This guy is Mormon?

[Archie Moses]

Then how did the guy on BYU get caught this past season? Did someone snitch? And is someone snitching enough evidence to be punished?

His girlfriend squealled twice.

 

[7StraightIsGreat]

I was thinking the same thing. Isn't he going to be the first, "African American" to go to BYU?

It's getting attention because you almost NEVER see a black, inner-city, mega-recruit from Chicago who just happens to be Mormon.

 

[kwb]

His girlfriend squealled twice.

We know that but did she confess and that's how he got caught?

 

[Duck Rodgers]

And they got Demarcus Harrison, a Black Mormon, from South Carolina last year, who isn't the player Jabari is, but probably a better athlete. A pic from BYU playing in Greece today :



Mormon demographics are rapidly changing. Utah County demographics are changing. BYU is going to dominate. It's not even a white church outside of the US so I'm not sure why this is surprising. Black people like God too.

 

[GVC]

Black people like God too.

Although not necessarily a God who thinks they were fence sitters in the pre-existence...

 

[7StraightIsGreat]

BYU is going to dominate.

(Insert emoticon of hand making ******** motion here)

 

[Beantown]

Although not necessarily a God who thinks they were fence sitters in the pre-existence...

That's not church doctrine and you know it.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

Almost every religion has previous affiliations to sexism/racism, it's not unique to Mormonism. Mormonism just has the least amount of distance (in terms of years) of being accepting of everyone. It's going to take time for it to be accepted religion among Africans.

 

[The-Joker]

That's not church doctrine and you know it.

That's only half true...


LDS Apostle Bruce R. McConkie wrote

...Of the two-thirds who followed Christ, however, some were more valiant than others. Those who were less valiant in pre-existence and who thereby had certain spiritual restrictions imposed upon them during mortality are known to us as the negroes.

Negroes in this life are denied the priesthood; under no circumstances can they hold this delegation of authority from the Almighty.

The present status of the negro rests purely and simply on the foundation of pre-existence. Along with all races and peoples he is receiving here what he merits as a result of the long pre-mortal probation in the presence of the Lord. The principle is the same as will apply when all men are judged according to their mortal works and are awarded varying statuses in the life hereafter.[6]

This policy was known informally as the "Negro doctrine."

I don't think it's totally cool either, especially since Joseph Smith clearly endorsed Blacks being granted the priesthood.

But that's the bureaucracy of religion for ya...

 

[Craig K. Manscill]

Well, you have to remember to make the distinction between what USED to be doctrine and what currently is NOW doctrine. So Beantown is completely right, that doctrine is dynamic and in flux, and even though it used to be doctrine, we put it in the past so it doesn't matter anymore.

- Craig

 

[Hantlers]

Parker is a pretty big fan of Duke.

 

[NUMBERICA]

That's only half true...


LDS Apostle Bruce R. McConkie wrote




I don't think it's totally cool either, especially since Joseph Smith clearly endorsed Blacks being granted the priesthood.

But that's the bureaucracy of religion for ya...

There is also this:

And after the flood we are told that the curse that had been pronounced upon Cain was continued through Ham’s wife, as he had married a wife of that seed. And why did it pass through the flood? Because it was necessary that the devil should have a representation upon the earth as well as god.

I'll probably never understand how you can claim to have direct communication with the almighty (who is reportedly omniscient, omnipotent, and never changes his mind [why should He?]) and have a 100-something year gaffe like this. Or why everyone can't even have a unified alibi for such beliefs. Oh well! I'm sure glad Dude or Kimball had that change of heart, whatever it was that caused it.

 

[Jazz Spazz]

I'll probably never understand how you can claim to have direct communication with the almighty (who is reportedly omniscient, omnipotent, and never changes his mind [why should He?]) and have a 100-something year gaffe like this. Or why everyone can't even have a unified alibi for such beliefs. Oh well! I'm sure glad Dude or Kimball had that change of heart, whatever it was that caused it.

It's hard to "understand" when your intent, or approach is to find fault or scoff and scorn.

Are you Agnostic, Athiest, or something else in your belief or disbelief and set of values/lack of values?

I will ignore your alibi garbage because that's all it is, an attempt to belittle someone else's beliefs while not using a word correctly.

As to the "God never changes His mind", there is a difference between God never changing, and never changing his mind, or changing things for people on the earth. For instance, the first time Moses came down from the mount with some laws or commandments he found the people worshipping idols so he broke the tablets and went back up to the mountain. The next time he came down he came down with the 10 commandments which were lesser commandments that maybe the people could handle. Does that mean the nature of God changes, or just that the people needed something different so (in today's world terms) policy or procedure was changed to give the people a chance to succeed? [that was a rhetorical question in case you missed it]

I apologize for my attitude, sometimes it's difficult to not be a mirror and reflect things right back the way they came.

 

[GVC]

It's hard to "understand" when your intent, or approach is to find fault or scoff and scorn.

It's hard to "understand" the McConkie statement, hard as anyone tries. Maybe YOU should try harder to understand where others are coming from instead of just expecting them to understand where you're coming from, no?

 

[Jazz Spazz]

It's hard to "understand" the McConkie statement, hard as anyone tries. Maybe YOU should try harder to understand where others are coming from instead of just expecting them to understand where you're coming from, no?

Yea, I should. I get that it's a hard thing for some people to get, but approaching it in a mocking, and scoffing manner does not help, no?

At some point there should be two sides to a conversation if it is to be a real conversation. There should be looking at things from each point of view as part of the discussion. It is difficult to get to that point when the starting point is mockery.

 

[GVC]

Yea, I should. I get that it's a hard thing for some people to get, but approaching it in a mocking, and scoffing manner does not help, no?

Fair enough.

 

[Beantown]

Well, you have to remember to make the distinction between what USED to be doctrine and what currently is NOW doctrine. So Beantown is completely right, that doctrine is dynamic and in flux, and even though it used to be doctrine, we put it in the past so it doesn't matter anymore.

- Craig

It never was doctrine, it was something he wrote in a book. The biggest problem with outsiders looking at the church is if a member or church official isnt perfect then it's something wrong with the church not the individual.

 

[The-Joker]

It never was doctrine, it was something he wrote in a book. The biggest problem with outsiders looking at the church is if a member or church official isnt perfect then it's something wrong with the church not the individual.

Ya... stupid "outsiders"... it's their fault... they are supposed to know people called directly by god to dictate his true word and prophesy unto the "gentiles" about God's path in challenges pertaining to their life (like biblical justification of racism), are only speaking the true word of god "most" of the time, and they, themselves, are supposed to differentiate from The Word and everything else. Stupid, stupid, outsiders.

But you have to give them some leeway for 'some' confusion. Its not like McConkie was some racist ward clerk with a webblog where he complained about negroes and kids playing on his lawn. McConkie, apart from the prophet, was probably the top church member of the time, when it came to interpreting the scriptures, and determining "doctrine". It's a little confusing when 'that' guy is wrong.

I mean anything McConkie said was pretty much doctrine. It would be like if the current President of the Quorum of the 12 were to give a talk during General Conference and really insult and dictate blatant inaccuracies about a group of people who were born into their given predicament and did nothing themselves to cause their inferred "source of shame" to be placed upon them... I mean that would be ABSOLUTELY ludicrous LOL for a man of god to "damn" them for something they can't control, I mean Jesus Christ HIMSELF said stuff like "Judge not (unrighteously), lest ye be judged". I mean that would be absolutely LUDICROUS and would NEVER-EVER HAPPEN....

....oh, wait.... nevermind guys... carry on.


As a member of The Church I find it easiest to deal with my conscience, by taking what Ballard and McConkie say with a grain of salt. Those guys had/have a tendency to take prominent political/moral arguments of the time and justify their personal beliefs with an "uninspired church interpretation" that is only valid until it is disproven. I'm not saying those guys are wrong all of the time, they are probably even right most of the time, it's just the things they could be wrong about cause serious PR-trouble for the Church. I mean it seems like everytime Ballard gets a controversial thought, the church has to go all "Don-Draper" to defend their boy.

 

[Beantown]

The point is people can't seem to separate individuals from the church. The biggest reason people go inactive is individuals actions or words. Not the church. The same for people outside the church. When a Mormon does something indivually offensive they blame the church.

 

[NUMBERICA]

The point is people can't seem to separate individuals from the church. The biggest reason people go inactive is individuals actions or words. Not the church. The same for people outside the church. When a Mormon does something indivually offensive they blame the church.

Any man having one drop of the seed of [Cain] ... in him cannot hold the Priesthood and if no other Prophet ever spoke it before I will say it now in the name of Jesus Christ I know it is true and others know it.

I don't understand how you can't blame the church for having a 100+ year legacy of racism. These are the prophets and presidents that say they confer with god directly and make DOCTRINAL proclamations in his name. The church started and continue to use the above guy's name for the name of their highest institution of learning on top of that. How CAN you separate them?

If this is just Brigham Young being a total ******* in god's name, is that a ticket to spirit prison, outer darkness, or does he still go to the celestial kingdom because of his namesake? Maybe spirit prison and THEN celestial glory? I'd love to hear the thoughts on this if Young, F. Smith, Taylor, etc were just acting on their own accord in god's name and instituting and furthering a doctrine and policy as such.