Mormonism and Racial Supremacy

[Super Universe]

If God truly meant for the races to be separate then breeding would not be possible between them. The King James Bible has many rules about women being subservient to men.

Whatever the motivation is for these beliefs they are obvious human misinterpretations of revelation or even complete fabrications put in to support the religious writers views.

Ancient religious writers also put the old human tribal traditions of animal sacrifice into the bible so they could have fresh meat delivered to the steps of their temple, the "best of the flock" it says, as if God would want this.

In reality there is only one race, the human race.

 

[Booko]

Whatever the texts and interpretations in LDS on the subject of races, I would like to say this:

I've seen LDS missionaries many times in S. DeKalb County near one of our Baha'i Centers, in an area that's 98% black. They're sort of unmistakable.

One wonders why they would be trying to teach the African-Americans there, if they were so in favor of segregation and believed in racial superiority.

 

[cardero]

Not to take away from this thread but there was an interesting discussion about this in a thread entitled 1954, Jim Crow, and the LDS that may be useful.
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=33031&highlight=Mormons+Prejudice

 

[Ryan2065]

Whatever the texts and interpretations in LDS on the subject of races, I would like to say this:

I've seen LDS missionaries many times in S. DeKalb County near one of our Baha'i Centers, in an area that's 98% black. They're sort of unmistakable.

One wonders why they would be trying to teach the African-Americans there, if they were so in favor of segregation and believed in racial superiority.

Oh, I was asking historically... I don't believe it is the current doctrine, but in the past was it?

 

[Ody]

As per Becky's request, I moved this rabbit trail discussion (which started in the thread on God's gender) here. Becky said that it has never been a doctrine on the Mormon church that black people are cursed by God and that's why they have dark skin. I'm still collecting info on this subject, so I'll be adding sources to it periodically, but I wanted to start with this one:


Well, Becky, you said you hadn't heard this before...now you have.


For those Mormons who are not racist (and I know most of you aren't)...what is wrong with this guy's explanation here?

Source?

 

[Faint]

I'm also interested to see what you guys say about these verses from the Book of Mormon:

2 Nephi 5:21 For behold, they had hardened their hearts against him, that they had become like unto a flint; wherefore, as they were white, and exceedingly fair and delightsome, that they might not be enticing unto my people the Lord God did cause a skin of blackness to come upon them.

Alma 3:6 And the skins of the Lamanites were dark, according to the mark which was set upon their fathers, which was a curse upon them because of their transgression and their rebellion against their brethren, who consisted of Nephi, Jacob, and Joseph, and Sam, who were just and holy men.

No really, how do the modern LDS folk interpret the above passages? I'm not really up on my Mormonisms...but from a layman's perspective, the black skin seems to be a representation of a curse. Is this meant to imply that people with darker skin are somewhat worse than the white folk (since they bear a "mark"), or that they're uglier (so that "they might not be enticing unto [someone's] people")?

I know the Church of LDS is not a racist institution, but it may be worth mentioning that the Warren Jeffs' FLDS is highly racist...might they be drawing a racist interpretation from the Book of Mormon as well, and if so is this viewpoint justified based on the original text?

 

[nutshell]

What about this?

http://lds-mormon.com/racism.shtml


At the top it says "Mormon Doctrine" and its in favor of segregation... Was this a part of Mormon Doctrine?

"Mormon Doctrine" is the unfortunate title of this book independantly written by a church leader who was giving his opinions. Much of it is accurate, much of it is not.

This book has nothing to do with our canon.

 

[nutshell]

No really, how do the modern LDS folk interpret the above passages? I'm not really up on my Mormonisms...but from a layman's perspective, the black skin seems to be a representation of a curse. Is this meant to imply that people with darker skin are somewhat worse than the white folk (since they bear a "mark"), or that they're uglier (so that "they might not be enticing unto [someone's] people")?

I honestly don't know if this "mark" was literal or not. I like to think it was symbolic. We often read in the bible that are garments are made white or clean by the blood of Christ. Of course, that doesn't happen literally (and would be pretty freaky if it did), but it is symbolic.

I think what happened is early church leaders (who we do believe are fallible) were products of their time and when giving their own opinions said some things that by our standards today are pretty outrageous. As our cultural awareness increases as does our knowledge of science and technology, our interpretations of these and other scriptures change.

[/quote]I know the Church of LDS is not a racist institution, but it may be worth mentioning that the Warren Jeffs' FLDS is highly racist...might they be drawing a racist interpretation from the Book of Mormon as well, and if so is this viewpoint justified based on the original text?[/quote]

Interesting. I don't believe his viewpoint is justifed. He is misinterpreting the text. This was basically a one-time event to separate believers from non-believers, but there is examples of people from both groups eventually visiting each other and teaching each other about God.

 

[Bishka]

Mark E. Petersen was voicing his own opinion and was not stating LDS doctrine.

Which is what I said in a matter of words, but apparently, I don't know enough my own Church doctrine to know it. :sarcastic

 

[Bishka]

Was Mr Peterson considered a prophet?

No, not at all. It would be Elder Peterson actually.

 

[Bishka]

What man is worshipped by LDS? When did God say follow Mark E. Peterson? Where does the BOM say to be like him instead of making your own choices in life?

The pope recently insulted Muslims. Might there just be a few good Muslims in the world?

This is the problem with placing humans in religious leadership positions. They make mistakes. To some degree we all have prejudices and bigotry, anger and self value issues to deal with. These are reflections of us not of God nor of any whole faith.

Did you not see what was posted? We said we don't follow him. Does anybody read the
LDS'ers posts on this, or are we just to be ignored about our own doctrine?:sarcastic

 

[Bishka]

What about this?

http://lds-mormon.com/racism.shtml


At the top it says "Mormon Doctrine" and its in favor of segregation... Was this a part of Mormon Doctrine?

None of it.

*Sigh*

Just becuase it has a title doesn't mean it's doctrine. :no:

 

[Bishka]

Oh, I was asking historically... I don't believe it is the current doctrine, but in the past was it?

No, not at all, but some people may have believe it, but that DOES NOT mean it is doctrine.

 

[Bishka]

Just a quick question,

Even if we say it was NEVER doctrine and NEVER will be, why keep presenting things to try to 'prove us wrong'?

 

[Super Universe]

Did you not see what was posted? We said we don't follow him. Does anybody read the
LDS'ers posts on this, or are we just to be ignored about our own doctrine?:sarcastic

I've been defending your religion but why should I continue to do so when I'm just going to be attacked by you?

I'm not the one posting racist quotes from LDS leaders.

Why is everyone ignoring what you say?

Because you're late to the conversation and because you are not an elder in the LDS church whereas Mark E. Peterson sure seems to be.

So what you don't follow him, other LDS might, he is an elder after all, a leader in your faith, someone who is supposed to guide LDS about the meanings in the BOM.

Are you an LDS elder?

 

[Bishka]

I've been defending your religion but why should I continue to do so when I'm just going to be attacked by you?

Is that what you call it?

Because you're late to the conversation and because you are not an elder in the LDS church whereas Mark E. Peterson sure seems to be.

It't just that. I'm saying -- this has happened plenty of times, we explain it, but no one seems to listen or care.

Should it matter if I'm an Elder or not? Does that make me any less realiable on the information that I present? Do you even know what an Elder is?

So what you don't follow him

I don't necessarily "follow" him. He's an elder, we don't follow anyone in our Church except the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. We listen to council given from FALLIABLE men.

, other LDS might, he is an elder after all, a leader in your faith, someone who is supposed to guide LDS about the meanings in the BOM.

And? It's NOT doctrine. How many times do we have to say that?

Are you an LDS elder?

Why does that matter? I teach Sunday School to my entire congregation - I teach what the scriptures say. Does that make me any less reliable?

 

[Katzpur]

Is this not what it says in the Book of Mormon? If not then complain about this site http://scriptures.lds.org/ and not me.

Well, if you want to debate, it would help if you'd be more clear on your premise. Why don't you start by telling us whether you're questioning the LDS doctrine concerning the Blacks or the Native Americans?

 

[Katzpur]

What about this?

http://lds-mormon.com/racism.shtml


At the top it says "Mormon Doctrine" and its in favor of segregation... Was this a part of Mormon Doctrine?

The book "Mormon Doctrine" is one man's interpretation of LDS doctrine. The book itself is not part of the LDS canon.

 

[Katzpur]

What about this?

http://lds-mormon.com/racism.shtml


At the top it says "Mormon Doctrine" and its in favor of segregation... Was this a part of Mormon Doctrine?

We have never in our history had segregated congregations. For a period of time, Black men were denied the priesthood. This was not a matter of doctrine, but of policy.

 

[Super Universe]

Is that what you call it?
It't just that. I'm saying -- this has happened plenty of times, we explain it, but no one seems to listen or care.

Should it matter if I'm an Elder or not? Does that make me any less realiable on the information that I present? Do you even know what an Elder is?

I don't necessarily "follow" him. He's an elder, we don't follow anyone in our Church except the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. We listen to council given from FALLIABLE men.



And? It's NOT doctrine. How many times do we have to say that?

Why does that matter? I teach Sunday School to my entire congregation - I teach what the scriptures say. Does that make me any less reliable?

Yes, I have been defending your faith. That is what I call it. How do you see any of my remarks as being against LDS? Why am I always a target for your misplaced anger?

This has happened plenty of times? Well it's the first time that I have come across LDS being accused of racism in it's BOM and from an elder's mouth.

And to give you some background the Urantia Book has some things in it that can be construed as racist, it calls the Yellow race "superior" and the black race "backwards". When I first joined RF I had quite a battle with Jayhawker Soule about it and no one came to my support (I was new here) so I know what it is like.

Should it matter if you are an elder or not? To me, no, but to others it absolutely does. So what if it's not doctrine, if this man is indeed an elder then he should be removed from this position. If not then it sends the message that the entire LDS faith agrees with his interpretation. Just as all of you LDS are here now arguing against this shows that the LDS do not condone this elder.