LDS general conference - Fall 2013

[Joe Bagadonuts]

I can assure that some of the active LDS women in my life are very smart and sophisticated. Are their those that are less intelligent and sophisticated? Of course there are. In any group with large membership numbers you will have that.

To assume that all members must be that way is foolish and to be honest a little bigotted. What that arguement is basically arguing is that Mormon women are unsophisticated and dumb. How is that different, in principle, from saying that all non Mormons are sinners and unelightened?

Edit: My response is targeted at the arguemernt and not you Joe.

Yeah, let me be clear. I was not making this argument. I was explaining the argument that I thought he was trying to make. Adding the part about women at the end might have made my post seem inflamatory or degrading to Mormon women (I see that now) but that was not at all the way I meant it. My point was that if we are to conclude that black people would only join the church if they either lacked knowledge of the situation or sophistication, we might also conclude the same thing about women.

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

Not all Africans are black.

Not all black converts to the church are idiots.

Not all women are idiots.

All of these statements are true, but I have been to Africa and (at least judging from the locations that I visited) it wouldn't make too much sense to go there to conduct missionary work if you were not interested in converting blacks.

 

[♪alt13]

I can assure that some of the active LDS women in my life are very smart and sophisticated. Are their those that are less intelligent and sophisticated? Of course there are. In any group with large membership numbers you will have that.

To assume that all members must be that way is foolish and to be honest a little bigotted. What that arguement is basically arguing is that Mormon women are unsophisticated and dumb. How is that different, in principle, from saying that all non Mormons are sinners and unelightened?

Edit: My response is targeted at the arguemernt and not you Joe.

I think a lot of mormons have this attitude. It is by far the number one thing that bugs secular people about the LDS church.

 

[Stoked]

Yeah, let me be clear. I was not making this argument. I was explaining the argument that I thought he was trying to make. Adding the part about women at the end might have made my post seem inflamatory or degrading to Mormon women (I see that now) but that was not at all the way I meant it. My point was that if we are to conclude that black people would only join the church if they either lacked knowledge of the situation or sophistication, we might also conclude the same thing about women.

That would stand to reason.

 

[Stoked]

I think a lot of mormons have this attitude. It is by far the number one thing that bugs secular people about the LDS church.

From my first hand experience that is much more a Utah Mormon attitude than a Mormon attitude. I say this from having lived in north and south Utah, Denver, Seattle, Memphis and Honduras. Being active and inactive. Mormons out side Utah and especially in Honduras seem to be very humble abou their faith.

 

[colton]

I thought he was referring to the fact that blacks couldn't hold the priesthood. Wasn't he specifically talking about African converts? If you had a physical trait that was beyond your control and discovered that an organization that was trying to recruit you was set up to permanently ban you from full membership because of that trait, would you join? I think it's fairly easy to argue that you lack either knowledge of the situation or the sophistication to understand the situation if you did. Of course, this argument could also be applied to women.

For what it's worth, I baptized about 9 black individuals while I was a missionary, about 7 from Africa, and one African-American couple. I thought exactly the same thing you are stating there, and I felt it was only fair for them to know at least some history of the priesthood ban. So I told them about how the church prohibited blacks from having the priesthood until 1978. I was somewhat surprised that it made absolutely no difference, for all of them. Every single person had the attitude that bygones were bygones, and they wouldn't dwell on what the policy had been in the past. Of course if the ban had still been in effect, that may well have affected their attitudes but as it was, it didn't.

 

[7StraightIsGreat]

The blacks/priesthood issue still bugs me and I'm always suprised when I see a black mormon. Yes, the ban was lifted in the 70's, but IMO the church rises or falls on the shoulders of Brigham Young and some of the completely insane things this guy believed. He is the #1 reason I've never been candidate to convert. Modern day Mormons brush off most of Young's quotes/antics with the "It was a very different time back then and we've moved past that" argument but I've never seen that as suitable reasoning.

If Brigham were brought back to life today, he'd probably be appauled by all of the progress the church has made because it would go against almost everything that he taught. For the record, I think Mormons today have done an excellent job with the modern day issues of equality. Removing the priesthood ban in 70's was the right thing to do and it even seems like they're inching towards similiar reconciliations with their homosexual members. However, it doesn't undo what was taught by a man who was supposed to the voice of God.

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

For what it's worth, I baptized about 9 black individuals while I was a missionary, about 7 from Africa, and one African-American couple. I thought exactly the same thing you are stating there, and I felt it was only fair for them to know at least some history of the priesthood ban. So I told them about how the church prohibited blacks from having the priesthood until 1978. I was somewhat surprised that it made absolutely no difference, for all of them. Every single person had the attitude that bygones were bygones, and they wouldn't dwell on what the policy had been in the past. Of course if the ban had still been in effect, that may well have affected their attitudes but as it was, it didn't.

Did you ever baptize a woman? Did you have a similar discussion with them... except, of course, for the part about the policy having been changed.

 

[UGLI baby]

The blacks/priesthood issue still bugs me and I'm always suprised when I see a black mormon. Yes, the ban was lifted in the 70's, but IMO the church rises or falls on the shoulders of Brigham Young and some of the completely insane things this guy believed. He is the #1 reason I've never been candidate to convert. Modern day Mormons brush off most of Young's quotes/antics with the "It was a very different time back then and we've moved past that" argument but I've never seen that as suitable reasoning.

If Brigham were brought back to life today, he'd probably be appauled by all of the progress the church has made because it would go against almost everything that he taught. For the record, I think Mormons today have done an excellent job with the modern day issues of equality. Removing the priesthood ban in 70's was the right thing to do and it even seems like they're inching towards similiar reconciliations with their homosexual members. However, it doesn't undo what was taught by a man who was supposed to the voice of God.

What are some of the crazy things Brigham did/said?

(honest question, I know next to nothing about mormons)


dat jazzfanz.com mobile app doe

 

[Bronco70]

Modern day Mormons brush off most of Young's quotes/antics with the "It was a very different time back then and we've moved past that" argument but I've never seen that as suitable reasoning.

This is a pretty broad generalization and doesn't apply to me or a lot of other mormons I know. Personally, I assume that BY was pretty much a racist. Truth be told, he had a lot of character flaws (especially by today's standards). I think many issues stem from the assumption that, if he's God's mouthpiece, he will always say and do the right thing. I don't agree with this. It's contradictory to the concept of agency. I think BY was the prez during that time for other reasons - more pragmatic, logistical reasons that had to do with getting the saints to Utah. And I am certain that plenty of policy is (and has been) formulated, in the church, without a direct green light from God. But that's purely me speculating.

Know that I am not arguing with you, merely sharing my perspective, as a mormon, on this question.

...I'm always suprised when I see a black mormon.

On paper, it may appear unreasonable for blacks to overlook the past, but I think that when someone finds something that makes a positive difference in their life, they are willing to excuse the imperfections.

 

[Stoked]

Did you ever baptize a woman? Did you have a similar discussion with them... except, of course, for the part about the policy having been changed.

I baptized several women. They all knew what the priesthood was, what it did and who could hold it and who could not. They still wished to be baptized.

 

[spycam1]

What are some of the crazy things Brigham did/said?

(honest question, I know next to nothing about mormons)


dat jazzfanz.com mobile app doe

-Racist comments like:

"Shall I tell you the law of God in regard to the African race? If the white man who belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the law of God, is death on the spot. This will always be so." (Journal of Discourses, vol. 10, p. 110).


-Weird things he taught as doctrine such as Blood Atonement (it basically means there are certain sins that are large enough that Christ's blood can't pay for them, and you have to pay for it...with your own blood).

"There is not a man or woman, who violates the covenants made with their God, that will not be required to pay the debt. The blood of Christ will never wipe that out, your own blood must atone for it . . . " (Journal of Discourses, vol. 3, p. 247; see also, vol. 4, p. 53-54, 219-220).


Those are probably the most famous of BY's whaky statements.

 

[Gameface]

What are some of the crazy things Brigham did/said?

Well, he always used to drive up to Evanston and buy illegal fireworks for the 4th of July. One year he put a whole gross (that's 144) of bottle rockets in a coffee can and lit them all at once. Haha, it was crazy.

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

I baptized several women. They all knew what the priesthood was, what it did and who could hold it and who could not. They still wished to be baptized.

Does it surprise you at all, thinking back, that they wanted to be baptized knowing that they were joining an organization where they would never earn full rights? Would you join an organization that cast you as secondary to a woman? I am not trying to be contentious. I'm simply asking a question that hadn't really occurred to me before. It seems like this would become a major obstacle to missionary work in the modern world.

In my childhood I could imagine a God that saw men and women differently in these sorts of ways. Now, not so much.

 

[UGLI baby]

-Racist comments like:

"Shall I tell you the law of God in regard to the African race? If the white man who belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the law of God, is death on the spot. This will always be so." (Journal of Discourses, vol. 10, p. 110).


-Weird things he taught as doctrine such as Blood Atonement (it basically means there are certain sins that are large enough that Christ's blood can't pay for them, and you have to pay for it...with your own blood).

"There is not a man or woman, who violates the covenants made with their God, that will not be required to pay the debt. The blood of Christ will never wipe that out, your own blood must atone for it . . . " (Journal of Discourses, vol. 3, p. 247; see also, vol. 4, p. 53-54, 219-220).


Those are probably the most famous BY's whaky statements.

Ive always been confused about Mormons beliefs about Jesus and the Cross. What do Mormons believe?


dat jazzfanz.com mobile app doe

 

[Stoked]

Does it surprise you at all, thinking back, that they wanted to be baptized knowing that they were joining an organization where they would never earn full rights? Would you join an organization that cast you as secondary to a woman? I am not trying to be contentious. I'm simply asking a question that hadn't really occurred to me before. It seems like this would become a major obstacle to missionary work in the modern world.

In my childhood I could imagine a God that saw men and women differently in these sorts of ways. Now, not so much.

No and here is why. I feel that women are men's equal. Now that does not mean the same. For example: in my mission field there were female missionaries. Some male missionaries did not feel they should be there and were a waste of time and resources. I did not. They could reach people and do things that I could not and vice versa.

If you want to consider women not holding the priesthood means they are second class citizens than fine. But I do not. So I disagree with the premise of the arguement.

Edit: I am sure that some people do feel that way and that is fine. But others do not. So the base arguement is not an absolute.

 

[Stoked]

Ive always been confused about Mormons beliefs about Jesus and the Cross. What do Mormons believe?


dat jazzfanz.com mobile app doe

Jesus died on the cross for our sins. Thru him we can reach heaven and he made it possible to seek repentance for our sins. As a result he is our Savior.

The major difference is all symbolism. Many Christian denominations use the cross as a symbol of their faith in Christ. Mormons choose not to because we try not to focus on his death but on his resurrection.

 

[♪alt13]

I don't understand why women want the priesthood. IMO you either believe that blacks carry "the mark of cain" and that women play a secondary role to men or you don't really believe in the book of mormon. If one can edit these great books that were handed down to man by god to people with a higher moral character than ourselves what is the point believing in them at all.

This doesn't just apply to mormons. I have never met a christian in my life that actually believes what the bible says. Do any of you believe this...

- Leviticus 24:16:

And he that blasphemeth the name of the LORD, he shall surely be put to death, and all the congregation shall certainly stone him: as well the stranger, as he that is born in the land, when he blasphemeth the name of the Lord, shall be put to death.

 

[UGLI baby]

Jesus died on the cross for our sins. Thru him we can reach heaven and he made it possible to seek repentance for our sins. As a result he is our Savior.

The major difference is all symbolism. Many Christian denominations use the cross as a symbol of their faith in Christ. Mormons choose not to because we try not to focus on his death but on his resurrection.

In specific I guess I wanted to ask if Mormons believe that Jesus paid their debt in full or not. I have heard so many differing things and never asked a Mormon.

Also, why do Mormons believe Jesus had this authority?

I promise these are genuine questions.


dat jazzfanz.com mobile app doe

 

[Stoked]

In specific I guess I wanted to ask if Mormons believe that Jesus paid their debt in full or not. I have heard so many differing things and never asked a Mormon.

Also, why do Mormons believe Jesus had this authority?

I promise these are genuine questions.


dat jazzfanz.com mobile app doe

Oh ok. Well Baptists believe that faith alone is enough to save you. LDS doctrine teaches that faith without works is dead.

For example: I cannot say I believe in our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and go out and lie, cheat, booze, steal...if I truly believe I will act in accordance and have things to show for my faith. Just believing it is not enough. I have to act on it.

As for the authority. Jesus Christ was hand picked by Heavenly Father (God) to be our Savior. It is why he came to earth. He is our Eldest brother and as such paid the price for our sins. He was perfect here on this earth and as such was worthy of paying that debt.