beforehand comes to mind. What is happening in this verse is that the person is being cleansed of sin. White people in the Book of Mormon are sinful throughout their lives and are not living "pure" lives just because their skin is so light (called "white"). So obviously again, this verse, unlike the MORMON verses do not justify or push off a white racial view.

Nahum 2:10 She is empty, and void, and waste: and the heart melteth, and the knees smite together, and much pain [is] in all loins, and the faces of them all gather blackness.

To gather blackness (paw-roor') here has nothing to do with changing skin color. It is referring to the city of Ninevah, which is a city, compared to a mourning woman. It would be like today saying "she will feel blue".

Finally in addition to the facts presented NONE OF THESE examples are used to described a curse generation by generation. Job was cured. Nineveh was simply destroyed. Psalms and Daniel refer to each individual's sins being forgiven and their character being purified. TOTALLy unrelated to the Mormon verses.

[osirica]

E: Obviously you don't believe that anything that anyone on earth says "is from the lord" is actually from the lord. If that were the case, a demon could lie to you and trick you. A false prophet could fool you without any trouble. So at some point you say "is this REALLy true"?

Isn't that what the HG is supposed to prevent? Isn't he supposed to teach all truth regarding the Lord? Isn't he supposed to prevent Satan from 'tricking' us? If not, then what he is here to do?

E: Obviously those two verses do not measure up. God did not change the color of Cain, nor did he create Black people from any artificial change. We know it's biologically impossible for Black people to come from solely white ancestors. We know that the native Americans are not in any way related to middle easterners, and we also know that their skin color did not come from any curse.

You know this to be fact do you? Would you like to fill us in on your source?

God did prevent this by giving us the Bible. Do you think honestly that false prophets would not arise? Yes, the Bible says they will! Does the Bible instruct us on how to discern? Yes. There is your prevention. You choose to say "noo, i like Smith, he sounds nice, I don't want to discern"! That's your CHOICE, not a trick.

Source: Bible. Source: archaeology. Source: history. Source: Ancient writings and testimonies of Black people living in areas before white people. Source: biology.

Now, I postulate, that if there was a curse on Cain to change his skin color.. it was to change it from the original Black color to white. As the curse on Mariam in exodus insuniates that.

Now fill us in on your sources. What makes you think it was white to black, and not black to white?

[osirica]

If blacks generally could not hold the priesthood or enter the temple before 1978, then they couldn't be endowed or sealed to families, right?

That kind of sounds like the pews weren't segregated but heaven was?

Why take it seriously? Why believe in it as if it has any serious reality to believe in?

[osirica]

Obviously those two verses do not measure up. God did not change the color of Cain, nor did he create Black people from any artificial change. We know it's biologically impossible for Black people to come from solely white ancestors. We know that the native Americans are not in any way related to middle easterners, and we also know that their skin color did not come from any curse.

Argue with the experts and then explain why the Bible uses black/dark/white in the same manner as the BOM. Wood says that that the Christian justification of slavery would come "crashing down" without a belief in a curse and "could be sustained only on the assumption that God either changed the color of Ham's skin instantly or that of his descendants in a relatively brief period. This was orthodox Christian thinking."

Forrest G. Wood. The Arrogance of Faith: Christianity and Race in America from the Colonial Era to the Twentieth Century (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1990), 88.

Unfortunately, the Bible says none of this without a lot of help and neither does the BOM. But don't let that stop the race-baiting! Just remember that people in glass churches shouldn't throw Bibles.

Yet there are those verses. And the quesiton arises, why was smith obsessed with skin color?

[grapevine]

I remember 1978 too. It was a great occassion.

However, the church was under implied threat of losing it's tax exempt status and they had actually hired a lawyer to begin to build their defence case.

Universities all over the US were refusing to compete with BYU on the sports field and BYU was threatened with oher sanctions.

The Scout Movement threatened legal action against the church for its discrimination against blacks because Scout troops were organisd along Aaronic Priesthood lines which meant they used the priesthood structure. As no blacks held the priesthood no black could be scout leader.

A mass demonstration was being mobilized to hit Salt Lake City at the October 1978 conference. This would have given the church's policy massive national and intenational coverage.

And finally, a declaration by the First Presidency does not carry the weight of direct revelation to the church. The two things are distinct. The very fact that this was presented as a declaration would suggest that no revelation, beyond what Hinckley has famously described as an "inspired hunch", was received. If it had been, you can bet your life we would have it.

Alan

The protests died down in the early 70's at byu sporting events. There never was any tax exempt status threatende bacause of. it. I dont know what the boy scouts could of done. Shane was over on the deseret book board justifying his adultery fortunatly he got banned. Other prophets talked about lifting the ban Brigham Young Harold b Lee and Spencer W kimball but the answer was not yet. President Kimball it weighed on his mind for some time before the answer was yes. There were bombs planted in church office buildings over it. However in order for a change to happen it has to come because of divine revelation not merely to satisfy human wishes particularly those that have no desire to be a member of the church. Whey should they care what a church they have no interest in joining does.

[Gordon]

If blacks generally could not hold the priesthood or enter the temple before 1978, then they couldn't be endowed or sealed to families, right?

That kind of sounds like the pews weren't segregated but heaven was?

Why do you think there are baptisms and endowments for the dead?

Do you think those that are white and haven't had their temple work done yet are 'segregated' too?

[osirica]

Obviously those two verses do not measure up. God did not change the color of Cain, nor did he create Black people from any artificial change. We know it's biologically impossible for Black people to come from solely white ancestors. We know that the native Americans are not in any way related to middle easterners, and we also know that their skin color did not come from any curse.

Argue with the experts and then explain why the Bible uses black/dark/white in the same manner as the BOM. Wood says that that the Christian justification of slavery would come "crashing down" without a belief in a curse and "could be sustained only on the assumption that God either changed the color of Ham's skin instantly or that of his descendants in a relatively brief period. This was orthodox Christian thinking."

Forrest G. Wood. The Arrogance of Faith: Christianity and Race in America from the Colonial Era to the Twentieth Century (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1990), 88.

Unfortunately, the Bible says none of this without a lot of help and neither does the BOM. But don't let that stop the race-baiting! Just remember that people in glass churches shouldn't throw Bibles.

Yet there are those verses. And the quesiton arises, why was smith obsessed with skin color?

[Gordon]

God did prevent this by giving us the Bible. Do you think honestly that false prophets would not arise? Yes, the Bible says they will! Does the Bible instruct us on how to discern? Yes. There is your prevention. You choose to say "noo, i like Smith, he sounds nice, I don't want to discern"! That's your CHOICE, not a trick.

Source: Bible. Source: archaeology. Source: history. Source: Ancient writings and testimonies of Black people living in areas before white people. Source: biology.

Now, I postulate, that if there was a curse on Cain to change his skin color.. it was to change it from the original Black color to white. As the curse on Mariam in exodus insuniates that.

Now fill us in on your sources. What makes you think it was white to black, and not black to white?

Umm, G-d didn't give us the 'Bible' - books, he gave revelation that was written by his prophets, and someone added them together - not all mind you - to create the 'Bible'. Words on paper are not exempt from corruption.

False prophets, then there must be true prophets - modern that is - or else it would just warn us of ALL prophets. Come on, think, I'm sure you have heard this before.

Yes, the Bible does intruct us how to discern - through the HG! That's how I know JS was a 'true' prophet of G-d. I just didn't like how he sounded.

If G-d - the Christ - can create man (biology, DNA, etc.) why can't he change its structure?

[osirica]

If blacks generally could not hold the priesthood or enter the temple before 1978, then they couldn't be endowed or sealed to families, right?

That kind of sounds like the pews weren't segregated but heaven was? 

Why do you think there are baptisms and endowments for the dead?

Do you think those that are white and haven't had their temple work done yet are 'segregated' too?

No

That's not segregation. That's a matter of position, not of ethnic origin. The key word "segregation" in that sense has no meaning. You are segregated from your supervisor, manager and corporate owner when they all interact and you don't. The position of people in a corporation (whether religious or not) can be segregated for the sake of positions in functionality.

However as I see in the Mormon religion their temple pracices are even screweed up as they segregate the haves from the have nots. As some people are never allowed to even participate for all sorts of silly reasons. More evidence of the falsehood of it all.

[juliann]

Well they don't use it in the same manner.

Of course they don't. If they did your glass church would come tumbling right down with everyone else's. Reinsert fingers in ears and sing "lalalalala" really loud. Sometimes that is more effective than just putting the head in sand.

And by all means..never, ever, ever acknowledge this..it could really ruin your day. Much better to poke at the mote in those Mormon's eyes...who weren't even around to institute slavery.

"That white Christians were able to concoct an elaborate defense of human bondage out of three OT verses (a total of fifty-one words in the Authorized Version), and that most of the Christian world failed to challenge that defense, is difficult for the modern mind to comprehend. " 

Forrest G. Wood.  The Arrogance of Faith:  Christianity and Race in America from the Colonial  Era to the Twentieth Century.  (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1990)p.87.

[Gordon]

If blacks generally could not hold the priesthood or enter the temple before 1978, then they couldn't be endowed or sealed to families, right?

That kind of sounds like the pews weren't segregated but heaven was?

[juliann]

However as I see in the Mormon religion their temple pracices are even screweed up as they segregate the haves from the have nots. As some people are never allowed to even participate for all sorts of silly reasons. More evidence of the falsehood of it all.

Oh, absolutely. Thank you for reminding us of that very important standard of proving truth....let me write that down...any church that segregates is... false. OK...got it. Let's try it out here....

Virtually all Protestant denominations have separate Negro churches, and thus the areas of association for religious purposes have been very small.

Thomas F. Gossett, Race: The History of An Idea in America (New York: Oxford University Press, 1963), 447.

Yup...works here too! Virtually all Protestant denominations are false! Wow, that is a heck of a lot easier than learning how to listen to that pesky Holy Spirit...thanks for the tip!

[osirica]

God did prevent this by giving us the Bible. Do you think honestly that false prophets would not arise? Yes, the Bible says they will! Does the Bible instruct us on how to discern? Yes. There is your prevention. You choose to say "noo, i like Smith, he sounds nice, I don't want to discern"!  That's your CHOICE, not a trick.

Source: Bible. Source: archaeology. Source: history. Source: Ancient writings and testimonies of Black people living in areas before white people. Source: biology.

Now, I postulate, that if there was a curse on Cain to change his skin color.. it was to change it from the original Black color to white. As the curse on Mariam in exodus insuniates that.

Now fill us in on your sources. What makes you think it was white to black, and not black to white?

Umm, G-d didn't give us the 'Bible' - books, he gave revelation that was written by his prophets, and someone added them together - not all mind you - to create the 'Bible'. Words on paper are not exempt from corruption.

False prophets, then there must be true prophets - modern that is - or else it would just warn us of ALL prophets. Come on, think, I'm sure you have heard this before.

Yes, the Bible does intruct us how to discern - through the HG! That's how I know JS was a 'true' prophet of G-d. I just didn't like how he sounded.

If G-d - the Christ - can create man (biology, DNA, etc.) why can't he change its structure?

So no answer to the question I gave, we are going to ignore it and assume that Cain was white and then cursed to be black? No I dont think so.

And see how we digress? You want to say, if Smith was false, then christianity as a whole is false. It's a basic training tactic of Mormonism. It is futile because the Old Testament was a series of propheies against idol worship, a testament of the orgin of man and of the presense of God. This amongst societies that believed in animal gods and superhero dieties. You think there is any doubt to the truth revealed in the Bible? Come on!

Then you say that he didn't give us the Bible. "He gave revelation... that was added together, not exempt from corruption." Well fine, point out the corrupted verses. But don't come with even grosser corruptions from the imagination of Joesph Smith as a way to 'correct'. Two wrongs don't make a right!

If there are false prophets then there must be true prophets? That's like saying, if there are false gods, then there must be true gods. If there are false christs, then there must be more "true" christs!

If there are false prophets, that means there are false prophets, that open ended "interpretation" is weaker than taking the apporach "Beware of false prophets, because there will be no more true prophets." Why didn't he say it? You should ask yourself, why didn't he say "Beware of false prophets, but be ready for the true prophets that will come." After all, the danger in that interpretation of yours isn't following a false prophet but instead...the danger is of NOT following the true prophets that would come in Mormonism... Why oh why didn't God tell us? Because that would never happen.

Common sense indicates: Beweare of false prophets, and let discernment alone determine if any true prophets remain... if there be none, then there be none. Oh but then that's in Revelations now isn't it? So you are warned from ALL prophets.

YOu may not like how Jesus sounded, but that's your problem. To excuse all of that to allow a curse of cain to turn his descendants black, then to say "oh he didn't mean Black race, all of the prophets of mormonism had it wrong!" THEN to come back to me in here and talk about how God was referring to "true" prophets (of Mormonism) who could not follow the truth on this issue?

Discernment, as the Bible indicates that these guys are not prophets by God. If there are OTHER true prophets, the Mormons arent the ones, neither was smith.

[osirica]

However as I see in the Mormon religion their temple pracices are even screweed up as they segregate the haves from the have nots. As some people are never allowed to even participate for all sorts of silly reasons. More evidence of the falsehood of it all.

Oh, absolutely. Thank you for reminding us of that very important standard of proving truth....let me write that down...any church that segregates is... false. OK...got it. Let's try it out here....

Virtually all Protestant denominations have separate Negro churches, and thus the areas of association for religious purposes have been very small.

Thomas F. Gossett, Race: The History of An Idea in America (New York: Oxford University Press, 1963), 447.

Yup...works here too! Virtually all Protestant denominations are false! Wow, that is a heck of a lot easier than learning how to listen to that pesky Holy Spirit...thanks for the tip!

You forgot to incorporate the part of the foundation of the churcch my friend. The American?european protestant segregations were not a part of the original church. They therefore do not impact on the truth of Christianity.

Mormon religion however incorporates "god inspired" doctrine to support segregation, for no other reason than to reinforce a circular argement that for some reason, Blacks were inferior spiritually!

But yes, please take my standard and apply it liberally. Those who teach/taught such lies are seriously as far as I can see it committing sin against God. Those that did so, knowing it was against the Word of God are in danger of damnation because they willfully act in a reprobate manner and deceive their parishoners. That is why some in the Church will not go to heaven. Their hearts are judged by God. I cannot say who, but I know that God's standard is not to be mitigated for the convenience of white comfort!

Now we know that the Protestant denominations as a whole are not automatically damned, for each church acts independantly. Negro churches for example were not willfully disobeying God, they were refuges from otherwise no church at all for the black people that were rejected from Church. Then there many of the mixed churches, the churches elsewhere in the world, Latin America, Africa, India, etc. They didn't suffer from this American/European problem now did they. A lot of souls didn't have to suffer this sin and inequity!

The pesky holy spirit is telling you and me that the Mormonism is a lie. Your sarcasm is a way to avoid seriously listening. You don't start a revelation that supports a sinful activity and incorporate that sinful activity into the foundation of your "restoration"!

[juliann]

Now, I postulate, that if there was a curse on Cain to change his skin color.. it was to change it from the original Black color to white. As the curse on Mariam in exodus insuniates that.

Yikes. Do you win many black converts with that kind of overt racism? Or do you just not tell them what you really think?

And see how we digress? You want to say, if Smith was false, then christianity as a whole is false. It's a basic training tactic of Mormonism. It is futile because the Old Testament was a series of propheies against idol worship, a testament of the orgin of man and of the presense of God. This amongst societies that believed in animal gods and superhero dieties. You think there is any doubt to the truth revealed in the Bible? Come on!

Actually, what we are saying is that you are not going to be allowed to set up self-serving standards. All religion falls based on your standards. And you just demonstrated that again. Is there any doubt as to "truth" in the Bible? I hope you are following the truth and not letting your women speak in church and by golly...they better be covering their heads. And no one in your congregation has used a lawyer, I'm sure. I mean...you do believe the Bible...right?

[osirica]

It's segregation according to the usage that 'onthepath' used it in. If blacks are segregated in Heaven because they hadn't received their endowments/sealings yet, then by that logic, anyone who hadn't/hasn't received them would be segregated. I'm arguing in response to HIS logic.

Your kind of going on a tangent with this one, slow down.

There isn't the halves and half-nots (stealing from GW are we?), in the LDS church in regards to the Temple, only the obedient and disobedient. The Temple is the House of the Lord - a place where he can dwell. No unclean thing can dwell in the presence of the Lord. If you have issue with this, you need to take it up with him.

No, no tangent here. Just think about what I am saying before typing a response.

What Mormonism teaches is that all of those in the temple are white, in heaven (except one or two dozen non whites now?).

No. That's retarded. We know that many Israelites were Black. Not white with a tan, but Black. We know that the "priesthood" had nothign to do with getting into the temple, but was a responsibility by Christ alone. His priesthood was freely given to all men once he rose from the dead. He said so. Preach the gospel to all nations... He never said, "all shall enter into the temple, except the Blacks, and those of Cain's loins"

Come on. You said there is only the obedient and disobedient. Well, think about it. Many Black obedient souls were according to Mormonism denied the priesthoood... not because of disobedience, but because of their skin color!

Then you say "no unclean can dwell"... well that, in relation to this topic, implies that being a black person is being in some state of uncleanliness. Which is going back to the whole issue of blackness being a curse!

Now you can deny the uncleanliness of black people, then I will merely go back and say, since I agree, what then is the motivation to deny the black people "the priesthood"?

Because it's merely something that white's have, and they advertise, and they want blacks to "want it". it's control, and modern manipulation.

Totally unrelated to Jesus' ministry.