The Indians are the Red Men

[Calm]

5 hours ago, Jay 4 Christ said:

The founding claim of the first in vision is the ONLY living and TRUE church.

That phrase is not found in the First Vision, but D&C 1:30 iirc and that is an incomplete quote, which affects the interpretation.  LDS do the same thing, so I am only making an observation here, not criticizing.

I also agree it is inherently insulting to nonLDS, but that doesn’t mean it dismisses the value of any other church.

Now as to what that phrase is meant to mean to LDS about other faiths, I find this useful though it is not authoritative.  I will look for that later, got to go.

https://rsc.byu.edu/witness-restoration/joseph-smith-only-true-living-church

[theplains]

On 9/23/2026 at 4:44 PM, smac97 said:

No, I don't view it that way.  "{L}eading people away from the truth" in the context of some leaders teaching traditions about the priesthood ban as "doctrine" is certainly an error.  And a fairly serious one.

So in your mind, Islamic leaders continuing to affirm the Quran's teaching that Jesus is not the Son 
of God and that he wasn't crucified are serious errors but they are not leading Muslims astray.
 

On 9/23/2026 at 4:44 PM, smac97 said:

  The early leaders of the Church lacked both experience and training and resources to unequivocally differentiate between "doctrine" and opinion, tradition, policy, and so on.  Now that we are 200 years into this experiment, are the Brethren still doing that, or have they long since corrected course?

They lacked the guidance of the Holy Spirit in this matter.
 

On 9/23/2026 at 4:44 PM, smac97 said:

If "leading people astray" = "leading people away from the truth," and if "leading people away from the truth" = "erring in pronouncements of doctrine," I can't get on board that that.  It requires us to get considerably closer to infallibility than I think we ought.

LDS leaders being fallible means they can lead people astray.

The Governing Body of the Jehovah's Witnesses also leads people astray by teaching Jesus is Michael the 
Archangel.
 

On 9/23/2026 at 4:44 PM, smac97 said:

I don't follow.  You are saying that "we cannot state with clarity and confidence" the "current posture of the LDS Church?"

The LDS Church is clear in stating that they have since disavowed theories for the priesthood ban.  But 
this is not entirely true, since the reason for the ban was not taught as theory by the early leaders.

The statement would be more correct if it said something like, "Today, the Church disavows the doctrines 
advanced in the past by LDS leaders and the words translated by Joseph Smith with the help of God in the 
Book of Mormon that black skin is a sign of divine disfavor or curse … Church leaders today unequivocally 
condemn all racism, past and present, in any form".

By the way, it's not racism if God really did it that way in the Book of Mormon.

Skin color being a factor on judgment day is associated with physical skin color in the Book of Mormon.

Jacob 3:8 says the skin color of the Lamanites could be whiter than those of the Nephites when they appear 
before God's throne.

The LDS Church, in its seminary manual, shows verses 8 and 9 are speaking of physical skin color differences 
between the Nephites and Lamanites, and associate it with spiritual cleanliness.

"O my brethren, I fear that unless ye shall repent of your sins that their skins will be whiter than yours, 
when ye shall be brought with them before the throne of God. Wherefore, a commandment I give unto you, 
which is the word of God, that ye revile no more against them because of the darkness of their skins; neither 
shall ye revile against them because of their filthiness; but ye shall remember your own filthiness, and 
remember that their filthiness came because of their fathers".

The LDS seminary teaching manual interprets that in the same way:

"Book of Mormon prophets and modern prophets have taught it is wrong to revile or look down upon people 
because of the color of their skin (see Jacob 3:9)." (Book of Mormon Seminary Teacher Manual, 2024).

Again, the LDS Church is leading people astray.
 

On 9/23/2026 at 4:44 PM, smac97 said:

Not sure about "commandments."  Culture and tradition and unfortunate racialist proclivities, yes, some/many of the Latter-day Saints and their leaders did that.

The priesthood ban was from God or from man. Take your pick.

If it was from God, the Latter-day Saints were acting in the light.  If not, they were being led into 
darkness.
 

On 9/23/2026 at 4:44 PM, smac97 said:

Or maybe the phrase "leading people astray" has particularized significance, about which we continue to disagree.

It seems you believe false teachings and practices do not lead people astray (away from the truth).

Being led astray by leaders happens either intentionally or through ignorance.

"Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth" (John 16:13).

I like these admonitions given in the 1997 version of Gospel Principles:

"The most important things you will ever teach are the doctrines of Christ as revealed through the 
scriptures and modern prophets and as confirmed by the Holy Ghost. To do this effectively, you must 
obtain the Spirit of the Lord". 
 
"Never speculate about Church doctrine. Teach only what is supported by the scriptures and the Holy 
Spirit"

It's obvious that the early LDS leaders did not have the Spirit of the Lord on this matter.
 

On 9/23/2026 at 4:44 PM, smac97 said:

It is a recorded description of the revelation, yes.  I don't know if the revelation involved precise words from God or something else.

I don't see precise words as if God revealed OD #2.
 

On 9/23/2026 at 4:44 PM, smac97 said:

 We don't have this information, and this characterization is questionable.

Here is something that I replied to InCognitus:

I'll suggest several possibilities regarding the origins and parentage of the woman who would later be 
known as the Heavenly Mother of Earth:

[1] Daughter of an Exalted God and Goddess

She was the spirit offspring of an earlier Heavenly Father and Heavenly Mother. Born into a previous 
generation of divine parents, she eventually progressed through mortality and exaltation, becoming a 
Goddess and the eternal companion of the Heavenly Father of Earth.

[2] Created by Her Future Husband

Heavenly Mother was created or formed by the God who would later become her eternal husband. She was 
made in his image but was not his literal spirit offspring. Her existence therefore originated through 
divine creation rather than genealogical parentage.

[3] Daughter of a God from an Earlier Creation

Her father was an exalted God who presided over an earlier creation or inhabited world. She may have been 
associated with his divine household without being his literal spirit offspring. After entering into an 
eternal marriage with the Heavenly Father of Earth, she progressed through mortality and exaltation. In 
this scenario, she may or may not have shared the same divine parentage as her future husband.

[4] An Eternal, Rather Than Genealogical, Origin

Heavenly Mother has always existed as a divine being. She did not originate as the offspring or creation 
of another God, nor did she progress from mortality to godhood. Her divine status is therefore eternal 
rather than the result of genealogical descent or exaltation.

One conceptual distinction I'd make is that #1 is genealogical, #2 is creative, #3 is genealogical or 
familial but not necessarily biological, and #4 is eternal. 

That gives you four genuinely different models rather than four variations of the same parentage theory.

Model #1 seems most probable.

In that model, our Heavenly Father and Heavenly Mother would themselves be the children of an earlier 
Heavenly Father and Mother, who in turn had divine Parents, and so forth – an infinite regression of 
Gods.
 

On 9/23/2026 at 4:44 PM, smac97 said:

Not sure how this is responsive to my point: That some of Joseph's successors allowed and propagated substantial error in the Church (non-revelatory justifications for the priesthood ban) is not a hinge or a pivot point or a litmus test for the "legitimacy of the Restored Gospel."

Teaching and practicing the error of the priesthood ban is not the sole hinge that casts doubt on the 
legitimacy of the Restored Gospel concept as taught by the LDS Church. 
 

On 9/23/2026 at 4:44 PM, smac97 said:

Yes.  But I don't think the "Jesus" referenced in the Quran is numerically distinct from the "Jesus" referenced in the New Testament.

The Jesus of the Quran is distinct from the Jesus of the Watchtower is distinct from the Jesus of the 
Latter-day Saints is distinct from Jesus (the God from eternity to eternity).
 

On 9/23/2026 at 4:44 PM, smac97 said:

Yes.

I think denying the deity of Christ is fairly characterized as "leading people astray."  

But then, OD-1's reference to "astray" has no application to Muslims.

Some LDS teachings also deny the eternal deity of Heavenly Father – he became a God. He is an exalted man.

"God the Eternal Father was once a mortal man who passed through a school of earth life similar to that 
through which we are now passing. He became a God ... There was a time when the Deity was much less powerful 
than He is today... He grew in experience and continued to grow until He attained the status of Godhood" 
(Milton R. Hunter, The Gospel Through the Ages).

The church's seminary manual states: "The doctrine that God was once a man and has progressed to become 
a God is unique to this Church".

Brigham Young also taught, "It appears ridiculous to the world, under their darkened and erroneous 
traditions, that God has once been a finite being; and yet we are not in such close communion with him 
as many have supposed. He has passed on, and is exalted far beyond what we can now comprehend" (Journal 
of Discourses, volume 7, page 333).

This is contradicted in several other places:

"There is a God in heaven, who is infinite and eternal, from everlasting to everlasting the same unchangeable 
God, the framer of heaven and earth, and all things which are in them" (Doctrine and Covenants 20:17).

"... and he is the literal and personal father of the spirits of all men ... If we are to have that perfect faith by
which we can lay hold upon eternal life, we must believe in God as the possessor of the fullness of all these
characteristics and attributes. I say also that he is an infinite and eternal being, and as an unchangeable
being, he possesses these perfected powers and attributes from everlasting to everlasting, which means
from eternity to eternity" (Joseph Fielding Smith)

Prior to Joseph Fielding Smith reaching the age of six, Joseph Smith had already refuted the eternal deity 
of Heavenly Father in the King Follett Discourse.

"In order to understand the subject of the dead, for consolation of those who mourn for the loss of their 
friends, it is necessary we should understand the character and being of God and how He came to be so; for 
I am going to tell you how God came to be God. We have imagined and supposed that God was God from all 
eternity. I will refute that idea, and take away the veil, so that you may see".

The Bible gives us this admonition: “Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of
God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world” (1 John 4:1).