Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

3rd Nephi 2


Recommended Posts

Posted

As a seminary teacher this year, I"m looking at tomorrow's lesson on the Lamanites joining the Nephites and the description of their skin turning light.  

Since I'm uncomfortable with the possible implications of righteousness = light skin, what is your opinion of me simply skipping this chapter so as to avoid this conversation? 

Would it be advisable to suggest they read it themselves and talk with their parents if they have any questions about that chapter?  Not make any big deal about it just make the comment and move on?

Posted

I would be perfectly fine with you just asking my kids what they felt about it and letting them feel safe about them expressing themselves while sharing how you trust God despite things like this making you uncomfortable.

Posted
10 hours ago, MustardSeed said:

As a seminary teacher this year, I"m looking at tomorrow's lesson on the Lamanites joining the Nephites and the description of their skin turning light.  

Since I'm uncomfortable with the possible implications of righteousness = light skin, what is your opinion of me simply skipping this chapter so as to avoid this conversation? 

Would it be advisable to suggest they read it themselves and talk with their parents if they have any questions about that chapter?  Not make any big deal about it just make the comment and move on?

I do not think it should be skipped. You might explain that some people view this as literal, and others view it as figurative. Either way, the eternal principles are the same: 1. righteousness brings blessings and rebellion brings curses and 2. God deals with His people within the parameters of their cultural expression and language (which are often limited) and may be misunderstood by other cultures without the aid of the Spirit. When we read the Book of Mormon, we are looking for eternal principles and their confirmation by the Spirit (Moroni's promise).

Posted (edited)
12 hours ago, MustardSeed said:

As a seminary teacher this year, I"m looking at tomorrow's lesson on the Lamanites joining the Nephites and the description of their skin turning light.  

Since I'm uncomfortable with the possible implications of righteousness = light skin, what is your opinion of me simply skipping this chapter so as to avoid this conversation? 

Would it be advisable to suggest they read it themselves and talk with their parents if they have any questions about that chapter?  Not make any big deal about it just make the comment and move on?

It should simply be explained as a simile for the degrees of glory in the resurrection. When the formerly spiritually unenlightened Lamanites first listened with open hearts to the preaching of the gospel, exercised living faith in Christ, descended in the depths of humility with broken hearts and contrite spirits, sincerely repented of their sins, and were finally baptized by water and the Spirt, they received a great infusion of redeeming spiritual light, a great transformation from a very real state of spiritual darkness to one of dazzling spiritual light that was plainly discernible to those previously redeemed souls who were already existing in a state of spiritual enlightenment.

Just as the redeemed souls in the resurrection will be easily identified by the degree of glory they have obtained, the formerly spiritually unenlightened Lamanites were easily identified by the righteous Nephites when the Lamanites passed from a state of spiritual darkness to a redeemed and spiritually enlightened state because “if you live close to God, in his infinite grace, you don’t have to tell it shows on your face.”

Edited by teddyaware
Posted
13 hours ago, MustardSeed said:

As a seminary teacher this year, I"m looking at tomorrow's lesson on the Lamanites joining the Nephites and the description of their skin turning light.  

Since I'm uncomfortable with the possible implications of righteousness = light skin, what is your opinion of me simply skipping this chapter so as to avoid this conversation? 

Would it be advisable to suggest they read it themselves and talk with their parents if they have any questions about that chapter?  Not make any big deal about it just make the comment and move on?

A 2nd comment in addition to the one I posted above: President Oaks, in this talk, https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/president-oaks-byu-devotional-october-2020-talk says (in part):

--------------------------

Current efforts to identify and eliminate personal and official racism are best accomplished if we understand its relationship to scriptural references in the Old Testament and even the New Testament. As believers relying on scriptural history, we can be troubled and misled by Bible-recorded scriptural directions or traditions that may be viewed as racist or discriminatory by modern definition. For example, within the tribes of Israel, only members of the tribe of Levi were accepted for service in the temple.[16] The Israelites were forbidden to marry the Canaanites and some others of surrounding lands.[17] The direction for Jews not to associate with Samaritans was because of their partial descent from non-Israelite peoples.[18]

Most importantly, the gospel was not to be taught to Gentiles (non-Israelites). Jesus Himself affirmed that restriction in strong language (“not meet to take the children’s bread and to cast it to dogs”[19]), but then made an exception for a faith-filled mother.[20] During His mortal ministry Jesus reversed the prohibition against associating with the Samaritans,[21] and by revelation after His mortal life He revoked the prohibition against taking the gospel to the Gentiles.[22] But these and other restrictions remain in scriptural history.

Using current definitions, some might call such divine actions and prophet-taught principles racist, but God, who is the loving Father of all nations, tribes, and ethnicities,[23] cannot be branded as racist for His dealings with His children. Often the reasons for His plan are not known or understandable to mortals. “For my thoughts are not your thoughts,” He said through the Prophet Isaiah, “neither are your ways my ways” (Isaiah 55:8).

Some have rejected some element of God’s plan as unreasonable according to cultural norms they could understand or accept.[24] Others, who have accepted God’s plan, have mistakenly relied on cultural norms to provide reasons God has not revealed.[25] Thus, both non-believers and believers can reject or attempt to amend divine plans by relying on cultural norms instead of the directions of God. The safest course is not to reject or supplement the divine plan by human reasoning. Those who cannot accept the prophetic decisions and practices of the past should consider Winston Churchill’s wise counsel quoted earlier: “[I]f we open a quarrel between the past and the present, we shall find that we have lost the future.”

------------------------------------------

Posted
17 minutes ago, MustardSeed said:

Thank you all for the insightful feedback - I taught the lesson, we read it, the kids reacted on their own with shock and awe.  So I told them the story of my husband on his mission converting a man who physically changed before everyone's eyes, and how hope changes folks.  I also mentioned that I see this phenomenon in my work when people start out depressed and end up treating it and becoming well, how the renewed hope is reflected in posture,tone of voice, bags and circles under eyes, and radiance of skin and hair.  I shared with them the recent words of pres. oaks and reminded them of the messages from conference.  Then, I said, "the church you are a part of today does not support racist ideas.  I don't tolerate racism.  Our Heavenly Father loves us all.  No one is less than anyone else. "

Then I said "if you have further questions, talk to your parents."

I decided to dive in because I don't want anyone to say nobody told them that this type of thing was in the BOM.  I also told them its OK to wrestle with their faith.  

 

Thanks for sharing what is a very sensitive topic and more importantly, a very sensitive real life experience you were willing to risk for the students' benefit. : ) You seemed to handle the topic quite well.

Having said that, I'd like to offer up my own critique of two things you mentioned that you might find helpful the next time around -

1) Make sure to best insure the students do not conflate the idea of 'radiance of skin' to mean a lightened skin color. There can be no connection. Extreme black skin can radiate the wonderful qualities of gospel conversion just as much as the lightest color of skin.

2) What happens if some of your students don't have parents they can go to for clarification and commentary? Making it clear you can fill that role as best you can I think would be important for them to know. Many times (as I'm sure you're aware) a solid bond between student and teacher can be more powerful than anything a student will receive at home. And what are black youth to do? Do you have any in your class? If not, rest assured the dynamic both spoken and unspoken would be radically different and even more sensitive if you did.

These are just two thoughts that occurred to me immediately. Typing it out also reminds me of how powerfully I feel about our Black brothers and sisters in and out of the church. : )

 

Posted
5 hours ago, Vanguard said:

Thanks for sharing what is a very sensitive topic and more importantly, a very sensitive real life experience you were willing to risk for the students' benefit. : ) You seemed to handle the topic quite well.

Having said that, I'd like to offer up my own critique of two things you mentioned that you might find helpful the next time around -

1) Make sure to best insure the students do not conflate the idea of 'radiance of skin' to mean a lightened skin color. There can be no connection. Extreme black skin can radiate the wonderful qualities of gospel conversion just as much as the lightest color of skin.

2) What happens if some of your students don't have parents they can go to for clarification and commentary? Making it clear you can fill that role as best you can I think would be important for them to know. Many times (as I'm sure you're aware) a solid bond between student and teacher can be more powerful than anything a student will receive at home. And what are black youth to do? Do you have any in your class? If not, rest assured the dynamic both spoken and unspoken would be radically different and even more sensitive if you did.

These are just two thoughts that occurred to me immediately. Typing it out also reminds me of how powerfully I feel about our Black brothers and sisters in and out of the church. : )

 

Thank you 

Posted
8 hours ago, The Mean Farmer said:

Marvin Perkins is your friend here.

 

This deserves repeating.

I was about to post this myself and then this appeared.  I have invited Marvin to a fireside or two and he is a wonderful man and very easy to work with.  He lives just a few miles from me.

Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

Considering the entire context and history of the Book of Mormon, we should not feel obliged to accept the accusation that it is racist.

In fact I would be careful NOT to associate this with the "Blacks and the Priesthood" discussions- this is not about racism at all- the Marvin Perkins materials will help you understand if you do not understand it yet.

We are all brown unless you are an albino and no one of course means that when they talk about "white people", some of us just have more melanin than others.  Should that come up- I would take it straight along the Marvin Perkins approach 

This is a great opportunity to get those kids on the right track possibly before they hear any of the anti claims, and allow THEM to be able to answer others if needed.

Edited by mfbukowski
Posted
1 hour ago, mfbukowski said:

In fact I would be careful NOT to associate this with the "Blacks and the Priesthood" discussions- this is not about racism at all- the Marvin Perkins materials will help you understand if you do not understand it yet.

I came to that conclusion long ago while studying the issue in context of the BoM. I thought that was the point I was making. I guess I wasn’t successful. 

1 hour ago, mfbukowski said:

We are all brown unless you are an albino and no one of course means that when they talk about "white people", some of us just have more melanin than others.  Should that come up- I would take it straight along the Marvin Perkins approach 

This is a great opportunity to get those kids on the right track possibly before they hear any of the anti claims, and allow THEM to be able to answer others if needed.

I agree that we should not ignore these things but seek to give honest and accurate answers. 

Posted
16 hours ago, CV75 said:

I do not think it should be skipped. You might explain that some people view this as literal, and others view it as figurative. Either way, the eternal principles are the same: 1. righteousness brings blessings and rebellion brings curses and 2. God deals with His people within the parameters of their cultural expression and language (which are often limited) and may be misunderstood by other cultures without the aid of the Spirit. When we read the Book of Mormon, we are looking for eternal principles and their confirmation by the Spirit (Moroni's promise).

I have told stories before about how I met people in the community before I was a member and I noticed that they had a kind of "light" in their countenances - and I seemed to be drawn to that quality.

The first time I want to a stake conference after becoming a member, all those folks were there.   True story

 

Posted
22 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

I agree that we should not ignore these things but seek to give honest and accurate answers. 

I hope I did not imply otherwise

Posted
On 10/29/2020 at 8:07 PM, MustardSeed said:

As a seminary teacher this year, I"m looking at tomorrow's lesson on the Lamanites joining the Nephites and the description of their skin turning light.  

Since I'm uncomfortable with the possible implications of righteousness = light skin, what is your opinion of me simply skipping this chapter so as to avoid this conversation? 

Would it be advisable to suggest they read it themselves and talk with their parents if they have any questions about that chapter?  Not make any big deal about it just make the comment and move on?

Do not skip the subject. Prepare yourself accordingly and if a question arises that you do not have the answer, just say so and promise to inquire with others and sources as to secure an appropriate response. This article is a good one:  "Skins as Garments in the Book of Mormon" by Ethan Sproat in Journal of Book of Mormon Studies. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/jbms/vol24/iss1/7/

I am of African descent and never shy away from topics that may be delicate or "controversial". We may not have an explanation but God does not do random. If there are errors, misinterpretations or omissions those are always OURS, fallen, imperfect creatures. Not ALL truth has been revealed.

Beyond that, the event described in scripture has a cultural, historical and theological context that was unique. No everything we read in scripture applies to us. It is certainly beneficial to us from a spiritual standpoint, but not necessarily applicable today.

 

Posted
12 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

It occurred to me this week that the Nephites never sought to enslave the Lamanites. Just the opposite. 

They put prisoners of war to work. 
 

And we have the record from the Nephite POV. The Lamanites might tell a different story. 

Posted (edited)
21 hours ago, Calm said:

They put prisoners of war to work. 
 

And we have the record from the Nephite POV. The Lamanites might tell a different story. 

...to strengthen the Nephite defenses. That’s what prisoners of war do. Rarely are they treated humanely. Most often they die from neglect, starvation, or exhaustion. I think the record shows  Nephite military leaders on the humane side. Prisoners either drain the resources of their captors, work for them, or are exchanged for other prisoners. The latter was the go-to goal of the Nephite leaders. For example, Helaman offered an exchange of prisoners, but the Lamanites refused. Moroni was able to negotiate a favorable exchange. 

There are numerous examples of Lamanites putting Nephites into bondage, often at the instigation of Nephite traitors. 

We need to find that lost Book of Laman.

Of, wait! It has been found! 🙂

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1952286.The_Lost_Plates_of_Laman

Twice!

https://www.amazon.com/Book-Laman-Mette-Ivie-Harrison/dp/0998605247/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&hvadid=77927912225644&hvbmt=be&hvdev=c&hvqmt=e&keywords=book+of+laman&qid=1604344398&sr=8-1&tag=mh0b-20

 

EDIT: The Nephites neither plotted nor endeavored to enslave Lamanites. Rather they sought to win them over by preaching the gospel to them, sometimes at great sacrifice and risk to themselves. Any time Lamanites came to the Nephites it was with weapons in the attitude of total war. Prisoners of war were taken by the Nephites only when Lamanites tried to enslave the Nephites. They never raided Lamanite country to enslave the people.

Edited by Bernard Gui
Posted
1 minute ago, Bernard Gui said:

...to strengthen the Nephite defenses. That’s what prisoners of war do. They either drain the resources of their captors or work for them. Helaman offered an exchange of prisoners, but the Lamanites refused.

We need to find that lost Book of Laman.

There are numerous examples of Lamanites putting Nephites into bondage, often at the instigation of Nephite traitors. 
 

 

I am not disagreeing that in the case of prisoners it is wrong to put them to work.  But it is still enslavement to force them to imo.

Posted
32 minutes ago, Calm said:

I am not disagreeing that in the case of prisoners it is wrong to put them to work.  But it is still enslavement to force them to imo.

Do you see it as enslavement when we do that today with our prison system?  

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...