LDS Church removes racial references in Book of Mormon headings

[Lightbearer]

Yes. But the content of the character of some BOM people was visibly evident

by the curse of their dark skin.

In Alma 3:6-7, it is recorded that the skins of the Lamanites were dark,

"according to the mark which was set upon their fathers, which was a curse

upon them because of their transgression and their rebellion against their

brethren, who consisted of Nephi, Jacob, and Joseph, and Sam, who were just

and holy men. And their brethren sought to destroy them, therefore they were

cursed; and the Lord God set a mark upon them, yea, upon Laman and Lemuel,

and also the sons of Ishmael, and Ishmaelitish women."

Tony

I find that those who charge the Book of Mormon as "racist" are generally those who have never read it seriously. If you did you would know that you do not know what you are talking about. Here is a sample:

(Jacob 3:5-9) "Behold, the Lamanites your brethren, whom ye hate because of their filthiness and the cursing which hath come upon their skins, are more righteous than you; for they have not forgotten the commandment of the Lord, which was given unto our father

[semlogo]

I second that!

I still didn't get an answer about how a so called christian church or church that follow Christ could invent such a thing.

I am glad at least God has no respect of person!

Was the mormon at one point a supporter of slavery??

one love

Joseph Smith was against slavery. While racism was a problem for a long time in our church, it was also a problem in most other Christian churches.

By the way, the pro slavery people took their justification for their actions right out of the Bible.

[Pahoran]

DidN#t know you guys has a history which can be found or proven!

What you don't know about LDS life, teaching and history could fill several aisles of a decent library. But I'm glad you're starting to realise that. Admitting one's ignorance is the beginning of wisdom.

Regards,

Pahoran

[evangelist]

Southern Slave holders.

Were some also mormons??

one love

[evangelist]

Only among those who know nothing at all about LDS history, doctrine and scripture.

Regards,

Pahoran

I can you know a history of morminism which can't be proven and weak evidence except the teaching all black people came to earth as cursed people!

Do you see that as love and we being the same before God?

one love

[evangelist]

Your knowledge of the Book of Mormon is inadequate to support such a declaration.

Bernard

I just know the truth of the bible disagreeing with black and myself being cursed spirits like we are black demons according to the mormon infallible society at one time!

one love

[Gohan]

I just know the truth of the bible disagreeing with black and myself being cursed spirits like we are black demons according to the mormon infallible society at one time!

one love

Before you keep running your mouth off and embarrassing yourself by talking about that which you don't know, read something from people who actually know what they're talking about.

Cheers. Merry Christmas!

[LeSellers]

I can you know a history of morminism which can't be proven and weak evidence except the teaching all black people came to earth as cursed people!

This is an erroneous interpretation of our beliefs on the matter.

Your ignorance shows more and more with each of your postings. You'd do well to stop and educate yourself a bit before letting your fingers do any more damage to your reputation.

Do you see that as love and we being the same before God?

In its context, yes, most definitely.

Lehi

[LeSellers]

Were some [southern Slave holders] also mormons??

No. In the early history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (there is no "Mormon Church", or wasn't until an acquaintance of mine started one as a joke about a decade ago) we were seen as an abolitionist movement by slaveholders. It was one reason we (many of my ancestors included) were driven out of Missouri in the 1830s, and even Illinois in the 1840s.

One man was a slaveholder in Utah in the 1850s, but one out of thousands hardly makes a blip, much less a statistic. He was permitted to keep his slaves (three, I believe), but it was not against the federal law, which governed in the territory at the time.

Your ignorance on these matters shines brighter the more you post here. Please get some basic knowledge before you rant again. It will do us all good.

Lehi

[BookofMormonLuvr]

I just know the truth of the bible disagreeing with black and myself being cursed spirits like we are black demons according to the mormon infallible society at one time!

one love

The Book of Mormon teaches no such doctrine. You would do well to separate Book of Mormon teachings from previous speculative teachings of LDS leadership.

let's get together and feel alright.

[Palerider]

The Church has every right to change chapter headings in the scriptures to reflect the needs and understandings of todays world. However the idea of "backpeddling" on racist ideas is ridiculous for the simple reason none ever existed. Did it ever occur to anyone that the reason skin color an racial differences are mentioned in the Book of Mormon are because it was known that this would be an important subject in the world today. I have never interpreted the Lamanite and Nephite race relations in the Book to be anything but to show that these differences, prejudices, and problems can be overcome with the living of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Notice that after Christ restores the Gospel in third Nephi that the racial differences disappear and they become a united people. Also note that the Lamanites (while intially cursed because of their fathers) become even more faithful and righteous than the Nephites and that Samuel the Lamanite is sent to the rebellious Nephites. So to me the Book of Mormon is a witness that God is not respecter of persons but instead judges us by the "content of our character rather than the color of our skins."

Joseph Smith:

[Palerider]

Joseph Smith was against slavery. While racism was a problem for a long time in our church, it was also a problem in most other Christian churches.

By the way, the pro slavery people took their justification for their actions right out of the Bible.

Joseph Smith:

[LeSellers]

Joseph Smith:

...

Apparently Joseph later changed his mind..........

CFR that the writer was Joseph. I find no evidence of this being the case.

The editor of the Messenger and Advocate was not Joseph, but Oliver Cowdery. There is no notation of who wrote this article in the paper. When Joseph wrote an article or letter, it was signed, so your assertion, that Joseph was the author, is undermined by the lack of such an attestation.

Lehi

P.S. Was it necessary to post the same thing twice? Courtesy to your readers would dictate that you combine the messages to which you responded with identical (and erroneous) posts. LS

[BookofMormonLuvr]

CFR that the writer was Joseph. I find no evidence of this being the case.

The editor of the Messenger and Advocate was not Joseph, but Oliver Cowdery. There is no notation of who wrote this article in the paper. When Joseph wrote an article or letter, it was signed, so your assertion, that Joseph was the author, is undermined by the lack of such an attestation.

Lehi

P.S. Was it necessary to post the same thing twice? Courtesy to your readers would dictate that you combine the messages to which you responded with identical (and erroneous) posts. LS

Very true. There is no evidence of Joseph Smith being the author of said article- I looked it up here at church in the photo-print copies we have. There is, however, an indication, within the piece, that the article was compiled after serious contemplation amoung the leading brethren (which I would assume included Joseph) and that the article was an official declaration of the church's stance on the subject of abolition.

[cinepro]

Very true. There is no evidence of Joseph Smith being the author of said article- I looked it up here at church in the photo-print copies we have. There is, however, an indication, within the piece, that the article was compiled after serious contemplation amoung the leading brethren (which I would assume included Joseph) and that the article was an official declaration of the church's stance on the subject of abolition.

You forgot to mention that after the article was published, there was a great uproar in the Church that such a thing could be said about God's children, and Joseph himself disavowed it and called for a public apology from Oliver Cowdery, the true author of the article. That particular quote hadn't been approved for publication, and Oliver had mistakenly thought he was expressing the views of other Church leaders when in fact they felt exactly the opposite. This disagreement and public scolding was one of the many factors that led to Oliver's later disaffection from the Church.

I just made all of that up.

[BookofMormonLuvr]

You forgot to mention that after the article was published, there was a great uproar in the Church that such a thing could be said about God's children, and Joseph himself disavowed it and called for a public apology from Oliver Cowdery, the true author of the article. That particular quote hadn't been approved for publication, and Oliver had mistakenly thought he was expressing the views of other Church leaders when in fact they felt exactly the opposite. This disagreement and public scolding was one of the many factors that led to Oliver's later disaffection from the Church.

I just made all of that up.

I am not sure as to the point of the above post. Are you accusing me of lying? I am at our church with my wife right now, putting some finishing touches together for tomorrow and in our church library we have photo re-prints of "Times & Seasons" and "Messenger & Advocate" on the shelves. I wanted to verify the context of the quote by Palerider, so I went and looked, and read the whole article. I am just reporting what I found.

[LeSellers]

Very true. There is no evidence of Joseph Smith being the author of said article- I looked it up here at church in the photo-print copies we have.

Palerider explicitly claimed it was Joseph who wrote the article. He was simply and completely wrong.

There is, however, an indication, within the piece, that the article was compiled after serious contemplation amoung the leading brethren (which I would assume included Joseph) and that the article was an official declaration of the church's stance on the subject of abolition.

It may have been, although I do not see the indication you assert. However, as there was at least one other article on abolition that was penned by Joseph, it seems odd that there would have been two, not entirely complementary, articles in the same issue.

Joseph's article was a call to his readers to go slowly on abolition, not because he approved of slavery (his other writings on the subject clearly demonstrate he did not approve in the least), but because of the unpreparedness of blacks to assimilate into free status without violence or other catastrophic effect.

In his own writings, Joseph said, that in the event a black man (or, presumably a black woman) was so prepared, he would compare more than favorably to any white man. It was a matter of pragmatism, not principle, that made him take a stance against immediate and abrupt emancipation.

In his fatally incomplete 1844 candidacy for the presidency of the united States, he had a plank (for which he did not claim any revelation) calling for the sale of federal lands, the proceeds of which sales, would be used to purchase slaves. This would have been a reasonable alternative to the internecine war wages under Lincoln and Davis. It would also have avoided much of the racial tension that arose following the War Between the States. But the Carthage Greys (most of whom were proponents of slavery) made that a moot point.

Lehi

[BookofMormonLuvr]

Palerider explicitly claimed it was Joseph who wrote the article. He was simply and completely wrong.

It may have been, although I do not see the indication you assert. However, as there was at least one other article on abolition that was penned by Joseph, it seems odd that there would have been two, not entirely complementary, articles in the same issue.

Joseph's article was a call to his readers to go slowly on abolition, not because he approved of slavery (his other writings on the subject clearly demonstrate he did not approve in the least), but because of the unpreparedness of blacks to assimilate into free status without violence or other catastrophic effect.

In his own writings, Joseph said, that in the event a black man (or, presumably a black woman) was so prepared, he would compare more than favorably to any white man. It was a matter of pragmatism, not principle, that made him take a stance against immediate and abrupt emancipation.

In his fatally incomplete 1844 candidacy for the presidency of the united States, he had a plank (for which he did not claim any revelation) calling for the sale of federal lands, the proceeds of which sales, would be used to purchase slaves. This would have been a reasonable alternative to the internecine war wages under Lincoln and Davis. It would also have avoided much of the racial tension that arose following the War Between the States. But the Carthage Greys (most of whom were proponents of slavery) made that a moot point.

Lehi

I have said nothing to the contrary and in fact a proper reading of the article in question signals a very similar reasoning for being very deliberate about the slave question. Their ability to assimilate as they currently stood and the devastation to the Republic by forcing the issue with the South.

I am not your enemy.

[Palerider]

Palerider explicitly claimed it was Joseph who wrote the article. He was simply and completely wrong.

It may have been, although I do not see the indication you assert. However, as there was at least one other article on abolition that was penned by Joseph, it seems odd that there would have been two, not entirely complementary, articles in the same issue.

Joseph's article was a call to his readers to go slowly on abolition, not because he approved of slavery (his other writings on the subject clearly demonstrate he did not approve in the least), but because of the unpreparedness of blacks to assimilate into free status without violence or other catastrophic effect.

In his own writings, Joseph said, that in the event a black man (or, presumably a black woman) was so prepared, he would compare more than favorably to any white man. It was a matter of pragmatism, not principle, that made him take a stance against immediate and abrupt emancipation.

In his fatally incomplete 1844 candidacy for the presidency of the united States, he had a plank (for which he did not claim any revelation) calling for the sale of federal lands, the proceeds of which sales, would be used to purchase slaves. This would have been a reasonable alternative to the internecine war wages under Lincoln and Davis. It would also have avoided much of the racial tension that arose following the War Between the States. But the Carthage Greys (most of whom were proponents of slavery) made that a moot point.

I think Joseph approved the article and then when there was an adverse reaction from some LDS he layed the blame on Oliver.......

Writing for the Messenger and Advocate (April 9, 1836) newspaper on the subject of slavery, Joseph Smith states:

"After having expressed myself so freely upon this subject, I do not doubt but those who have been forward in raising their voice against the South, will cry out against me as being uncharitable, unfeeling and unkind-wholly unacquainted with the gospel of Christ. It is my privilege then, to name certain passages from the bible, and examine the teachings of the ancients upon this nature, as the fact is incontrovertible, that the first mention we have of slavery is found in the holy bible, pronounced by a man who was perfect in his generation and walked with God. And so far from that prediction's being averse from the mind of God it remains as a lasting monument of the decree of Jehovah, to the shame and confusion of all who have cried out against the South, in consequence of their holding the sons of Ham in servitude!

"And he said cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren. And he said, Blessed be the Lord God of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant. God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem and Canaan shall be his servant."

[LeSellers]

Palerider explicitly claimed it was Joseph who wrote the article. He was simply and completely wrong.

... I do not see the indication you assert. However, as there was at least one other article on abolition that was penned by Joseph, it seems odd that there would have been two, not entirely complementary, articles in the same issue.

Joseph's article was a call to his readers to go slowly on abolition, not because he approved of slavery (his other writings on the subject clearly demonstrate he did not approve in the least), but because of the unpreparedness of blacks to assimilate into free status without violence or other catastrophic effect.

In his own writings, Joseph said, that in the event a black man (or, presumably a black woman) was so prepared, he would compare more than favorably to any white man. It was a matter of pragmatism, not principle, that made him take a stance against immediate and abrupt emancipation.

In his fatally incomplete 1844 candidacy for the presidency of the united States, he had a plank (for which he did not claim any revelation) calling for the sale of federal lands, the proceeds of which sales, would be used to purchase slaves. This would have been a reasonable alternative to the internecine war wages under Lincoln and Davis. It would also have avoided much of the racial tension that arose following the War Between the States. But the Carthage Greys (most of whom were proponents of slavery) made that a moot point.

I think Joseph approved the article and then when there was an adverse reaction from some LDS he layed the blame on Oliver.......

Writing for the Messenger and Advocate (April 9, 1836) newspaper on the subject of slavery, Joseph Smith states:

After having expressed myself so freely upon this subject, I do not doubt but those who have been forward in raising their voice against the South, will cry out against me as being uncharitable, unfeeling and unkind-wholly unacquainted with the gospel of Christ. It is my privilege then, to name certain passages from the bible, and examine the teachings of the ancients upon this nature, as the fact is incontrovertible, that the first mention we have of slavery is found in the holy bible, pronounced by a man who was perfect in his generation and walked with God. And so far from that prediction's being averse from the mind of God it remains as a lasting monument of the decree of Jehovah, to the shame and confusion of all who have cried out against the South, in consequence of their holding the sons of Ham in servitude!

And he said cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren. And he said, Blessed be the Lord God of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant. God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem and Canaan shall be his servant."

Trace the history of the world from this notable event down to this day, and you will find the fulfillment of this singular prophecy. What could have been the design of the Almighty in this wonderful occurrence is not for me to say; but I can say that the curse is not yet taken off the sons of Canaan, neither will be until it is affected by as great power as caused it to come; and the people who interfere the least with the decrees and purposes of God in this matter, will come under the least condemnation before him; and those who are determined to pursue a course which shows an opposition and a feverish restlessness against the designs of the Lord, will learn, when perhaps it is too late for their own good, that God can do his own work without the aid of those who are not dictate by his counsel.

Thinking, perhaps, that the sound might go out, that "an abolitionist" had held forth several times to this community, and that the public feeling was not aroused to create mobs or disturbances, leaving the impression that all he said was concurred in, and received as gospel and the word of salvation. I am happy to say, that no violence or breach of the public peace was attempted, so far from this, that all except a very few, attended to their own avocations and left the gentleman to hold forth his own arguments to nearly naked walls.

Not long since a gentleman of the Presbyterian faith came to this town (Kirtland) and proposed to lecture upon the abolition question. Knowing that there was a large branch of the church of Latter Day Saints in this place, who, as a people, are liberal in our sentiments; he no doubt anticipated great success in establishing his doctrine among us. But in this he was mistaken. The doctrine of Christ and the systems of men are at issue and consequently will not harmonize together.

I see no problem with Joseph later changing his mind on this issue to one of non-support for slavery. It would be congruent with his character to do so.

While I have already agreed that Joseph wrote the article actually attested to him in the same issue of the Messenger and Advocate you quoted earlier (and which you quote from above), I reiterate that Joseph did not write the article you said he did.

I agree that he was opposed to the abolitionist movement in the 1830s for reasons entirely reasonable. We have seen the failure of freedom to take root in the old Soviet empire (e.g., Czech Republic, Poland, etc.) because the people are totally unable to govern themselves due to a sad lack of "corporate memory" of how to do it. The slaves of the post-bellum South did the same thing, very nearly exactly as Joseph said they would. It took decades for them to become self-governing, even though they had a great model in their white neighbors (who'd had the serious advantage of that "Freedom DNA"). It took only a few more decades to destroy that self-government mentality by other white people (in the form of racist government nannyism).

Even in absolute numbers (not just per capita) black-on-white crime is 'way above white-on-black crime in USmerican cities, including all violent crime (rape and other sexual assaults not least), theft and others (largely due to idiotic drug laws in this country, especially the "War on Drugs").

I'd say Joseph was in the nine-ring, at least.

However, the charge is that he was a racist, I reject this entirely. There is simply nothing in his personal writings that supports such an accusation. He saw Negroes and Indians and all men

[Palerider]

Calling him a racist does not advance the discussion, and, as most all other uses of the label, is designed only to end the conversation.

Lehi

[Bernard Gui]

I just know the truth of the bible disagreeing with black and myself being cursed spirits like we are black demons according to the mormon infallible society at one time!

one love

I ask you to provide the reference in the Book of Mormon that supports your statement. In other words, CFR, please.

Bernard

[evangelist]

Before you keep running your mouth off and embarrassing yourself by talking about that which you don't know, read something from people who actually know what they're talking about.

Cheers. Merry Christmas!

What positions did black have before 1978 or what were they not accepted to be and do??

Also can a black become a president like Albama in the mormon church now and before??

Also the last question is how are blacks in thwe spirit world , are they the same as white people are and were??

one love

[CQUIRK]

What positions did black have before 1978 or what were they not accepted to be and do??

Also can a black become a president like Albama in the mormon church now and before??

Also the last question is how are blacks in thwe spirit world , are they the same as white people are and were??

one love

'Albama'? Does somebody need to use a spell checker here?

[evangelist]

'Albama'? Does somebody need to use a spell checker here?

Sorry ! Obama, Barack Hussein .

Now can you answer my question?

one love