Priesthood And Edowment

[cinepro]

When I use the term "black", I am almost always referring to those of African lineage.

We know; it's just embarrassing to talk about "blacks" (or even worse, "negros") not being able to have the Priesthood. If we can use the more respectable-sounding "african-descent" distinction, then maybe the whole Priesthood ban thing will stop sounding so bad after a couple of generations. But I doubt it.

And since white Africans were given the Priesthood, it is a little disingenuous to protest the use of the word "black" in discussing the Priesthood ban. Yes, dark-skinned people from other areas of the world were given the Priesthood, but that doesn't mean it wasn't at least a partial factor in determining Priesthood eligibility.

So, it wasn't just a Priesthood ban, but also a ban on Priesthood blessings that extended to all of African lineage? I thought blacks were allowed baptism, before 1978? Aren't those Priesthood blessings?

Not letting [dark skinned people of African descent] join the Church?! Now that's just racist!

The interesting thing about the Priesthood ban is that if you take any aspect of it and ask a few questions, you quickly find a nonsensical conundrum of some sort. At that point, you can either have faith that it's from God and live with the conundrum, make up a doctrine of some sort that spackles over the discrepancy, or start opening up to the idea that some portion of the policy originated with man and not from God.

But once you do that, you've just yanked the thread that might unravel the whole dang sweater.

[Libs]

The interesting thing about the Priesthood ban is that if you take any aspect of it and ask a few questions' date=' you quickly find a nonsensical conundrum of some sort. At that point, you can either have faith that it's from God and live with the conundrum, make up a doctrine of some sort that spackles over the discrepancy, or start opening up to the idea that some portion of the policy originated with man and not from God.

But once you do that, you've just yanked the thread that might unravel the whole dang sweater.[/quote']

Yes, that seems to be the case. I don't believe this could have been from God. (I'm also out of the church..*sigh*)

[Hamba Tuhan]

When I use the term "black", I am almost always referring to those of African lineage.

I understand. That's because of where you live. I live where 'black' almost never refers to people of African lineage in its daily usage. I also live where 'blacks' experienced no priesthood restrictions, ever. Consequently, it's a important distinction to me personally.

So, it wasn't just a Priesthood ban, but also a ban on Priesthood blessings that extended to all of African lineage? I thought blacks were allowed baptism, before 1978? Aren't those Priesthood blessings?

Baptism is a blessing of the priesthood in the sense that all ordinances are performed by the authority of the priesthood, but the 'blessings of the priesthood' specifically refer to entering into the order of the priesthood, and that begins, for both men and women, with the endowment. You may want to read Pres Benson's entire talk, linked to above.

[Hamba Tuhan]

We know; it's just embarrassing to talk about "blacks" (or even worse, "negros") not being able to have the Priesthood. If we can use the more respectable-sounding "african-descent" distinction, then maybe the whole Priesthood ban thing will stop sounding so bad after a couple of generations. But I doubt it.

As per my response above, cinepro, you may not be as good at reading minds as you suppose. I personally know several 'blacks' who were ordained to priesthood office long before 1978, and I share a house with a (rare in these parts) refugee from Africa who joined the Church there. It's an important distinction for all of the above...just not for the cyncial and very American-centric reasons you've attributed.

[Hamba Tuhan]

(I'm also out of the church..*sigh*)

I'm not sure I understand the sigh exactly, but I share it. Perhaps the next step is one you already know from 'Little Gidding'?

[Libs]

I understand. That's because of where you live. I live where 'black' almost never refers to people of African lineage in its daily usage. I also live where 'blacks' experienced no priesthood restrictions, ever. Consequently, it's a important distinction to me personally.

Okay, thank you for the explanation. I didn't realize you were out of country.

Baptism is a blessing of the priesthood in the sense that all ordinances are performed by the authority of the priesthood, but the 'blessings of the priesthood' specifically refer to entering into the order of the priesthood, and that begins, for both men and women, with the endowment. You may want to read Pres Benson's entire talk, linked to above.

I think I understand what you're saying. There is a difference between receiving Priesthood blessings and actually entering into Priesthood covenants in the Temple.

I'm not sure I understand the sigh exactly, but I share it. Perhaps the next step is one you already know from 'Little Gidding'?

The sigh is a bit of regret that it didn't work out. Kind of like a marriage that breaks up...there may be good reasons for the split, but it can still be painful and regrettable that it didn't work out.

Not sure what "next step" you might be referring to...

[Hamba Tuhan]

The sigh is a bit of regret that it didn't work out. Kind of like a marriage that breaks up...there may be good reasons for the split, but it can still be painful and regrettable that it didn't work out.

Thanks for sharing. I think I understand. That's why I sighed with you.

Not sure what "next step" you might be referring to...

Well, in all your exploring, maybe don't be surprised if you end up back with the Saints again...and know the place for the first time. It's the most beautiful thing I know.

[cinepro]

As per my response above, cinepro, you may not be as good at reading minds as you suppose. I personally know several 'blacks' who were ordained to priesthood office long before 1978, and I share a house with a (rare in these parts) refugee from Africa who joined the Church there. It's an important distinction for all of the above...just not for the cyncial and very American-centric reasons you've attributed.

At the very least, I wish you would have quoted my second paragraph as well in your response. They both kind of went together.

[Avatar4321]

The sigh is a bit of regret that it didn't work out. Kind of like a marriage that breaks up...there may be good reasons for the split, but it can still be painful and regrettable that it didn't work out.

Not sure what "next step" you might be referring to...

Things don't have to not work out. You are always welcome back. And nothing is keeping you from talking with the Lord whether you are in or out of the Church.

[Libs]

Things don't have to not work out. You are always welcome back. And nothing is keeping you from talking with the Lord whether you are in or out of the Church.

Thanks, Avatar. I do still talk with God, everyday. I am a Christian (still) and have been attending a Protestant Church for the last (almost) two years.

[Robert F. Smith]

This, of course, was just one of the things that bothered me. I can understand it from a cultural standpoint. What I couldn't understand is how it could be considered revelation from God.

You are correct. It was clear to President David O. McKay that it was a cultural tradition and not doctrine. However, making the change in such an ingrained tradition required unanimity in the First Presidency and Twelve, and that would not be possible to obtain until 1978.

African-Americans were ordained to the priesthood from the beginning of the LDS Church:

Elijah Abel, born a slave in 1808, escaped slavery via the Underground Railroad, was baptized a Mormon in 1832, was ordained an elder by Joseph Smith in 1836 in Kirtland, Ohio, was made a seventy in 1836 or 1839, married a fellow African-American, served at least two missions: one to New York, another to Canada. He died in 1885 in Utah. His son Enoch was ordained an elder in 1900, and so was his grandson Elijah in 1935.

Another African-American member, Walker Lewis, was ordained an elder by William Smith, and LDS apostles who knew of it said nothing negative about it.

Joseph Smith was an abolitionist who ran for President of the USA in 1844 on a platform of freedom from slavery for all African-Americans.

The first notion that those of African ancestry might not be eligible for priesthood was stated by Brigham Young in 1849, but it was never applied to the Abels -- except that Elijah was not allowed to take his endowments.

For further information on such matters, see Gordon C. Thomasson, “Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and Anti-Slavery” in Encyclopedia of Anti-Slavery and Abolition (Greenwood Press, 2006), I:158-160; and Wikipedia on Elijah Abel .

[Hamba Tuhan]

You are correct. It was clear to President David O. McKay that it was a cultural tradition and not doctrine.

For another perspective, one can also consider Jacob 5 in the Book of Mormon. When I was working in America, my evening Institute teacher shared with me an email one night after we had been discussing this topic in light of Zenos's allegory. The email was from a mate of his who also taught Institute and who served in his local stake presidency. The visiting authority for their recent stake conference had been one of the Twelve, recently returned from Africa. During the priesthood leadership training meeting this apostle had said, according to this friend, that he'd just begun to understand why the Lord allowed the priesthood ban, and it was all in the context of Jacob 5.

[Libs]

Was he suggesting that the Priesthood ban had something to do with holding back, so a later grafting in, could take place, to save the vine?

[Hamba Tuhan]

Was he suggesting that the Priesthood ban had something to do with holding back, so a later grafting in, could take place, to save the vine?

Yes. Also concerns over not overwhelming the rootstock earlier in the process.

[Avatar4321]

The Lord has an order to all things. They happen in His timetable not ours. He didnt send the Gospel immediately to the Gentiles. He didnt even send it immediately to the Israelites because they weren't ready for the Gospel in it's fulness but could only handle the Law to point them to Christ. The Priesthood wasnt given to all men, it was given to select few, often based on lineage.

We all knew the time would come when the Prophecies would be fulfilled and that all men would recieve the priesthood who were worthy of it. And I think most of us rejoiced when the day finally came.

The beauty of it all is that no one has lost a chance for the blessings because all who ever lived can be ordained to the priesthood and recieve the blessings of the Endowement, whether they recieved it in this life or not.

God has a reason for doing things according to his own timetable. Always very wise reasons. I am often surprised people have difficulty recognizing that God can withhold or give blessings according to his time table and desire for very good purposes that we might understand. I think there is a tad bit of pride in assuming God would do things our way instead of seeking to understand the wisdom behind the way God does things.

I think that's why the Foundation of our Faith is Christ. And the Testimonies we recieve from the Holy Spirit. When the Lord reveals to us that Jesus is the Christ, that the Book of MOrmon and Bible are True, that we have living leaders who control the keys of the priesthood according to God's directions, other parts that we might not understand we can question with faith until we either understand them or we realize they may not be as important as originally thought.

I also wonder how this effect all the people we are still not preaching the Gospel to. They are not "banned" per se, but isnt our lack of preaching to them a type of temperary restriction to them now?

[Alla]

Avatar4321, Hamba Tuhan

Thanks, that was very interesting. I will re-read Jacob 5.

[cinepro]

You are correct. It was clear to President David O. McKay that it was a cultural tradition and not doctrine. However, making the change in such an ingrained tradition required unanimity in the First Presidency and Twelve, and that would not be possible to obtain until 1978.

Keeping in mind that two members of the Quorum of the 12 were not present for the final discussions and decision on the matter and were informed after the fact, maybe not even 1978.

[Kingsson]

The Lord has an order to all things. They happen in His timetable not ours. He didnt send the Gospel immediately to the Gentiles. He didnt even send it immediately to the Israelites because they weren't ready for the Gospel in it's fulness but could only handle the Law to point them to Christ. The Priesthood wasnt given to all men, it was given to select few, often based on lineage.

We all knew the time would come when the Prophecies would be fulfilled and that all men would recieve the priesthood who were worthy of it. And I think most of us rejoiced when the day finally came.

The beauty of it all is that no one has lost a chance for the blessings because all who ever lived can be ordained to the priesthood and recieve the blessings of the Endowement, whether they recieved it in this life or not.

God has a reason for doing things according to his own timetable. Always very wise reasons. I am often surprised people have difficulty recognizing that God can withhold or give blessings according to his time table and desire for very good purposes that we might understand. I think there is a tad bit of pride in assuming God would do things our way instead of seeking to understand the wisdom behind the way God does things.

I think that's why the Foundation of our Faith is Christ. And the Testimonies we recieve from the Holy Spirit. When the Lord reveals to us that Jesus is the Christ, that the Book of MOrmon and Bible are True, that we have living leaders who control the keys of the priesthood according to God's directions, other parts that we might not understand we can question with faith until we either understand them or we realize they may not be as important as originally thought.

I also wonder how this effect all the people we are still not preaching the Gospel to. They are not "banned" per se, but isnt our lack of preaching to them a type of temperary restriction to them now?

You have got your theology wrong.

[1] Acording to the New Testament, Every born again Christian is a priest unto God, There is no such thing as being ordained as a priest.

[2]There is no chace of anything after death, It is either heaven or hell, READ THE BIBLE, And you'll see the truth.

[3]God doesn't have a time table for blessing us, Every blessing has already been provided and we receive them by knowledge, faith and obedience.

[4]If you believe the Lord revealed to you that the Bible is true, WHY DON'T YOU BELIEVE IT??.

You can't make statements like you have if you believe the Bible, SO DO YOU BELIEVE IT OR NOT??.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

You have got your theology wrong.

[1] Acording to the New Testament, Every born again Christian is a priest unto God, There is no such thing as being ordained as a priest.

CFR please.

[2]There is no chace of anything after death, It is either heaven or hell, READ THE BIBLE, And you'll see the truth.

CFR. I am unaware of any verse telling us that right as soon as you die there is either an escalator to heavean or an escalator to hell.

[3]God doesn't have a time table for blessing us, Every blessing has already been provided and we receive them by knowledge, faith and obedience.

No major issue here.

[4]If you believe the Lord revealed to you that the Bible is true, WHY DON'T YOU BELIEVE IT??.

WE do, it is you that is having a hard time believing the bible. WEre in the bible does it claim it is complete?

You can't make statements like you have if you believe the Bible, SO DO YOU BELIEVE IT OR NOT??.

You can't make statements like you have if you believe the Bible, SO DO YOU BELIEVE IT OR NOT??.

[mfbukowski]

I find the idea that one must be endowed and married in a LDS Temple to enjoy the highest blessings of glory curious in light of this scripture...

(One must be baptized)

But I am just a simple country-boy, maybe I just don't read that well?

Gollllleeee Andy, whaaaa you are rahht!

The only problem is what happens to those who don't get baptized in this life?

They go to hell?

Never understood how you guys handle that question- ?

[Avatar4321]

You have got your theology wrong.

[1] Acording to the New Testament, Every born again Christian is a priest unto God, There is no such thing as being ordained as a priest.

[2]There is no chace of anything after death, It is either heaven or hell, READ THE BIBLE, And you'll see the truth.

[3]God doesn't have a time table for blessing us, Every blessing has already been provided and we receive them by knowledge, faith and obedience.

[4]If you believe the Lord revealed to you that the Bible is true, WHY DON'T YOU BELIEVE IT??.

You can't make statements like you have if you believe the Bible, SO DO YOU BELIEVE IT OR NOT??.

Actually, the New Testament is fairly clear that no one takes this honor on himself. He must be called of God as Aaron was. And How was Aaron called? The Lord revealed to Moses (IE one in authority) to go and set Aaron apart and confirm him a priest before the Congregations of Israel. This is the Lord's method clear in the Old and New Testament. What revelation have you recieved to change the way the Lord has established? Was not the convert Simon rebuked by Peter when he tried to purchase the ability to give the Holy Ghost? Why would he try to purchase something he was entitled to upon being a convert? You argument is completely contrary to the scriptures so again, where is your revelation?

The Lord preached salvation to the dead between His death and Resurrection. Peter testified to this. The Parable of the Prodigal son teaches this. Plus modern revelation expounds this. But you dont have to believe me. Just ask the Lord.

God doesn't have a time table? Which is why some are blessed sooner and others later. Take marriage for example. The Lord doesn't bless us with that blessing at the same time. Some are blessed with it quickly in life. Others have to wait for a very long time. The timing is the Lord's.

I believe the Bible. I just dont believe the nonsense you falsely attribute to the Bible. Especially when the Bible clear says the eact opposite.

Besides, the real question isn't whether I believe in the Bible. It's whether I believe in Christ or not. I believe in Christ. I listen to all His words. Even those not found in the Bible. The question is do you believe in Christ or not? If you do, then you must acknowledge that He gives all men and women the opportunity to recieve the blessings of his Atonement. Or are you suggesting that Christ is unjust?

[Kingsson]

CFR please.

CFR. I am unaware of any verse telling us that right as soon as you die there is either an escalator to heavean or an escalator to hell.

No major issue here.

WE do, it is you that is having a hard time believing the bible. WEre in the bible does it claim it is complete?

You can't make statements like you have if you believe the Bible, SO DO YOU BELIEVE IT OR NOT??.

Go and read the Bible, Then you'll find out what it says, Then ask yourself Is the Bible right or is the book of mormom right.

[Kingsson]

Actually, the New Testament is fairly clear that no one takes this honor on himself. He must be called of God as Aaron was. And How was Aaron called? The Lord revealed to Moses (IE one in authority) to go and set Aaron apart and confirm him a priest before the Congregations of Israel. This is the Lord's method clear in the Old and New Testament. What revelation have you recieved to change the way the Lord has established? Was not the convert Simon rebuked by Peter when he tried to purchase the ability to give the Holy Ghost? Why would he try to purchase something he was entitled to upon being a convert? You argument is completely contrary to the scriptures so again, where is your revelation?

The Lord preached salvation to the dead between His death and Resurrection. Peter testified to this. The Parable of the Prodigal son teaches this. Plus modern revelation expounds this. But you dont have to believe me. Just ask the Lord.

God doesn't have a time table? Which is why some are blessed sooner and others later. Take marriage for example. The Lord doesn't bless us with that blessing at the same time. Some are blessed with it quickly in life. Others have to wait for a very long time. The timing is the Lord's.

I believe the Bible. I just dont believe the nonsense you falsely attribute to the Bible. Especially when the Bible clear says the eact opposite.

Besides, the real question isn't whether I believe in the Bible. It's whether I believe in Christ or not. I believe in Christ. I listen to all His words. Even those not found in the Bible. The question is do you believe in Christ or not? If you do, then you must acknowledge that He gives all men and women the opportunity to recieve the blessings of his Atonement. Or are you suggesting that Christ is unjust?

[1]We are living in New Tesament times now, Not the old testamen times, under the Old testamen the only people who were anointed were the, Prophet Priest and King, But every Christian Is called and anointed to do what God has for them.

Every Christian is a priest unto God.

I don't see what Simon wanting the buy the power to give the Holy Ghost has anything to do with the subject, YOU ARE JUST BEING SILLY.

[2]My areguement isn't contary to the scriptures, It is you who is ignorant of the scriptures.

[3]There are two different Greek word for, "Preached" that Peter used, [1] was to proclaim the victory over the devil, 1 Pet 3: 19.

So Jesus didn't preach the gospel to them in 1 Pet 3: 19.

The other was to Evangelise to the already righteous Saints in peardise, [Arahams bosom], See Lk 16: 19--26. Jesus preached to those people in 1 Pet 4: 6... Other than this one time there is no mention of the dead having the gospel preached to them.

Besides, You need at leat two scriptures to build a doctrine.

[4] The devil believes the Bible and Jesus, Lots of false religious people believe Jesus, Lots of sinners believe Jesus, So you believeing Jesus doesn't count for much. It is what you do with what the Bible says that will either justify or condemn you.

[5] As for the call to the Five fold Ministry the Bible mentions, The Apostle, Prophet, Evangelist, Pastor and Teacher. PLEASE NOTE, NO PRIESTS OR PRIESTHOOD..

Jesus gives the five Ministries, Eph 4: 11--13. And God sets them in the Church, 1 Cor 12: 28--30.

No man can give these Ministers to the Church.

SO GO AND READ THE BIBLE and learn the truth.

[Hamba Tuhan]

Then ask yourself Is the Bible right or is the book of mormom right.

In my case, I very sincerely believe the Bible is right because the Book of Mormon taught me to believe it.

[Nathair/|\]

Go and read the Bible, Then you'll find out what it says, Then ask yourself Is the Bible right or is the book of mormom right.

False dichotomy, if you believe and understand one, you will believe the other, since they come from the same Source.

In my case, I very sincerely believe the Bible is right because the Book of Mormon taught me to believe it.

I'm in the same place. Were it not for the Book of Mormon, I would have serious concerns about the Bible and the Abrahamic tradition in general.