Question About Curse Of Cain Myth And The 1800S

[Hamilton Porter]

Most of how the Book of Mormon and the Book of Abraham reflected the 19th century environment (infant baptism, universalism controversies, Arminianism vs. Calvinism, mode of baptism, name of Church) can be easily understood within the framework of divine providence.

How are the curse of Cain and its sister notion about Lamanites explained?

[thesometimesaint]

None. Those controversies predate JS by at least 1805 years.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

Most of how the Book of Mormon and the Book of Abraham reflected the 19th century environment (infant baptism, universalism controversies, Arminianism vs. Calvinism, mode of baptism, name of Church) can be easily understood within the framework of divine providence.

How are the curse of Cain and its sister notion about Lamanites explained?

They happened?

[Kevin Christensen]

For the cultural background for interpretations of the curse of Cain, which cultural baggage influenced how the LDS interpreted the Book of Abraham see:

https://byustudies.byu.edu/showTitle.aspx?title=7674

For Nibley's close reading of the text, see his Abraham in Egypt. He points out that in Abraham, the curse has nothing to do with race or skin color, but involves the problem of claiming a patriarchal priesthood through a matrilinial line.

For the curse in the Book of Mormon, see John Tvedtnes:

http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/review/?vol=15&num=2&id=508

FWIW,

Kevin Christensen

Pittsburgh, PA

[Hamilton Porter]

For the cultural background for interpretations of the curse of Cain, which cultural baggage influenced how the LDS interpreted the Book of Abraham see:

https://byustudies.b...aspx?title=7674

For Nibley's close reading of the text, see his Abraham in Egypt. He points out that in Abraham, the curse has nothing to do with race or skin color, but involves the problem of claiming a patriarchal priesthood through a matrilinial line.

For the curse in the Book of Mormon, see John Tvedtnes:

http://maxwellinstit...15&num=2&id=508

FWIW,

Kevin Christensen

Pittsburgh, PA

So the environment was what induced the racist interpretation of those texts. Gotcha.

[thesometimesaint]

We are all subjects to our own culture.

[Hamilton Porter]

We are all subjects to our own culture.

Yes, our scriptures are too when they are saying good stuff.

[Damien the Leper]

The racism demonstrated in the Book of Mormon is a serious reflection of the 19th century mindset of some Americans. I don't understand why Joseph decided to write this other than as an attempt to give origin to different skin color or to give relatability to the people of the time. Personally, I see no reason to believe that white skin color was the only skin color from the origin of creation. It just seems silly to me.

I agree, however, that the skin curse is mere myth.

[thesometimesaint]

Valentinus:

The Nineteen Century didn't invent racism. It goes back at least 4,000 years before then.

[Damien the Leper]

Valentinus:

The Nineteen Century didn't invent racism. It goes back at least 4,000 years before then.

I understand that. I was speaking of a 19th century man writing a 19th century book of scripture and the theologies contained in it.

[thesometimesaint]

Valentinus:

I know that. What I am saying is that racism is nothing new. For the Saints the BoM is ancient Scripture that it addresses issues as common in their day as it is in ours. It should come as no surprize. It has been a problem common for all of mankinds recorded history. For those that are not Saints it shouldn't come as a surprize that it was addressed in the 19th century as well as in every century before and since.

[JeremyOrbe-Smith]

If the Book of Mormon is just a typical 19th-century pseudo-scriptural production by a racist man preaching against black skin, then so is the Bible.

[Log]

For the curse in the Book of Mormon, see John Tvedtnes:

http://maxwellinstit...15&num=2&id=508

Thanks for that reference. I had completely forgotten that essay. I was just saying to another poster that that was my view of the Book of Mormon - that it is actually an anti-racist tract even granting the literality of the imposition of the skin of blackness upon Laman, Lemuel, their seed, and the seed of whomsoever mixed with them.

[Doug the Hutt]

If the Book of Mormon is just a typical 19th-century pseudo-scriptural production by a racist man preaching against black skin, then so is the Bible.

2 Cor. 13:1:

...In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.

http://www.lds.org/scriptures/nt/2-cor/13.1?lang=eng

Better toss in the Book of Abraham (fac. 3 --> Olimlah the slave) as the third member of the ~racist scripture triumvirate~.

http://www.lds.org/scriptures/pgp/abr/fac-3?lang=eng

[Minos]

So the environment was what induced the racist interpretation of those texts. Gotcha.

You are race baiting.