Another Priesthood Ban Thread

[Saints Alive]

Suppose during general conference Pres. Monson reveals the true origin of the Priesthood ban, how would you react if it turns out that the ban (for whatever explanation) was a bone fide revelation and not mere folklore or enduring policy? In other thread many feel certain that the ban was a racist policy brought about by imperfect men, would it affect your testimony if it turns out that the ban was from God?

DISCLAIMER: This thread is for the sole purpose of examining participants feeling if they were to find out the true origin of the Priesthood ban (whatever that might be) specifically if the ban were to be revealed to be bona fide revelation. In accordance with the site moderators requests please DO NOT speculate about what that origin might be, or formulate your own theories. It is not the intent of this thread to further propagate or create false doctrine. Please tread lightly, Thank you.

MODERATORS: According to my understanding of the site rules this thread should be fair game, if it turns out to be to provocative and you deem it must be closed, I apologies in advance.

[JAHS]

If the ban was from God I can accept that because god knows what is best for his church and people at any given point of time in history.

[rodheadlee]

If the ban was from God I can accept that because god knows what is best for his church and people at any given point of time in history.

ditto

[Freedom]

All those who have speculated on the origin have no evidence for their position so nobody should be concerned. The problem is, there are many here who are convinced the ban was based on racism despite the complete lack of evidence; in fact some even get enraged with anybody who suggests otherwise. To those, arguing it is divinely appointed would be like having the prophet declare that the Book of Mormon is not a true record of an ancient people; it just won't happen.

[LeSellers]

The problem is, there are many here who are convinced the ban was based on racism despite the complete lack of evidence; in fact some even get enraged with anybody who suggests otherwise. To those, arguing it is divinely appointed would be like having the prophet declare that the Book of Mormon is not a true record of an ancient people; it just won't happen.

I believe you would have better expressed this had you said: "... in their minds, it just won't happen." Otherwise, if I had a dozen Rep Points, you'd get 'em all.

Lehi

[thesometimesaint]

JAHS:

Agreed.

[BlueDreams]

I'd take that to mean it was revelation.

It probably wouldn't change my mind that it was based on the racism of the people. I'd assume it would probably just be a glorified time out from God. The racist context in which the ban occured are pretty obvious and even if it were revelation, I'd assume it had less to do with lineage (sure, God has limited it, but he also hasn't at times (and far more recently than when it was restrictive). It's not justifiable policy solely based on lineage) and more to do with the spiritual state of the people of that time.

With luv,

BD

Edited March 6, 2012 by BlueDreams

[cinepro]

I would just do what Church members in 2062 will be doing and assume President Monson is wrong on the subject.