The Real Story of the Priesthood-Temple Ban - Terryl Givens with Paul Reeve

[@joshua_sykes]

Worth the listen for any Latter-day Saint =] Thank you, Faith Matters - and an even bigger thanks to the black Saints who persevere and pioneer patiently through all of this 🙏

[@ggrace1133]

I concur. I don’t think I could have endured with such grace and dignity.

[@paulokano5032]

Thank you so much for sharing this. Helps me understand the fraught racial past of our faith, and how we can meaningfully move forward to the universal gospel restored through Joseph Smith. Let us mourn with those who mourn. May our hearts and minds be knit together in love.

[@julieelliott9797]

I'm so grateful for this understanding of race and the priesthood. My heart has yearned to understand for decades. Well articulated! Compassion is my duty!

[@georgiaborn1173]

For lack of a better word: Wow! You have helped me better understand and want to do more and learn more from my past to my present.

[@carolboyle1055]

Thank you both for your research, your faith, and your reasoning. This discussion was a delight!

[@bbbarham6264]

Fantastic discussion. I wish every member would watch this.

[@colettechecketts2951]

Thank you for this amazing episode! Thanks for the honest way you have dealt with such a difficult topic.

[@l.lamaradams1842]

Terryl and Paul, when I read “The Real Story of ...”, as a professional, a red flag went up: “diametrical language.” Real implies “of God” (Alma 32:35). So the following response I gave to Darius, applies even more so to your presentation; but don't judge or “kill the messenger!” I commend you Darius for your extensive research and study, but at the same time, as a leading expert, I judge your Partial Chronology to be just that, partial, incomplete, & thus subject to providing biased observations. So please forgive me if I misunderstood several premises presented, which I consider to be invalid: 1. You said something like, “I agree. It took revelation by God to set right, something that has gotten somehow misplaced.” Thus, implying that apostles and prophets of the Church in denying the priesthood was not providential. 2. Individual Blacks receiving valid priesthood ordinations in Joseph Smith's day, etc., is evidence that the Lord did not withhold it from them as a people. (Implied?) 3. They were not “less valiant” in the pre-mortal life. (You may not have implied this as it seems.) Pres. Harold B. Lee in a BYU devotional warned us to not interpret the Church and the gospel in terms of history, but instead, interpret history in terms of the gospel. Since yours is a historical presentation, I shall add a touch of the reverse. I will mention only a verse or event or two; for all of these concepts are only fully understood in the Savior's way using 3 Nephi 17:2-3, to obtain the FULL story. 1. Abraham 1:26-27; plus Official Declaration 2, “by revelation...the long-promised day has come” [underline added], for them to receive the priesthood. So the Blacks were denied the priesthood by the Lord for an eternal purpose, until prophecy (“long-promised”) was to be fulfilled. And thus it was not a matter of something wrong being righted, but a matter of prophecy being fulfilled. Since several presidents of the Church had inquired of the Lord, hoping the prophesied time had arrived, for the Blacks to receive the priesthood in the last days, but each, until Pres. Kimball, received the revelation that the time had not yet come, it was providential. Plus the wording in Official Declaration 2 is evidence that previous denial was providential, and not inappropriate. 2. Although Blacks as a people were denied the priesthood by the Lord, “for their sakes,” prophets giving specific individuals the priesthood was not evidence that the Lord had not denied it to them as a race. Since Pres. McKay was one who was told by the Lord, that the time had not yet arrived, he serves as a good example. And yet as the prophet, he sent a signed First Presidency letter, to certain mission presidents in the Pacific Islands (when I was in the New Zealand mission presidency in 1957-58) giving the authority for them to ordain specific worthy Blacks to the priesthood, on a limited bases where needed; but not for all Blacks. Since both the denial and the exception were providential, they were not in contradiction, but by the word and ways of the Lord. 3. In certain ways, we were all less valiant in the pre-mortal life (Abr. 3:17-19), except perhaps celestial children who die prior to the age of 8, etc. (Mosiah 15:25 & Moro. 8:17-22). I do not know about you, but I for one was less valiant than my daughter who died at the age of 5, a celestial child. Less valiant does not mean less valuable to God, but less obedient; yet we all are equal in our own uniqueness. Pres. Joseph Fielding Smith in The Way To Perfection, indicated that we each chose in the pre-mortal life that which we were born to, as our Father in Heaven provided, by our choice and for our sake, the unique life of trials and afflictions, the most possible conditions by which we could overcome all things, to obtain eternal life. Thus equally, it was uniquely tailored specifically to us, and we shouted for joy, for the chance to become humble enough to put off the natural man in our less valiant state, and become a new creature in Christ, that He may seal us His, each to their own. [The same was the case with the house of Israel, in the wilderness, with the temple ordinances and the Melchizedek priesthood (D&C 84:20-25 ), but for a different reason.] The unique providential (of God) practice of denying the Blacks the priesthood, and/or certain ordinances, is of the same category as the unique providential practice of certain limited saints practicing plural marriage, and of the same category of Abraham offering up Isaac as a sacrifice-the same category as Nephi cutting off Laban's head. All were unique providential practices in relation to the laws of obedience and sacrifice. Thus, it is not necessary for me to practice plural marriage in some future date, nor to be denied the priesthood, etc., for me to gain eternal life; for I have my own unique tests and trials (practices) which are as hard for me to overcome my less valiant state, as it was for those with their unique providential practices. Nephi said, “mine afflictions were great above all.” (1 Ne. 15:5). [And reasons for the race, are entirely different than the reasons for individual blacks.] Then, we can now ask, to what extent are we taking quotes out of context, or applying them to things which ought not to be applied, or wresting (twisting) the scriptures or quotes of the prophets? For it is as possible on one hand as it is on the other, if we do not use 3 Nephi 17:2-3.

[@joepilimai4604]

Thank - what an outstanding discussion. Thoroughly enjoy the insight and history shared.

[@glennsolis9852]

This podcast reinforces my testimony of the truthfulness of the gospel. Indeed, the first principle is faith in the Lord Jesus Christ to whom all truth flows.

[@RegardingThePlan]

Great interview. In David O. McKay’s biography he told his secretary he prayed about the priesthood ban issue three times and didn’t get an answer and he wasn’t going to change the ban without a revelation. The answer may be the Twelve were not united on this issue and God needed them to be like they were with President Kimball. He will let us have a king if we want one. But God could have changed the whole issue like he did with Peter who wasn’t praying about the Gentiles at all. So why did he let the mistake remain? After 1,500 years of separate and not equal the Lord dramatically showed Peter He is no respecter of persons. 150 year ban showed us in a dramatic way that all are really alike unto God. Also if I were God I might see an advantage of His church looking prejudiced. It would keep those who hate blacks out of His church because they are so sure they know why a false prophet would keep them out. Like plural marriage, the lustful can only see one reason for having more than one wife. So they immediately are sure we are not a true church. In 1976 in Australia we had investigators say they hated that priesthood ban and polygamy. We agreed. So they had to feel their way to the truth. And many did. Take those two things away and our church is a no-brainer. Eternal marriage, priesthood authority, prophets, our church is too perfect. The God who raised the dead also healed on the Sabbath probably to make people get on their knees and ask if He really was the Christ. If Brigham Young made a mistake and it sounds like he did, I think God used it to His advantage. I wish we would teach that Laman and Lemuel were cursed with a black skin because they were bad (see Alma 3:6). But their children didn’t get that skin because they were bad. We must disavow any assumption that they did something wrong because they inherited their father’s skin color. They got that skin because dark is a dominant gene, and probably because God wants us to learn to love those who are different from ourselves and perhaps a dozen other reasons. .

[@averagedude76]

This is a very thoughtful and intelligent answer. Thank you

[@JPBotero717]

Thank you for your comment. I have been struggling with this kind of issue and faith. For one side, I know the church is true and prophets are called by God. But is hard for me to realize that a prophet can bring such a curse upon the people.

[@photostreet2711]

If racism is stated to be church policy wouldn't racist join? Why would a racist look at the same policy , figure it to be false doctrine then not join the church? I would think it would keep away people who believed racism to be wrong. Look up randy Kay for a deeper meaning on the nature of god

[@sachamo100]

So what you are saying is, Church leaders couldn’t decipher between truth and falsehood!

[@realdiehls]

Spiritual synergy meets intellectual integrity. So good. Thank you.

[@tridentlm]

This was very good! An excellent 50 min primer on the subject.

[@mp112501]

This discussion was very helpful. A sad and complex issue.

[@brendalehman8970]

Thank you so much. This was great. I greatly appreciate your facts and perspectives.

[@jennytaylor3203]

I'm so grateful for this video!

[@janhicken2840]

Thank you for that insightful interview. I am grieved when I hear of racial slurs being directed at our black brothers and sisters in our schools and places of employment. We can and should be so much better. Thanks again and I will try to direct as many others as possible to this site.

[@85jre]

I really enjoyed this podcast and its discussion of the cultural conditions that surrounded the ban. Joseph Smith's revelation was very inclusive. The Book of Mormon makes it clear that black and white are all accepted of God. The scriptural declarations about Priesthood are sometimes clear and sometimes veiled. It was clear at one time that Priesthood was limited (to the Levites). However, this was during a time when the fulness of the Gospel was withheld. It is also clear that later another priest would arise of a different lineage after the Order of Melchizedek from the tribe of Judah (Christ). The 1978 declaration stated "Aware of the promises made by the prophets and presidents of the Church. . . at some time, in God's eternal plan, all of our brethren who are worthy may receive the priesthood." This is a fair reading of Isaiah 66:19-21 when Isaiah prophesied of the latter-day gathering from all nations and promising that such persons gathered would be taken "for priests and Levites" (or in other words they will all receive the priesthood). So we know the priesthood was limited for a time (to Levites) and that it would go to all nations. What we do not have is clear scriptural direction for the ban. It was supported by questionable interpretations of the Book of Abraham but not otherwise. I can still remember the day in 1978 when my Mission President told us of the declaration allowing the Priesthood to go to all. I remember the overwhelming spirit that accompanied the announcement. I am settled that now we are aligned with the Lord's desires on this point.

[@julieelliott9797]

I remember the day I heard about all worthy males receiving the Priesthood. I was relieved and joyous. It felt like my feet weren't touching the ground. I knew this was a revelation from God!!!!!

[@thomaschristensen9963]

Growing up in the Church I was never told why there was a ban in Church. Since that time I never found a source of why there was a ban. I heard theories but never heard who started the idea or the started the the ban. I grew up from the 60's

[@artgivinghope]

Excellent work!

[@averagedude76]

This is outstanding

[@mrbbollywood]

My brother in law is black, non-member, my sister is inactive because of the church's racist past. How do we fix this? How can I help my family? How can I help myself as a brown man living in rural Utah? Sometimes I feel everyone is cursed in Utah, if you're brown, you're a cursed lamanite, if you are black, you are cursed from the pre-exitence, how do we fix the racist mindset of many Utahns?

[@IJN-33]

I'd like to think this is changing, but as someone outside of that context my opinion is perhaps less relevant. I don't have a lot of solutions, but I offer my love for the suffering this brings. God loves all his children no matter what. We as people do a much poorer job at following his example in that. I hope to see the day when we do a much better job of loving and valuing all in our community.

[@Kaydubbbb]

We need a link to Marvin Perkins explaining the idiom of black and white skin.

[@markhopkins6013]

Thank you very much

[@donseegmiller7759]

CES manuals state there will never be a majority of the Twelve on the wrong side of an issue. No wonder none of CES teachers didn’t raise their hand. I thank that you didn’t give enough emphasis on the power of the 1978 revelation. Many rated it the most spiritual experience they ever had. They learned that: Now was the time for the blacks to receive the priesthood. In David O McKay’s lifetime, he answered a letter from an African saying it was not yet time to take the Gospel. Did you say something about Abraham 1 as misinformation? If not, what was that chapter telling us including Joseph Smith?

[@kentthalman4459]

Not to take anything away from Lester Bush, Paul Reeve's foregoes any acknowledgement of Dr. Lowry Nelson's challenge what George Albert Smith call doctrine. He beat Lester Bush by 20 years and published his position that its a Church Policy in The Nation by over a decade before Lester Bush.

[@donseegmiller7759]

Was Jesus and the early church members prejudice against the gentiles for not letting them join the church until Peter’s vision?

[@zacharyertengrass892]

Though I appreciate this video, it completely leaves out the discussion of the issue of skin color in the Book of Mormon and how that played into these doctrines. I understand the motivation for leaving this out, but it is not a complete discussion of these issues if you leave out this important aspect of what went on -- and still goes on.

[@jerimiahjohnson9837]

Indeed it would seem the BoM text had an impact, but not in one clear direction. I think most would assume the text pushes one in a decidedly bigoted direction. Yet it did not for Joseph Smith, quite the opposite. Religion and politics is a very human, flawed endeavor. I’m an American, currently living in the UK; faithful LDS members here ask me “why such strong support in Utah for Donald Trump”? I’m living in the very time of this radical political dynamic, where solid faithful members like my father in Orem, UT is so unquestioning in his support for Trump. And yet being in the very moment I struggle to articulate the reasons for my father’s support of Trump. To UK faithful members here, it seems such a contradiction based on how they view Trump and his historical behavior. So clear to them, why wouldn’t members in Utah simply distance themselves from such a flawed character as Trump. And that’s the rub, if political/religious issues today aren’t clear cut and obvious, why would we expect a religious political issue like race and slavery in 1852 to be clear cut and obvious. Today it seems so clear and easy to sort, but in 1852 and thereafter for sometime, in the moment for those Saints, it was not clear cut and obvious, even for a prophet, and even with or without the help of the BoM.

[@tandrews5034]

@@jerimiahjohnson9837 The problem with that is that the scripture used to unify us , All are unlike unto Christ...” was available to those during that time as well. If you are referring to the curse on the Lamanites to support the ban on Blacks and the priesthood that doesn’t coincide with actions or scriptures because after the Lamanites repented they received the full blessings including holding the priesthood. I don’t think Samuel was the lone Lamanite with priesthood. So it supports the teaching that the curse was much more a spiritual one rather physical one. This was purely a policy or practice and not doctrine. And I do believe it was a calculated practice. The real question or concern is why it was allowed to play out so long after attitudes towards race had changed when clearly it was not doctrine but policy. Especially when seeing the swiftness the Church has moved in policy towards women and lgbtq+.

[@jerimiahjohnson9837]

@@tandrews5034 just noted your reply, i need to fix my settings so I'm pinged, now months later not sure you'll see this...anyway. No, NOT clearly a policy vs doctrine, As my father taught me about this in my teens, 1980s, he used scripture to justify the practice. BTW I've never understood the policy/doctrine debate, who cares, the Church implemented the policy/doctrine, it was wrong, and they were way too slow to fix it; are we somehow exonerated by claiming it was only a "policy" ? silly argument which does nothing to undo the harm. And now to my original point, clear to you that the BoM did not support the priesthood ban, but not clear to others, and hence often used as one of the sources to support the ban. A la, Trump is great, Trump is bad...very clear to Latter Day Saints in the UK, Trump is bad, to my Dad in Orem, UT, he's great.

[@tandrews5034]

@@jerimiahjohnson9837 I gotcha

[@RegardingThePlan]

@@jerimiahjohnson9837 We supported Trump because notwithstanding every time he opened his mouth we cringed, he was the first president in a long time that was pro American. He is an example of what an ignoramus who loves his country can do. I imagine the UK gets their news from our liberal media that never mentioned any good things Trump did. Bidden’s first day on the job showed he is against Americans. But more than that, Bidden is pro abortion, Trump was outspoken against abortion. I know it is only one issue. But once we know a man is okay with killing babies, we need not look any farther at him. Bidden was not a choice. So yes many in Utah were for Trump.

[@ShepStevVidEOs]

I’m becoming a rather big fan of Orson Pratt.

[@tawneenielsen4080]

Me too. I love truth and can still have faith when truth is told. I love that the Lord allows us to keep growing

[@JimAdams367]

Too bad it isn’t Orson Pratt University

[@kingofcascadia]

@@JimAdams367 I agree, although the initials O-P-U are a bit problematic lol

[@donseegmiller7759]

The curse was them not having the priesthood. The black skin was the mark. That is a nice generalization that apologists are good at putting spins on gospel issues. Show me an example of the that. If you don’t believe believe in LDS Scriptures, such as Abraham 3:21-23, then there is no sense in talking to you about it. The bottom line is that the blacks from every African country are coming into the Church by thousands and thousands. An african American young lady just invited me to go to the temple with her. Our lives here on earth are but for a moment…. Was Jesus and were the apostles prejudice for not allowing the Gentiles to join the Christian Church until Peter received a revelation?

[@donseegmiller7759]

Mr Meadow’s Massacre? How does that fit in again???

[@lazerlorne2670]

Do we as a church owe the black people of the world an apology for what happened? Was one given?

[@donseegmiller7759]

Is the Book of Mormon prejudice? Really? JS didn’t clarify the issue of the blacks, but was then prejudice regarding the Lamanites?

[@dcarts5616]

I still struggle with God, that “His” prophets would be permitted to commit such damaging atrocities as keeping our African brothers and sisters from the blessings of the temple, priesthood, falsely using their Prophet pulpit to perpetuate such erroneous claims as their skin color should prevent such blessing for one reason or another. It means there could be other ideologies that will fall, be claimed to not have come from God rather the bumblings of fallible men that God allows to act in His name? Will it come out that The Plan of Salvation is also horse manure? That now, Hinckley was just anti-homosexuals and it is fine to turn the page and allow these struggling brothers and sisters (is the binary gender theory also another false teaching from anti queer men led by God and I’ll be in trouble for referring to the two genders)? Do you guys see where this leads? God should have acted in my opinion. Sigh. Also a side note. Racism of any sort is evil. Whether it’s whites against blacks. Blacks against whites in retaliation. Asians against all other races, or any other race against Asians or anything like until these. Most people view thug or criminal culture from any race as evil. Most people in the world today do not focus on race as being anything of importance to decide how you treat them. Why does it seem that what is being said here in this discussion by the historian that racism is somehow worse now than it was 100-200-300-400+ years ago? I’m sorry, maybe I’m ignorant, but what is going on because that’s a lie. (Unless we’re talking outside the US, which I doubt was happening in this discussion) Lastly, the bottom line, focusing on Christ and obeying His commandments has always been the key. If followed as written, as stated, as advanced, the word of God the world would be a better place, dare I say an almost perfect place? This being said, the US Constitution that I doubt lasts another decade, when followed 100% in its current form with all of the amendments is the most perfect and all accepting documents ever to have existed. The fragiles of the world are distracting us all from those two documents. God, because his people are desiring it, is about to let the greatest nation on earth become ruled by a system of the adversary. Let’s have a king, let’s suffer. Let’s do it because Satan has slipped into everything we do, IGNORE what things say, don’t get back to basics, follow me and my new doctrine. Sadly, retaliation is coming, not equality. Violence is coming, not peace. Free agency is ending, force is about to become our guide. I’m so confused right now.

[@jeffreykinney8086]

Wow, what a parade of anti-Mormon straw men, and all delivered in such a nice concerned tone. How righteous you both are, I must have missed your testimonies of the truthfulness of the gospel, that Joseph Smith, Jr. was the great restorer of the truth… I also missed your acknowledgement that Joseph was running for President if the United States on a Black Emancipation platform - possibly the most plausible reason for his assassination. Great job gentlemen, may the Lord reward both of you for your works.

[@surewave8202]

I appreciate you sharing this with us. However, I think you went too far in suggesting that we do not put prophets on pedestals. If the children of Israel didn't put Moses on a pedestal, they never would have followed him across the sea. Many people in Noah's day did not give him heed and were drowned instead of getting on the ark. We need to see our prophet today in the same sense. This has started a huge problem online with members saying that the prophet and apostles aren't always right and having a attitude of doubt towards them. And yes, children should still be singing, "Follow the prophet, don't go astray". I have been going through very extreme Job-like trials and President Nelson's book and his teachings have made a huge difference in my life and have literally lifted me to a much better place. Please don't damage people's trust in the Lord's prophets and apostles. I know they are very careful in what they tell us.

[@Kaydubbbb]

Read my posts. You are dead on.

[@jodiepalmer9762]

I am so grateful for this interview. I am also very disheartened at the outset that we have two white, Mormon academics talking about the "real" story of the priesthood-temple ban. This feels like another example of the white-centeredness of the church. I simply cannot think of a sufficient reason not to invite one of the many black, Mormon priesthood holders who have been living this "real" story for their entire life. Does Faith Matters have a response to this?

[@JPBotero717]

I don't think there are many living people who can tell that story at this point.

[@treesap2]

Because the right way to talk about racism is by being racist? Can historians only talk about their own personal history or should we be racists and tell them only to talk about people of their own skin color?

[@dcarts5616]

@@treesap2 your comment is 100% correct. Racism is evident in many forms, and the commenter you replied to is the most racist person on this entire feed that I’ve read so far.

[@markchristiansen9611]

I assume it's more a matter of this podcast looking for a scholar who knows the most about the topic and was also available for an interview. He has written the best book on the subject, as is mentioned.

[@julieelliott9797]

I feel like the Church History department is the best vehicle the church has to explain many difficult questions. There are ways of hearing from Blacks about the Black experience. Faith Matters has a podcast by the main author of "My Lord, He Calls Me". Loved the podcast. Can't wait to buy this book, which contains first hand accounts from black members. Another great source is the movie by Mauli Bonner called ",My name is Green Flake." It's so important to hear from Black members!

[@Kaydubbbb]

There was no legal recourse against abusers of light and dark people who stepped over the Jim Crowe lines and treated people as equals when the Guys in pionty huts enforced their culture with voilence until the 196o’s Finally, the supreme court agreed that all people were equal under the law, and the federal government was willing to send troops to enforce that law. The priesthood ban could not have safely been removed until then. Safety was more important to Brigham Young than standing against the culture of the pre civil war United States, which surrounded the saints on every side in 1852 and was about to take advantage of our struggle to settle the west and survive after eviction from the US. The ban was appropriate for safety, far from a mistake. Brigham used whatever language he could to make it stick for the next 126 years for the safety of his people. Promoting the false doctrine of the southern slave owners worked, so Brigham did it. I do not think that there was any other more effective way. The ban was not a mistake, but luckily the Protestant false doctrine made it stick, or LDS branches all across the southern Jim Crowe states would have been in danger for over a century. The people lost the argument that Brigham was using false doctrine, but the argument did occur. The ban was only lifted about 13 years late because it could not be done until the law protected people who treated everyone as equals. The saints, especially Brigham, learned that lesson in Missouri, and because of Joseph’s presidential platform in 1844. The priesthood ban also most likely had some effect in keeping Utah out of the civil war. Since Utah was a slave territory, the Northern states didn’t really think they could expect Utah to help, and our young men weren’t obligated.

[@scottbrandon6244]

Connecting Joseph Smith to the priesthood ban is illogical considering he ran for U.S. President on an abolitionist ticket.

[@markchristiansen9611]

A painful and tragic story of racism. Like all history, we may not ever know the full story. But this podcast shines a great light on the subject. It seems to me the church is progressing from childhood to adolescence. So now we are like children learning that our parents (leaders) are not perfect and the world is more complicated that we thought. Thank goodness for this podcast to help us move forward. History is messy because it's acted out by imperfect humans. What else did we expect? We are right to judge the actions of history according to eternal principles. But if we want to also *understand* history we need to learn about how the world was at that time and what people's worldviews were. It's clear to me that just because this is God's true church doesn't mean the leaders will be perfect or that the organization will be perfect. Line up on line. The church and its members will continue learning and improving. Ultimately, in the long run, all men will have the opportunity to have the priesthood in the next life. That doesn't justify past racism, but it's important to keep in mind. (Ultimately, all women will have the full priesthood too, if you listen carefully to sacred teachings in our church.) Personally, for me this story is also a warning against a certain variety of conservative thinking that is based on ignorance and delusion. That can really hinder us as a church. This podcast has another episode that relates very well to this one: Can I Trust and Sustain Fallible Leaders? kzbin.info/www/bejne/bWbNpoWXed97fdk

[@jaquino451]

The book of BOM is still filled with racist teachings and sayings. They still believe that the Lamenites are native American even though genetics says differently.

[@pamelarust3487]

So far. Wait for better genetics testing.

[@kentthalman4459]

@@pamelarust3487 Today's DNA has advanced dramatically in these past 40 years. Rather than being limited to mitochondrial DNA, scientists can track the entire genome. If you have a 23&Me account, they can tell how much neanderthal you have in your genes. We have reached a point that we can definitively state there is no Lamanite DNA. Period. Additionally, linguists have known for 60 years that there is zero Hebrew or any mid-eastern language in any of the native tongues in America. At just 400 AD, it would be impossible to hide those language prints today.

[@kingofcascadia]

Your second sentence doesn't support the argument of your first sentence. The BOM is not "filled" with racist teachings and sayings. Quite the contrary. The prophets constantly referred to the Lamanites as their "brethren". Nephites welcomed Lamanites into the church with open arms. The prophets acknowledged when the Lamanites were more righteous than the Nephites. ETC, ETC. And, btw, both groups were of the same race.

[@donseegmiller7759]

Should we change the song Follow the prophet, he knows the way … most of the time? We need to spend less time showing that prophets are human and more time showing that humans can be prophets. What does false memory of Joseph F Smith mean? He lied? The Lord has placed safeguards for example, there will never be a majority of the apostles on the wrong side of an issue.

[@donseegmiller7759]

I think you should refer our previous life as pre-mortal experience rather than pre-existence. You lump together less valiant with fence sitters saying that there is not much difference. There is a big difference. What did you say about Abraham 3 about the great and noble ones to be our leaders? If they were great and noble, it follows that there were less valiant all with varying degrees just as there are here today. In fact a third of them who followed Lucifer were certainly less valiant. Suppose in the final judgment those who were denied the priesthood were more valiant than those who hold the priesthood, would you say that it would be racial prejudice to have those to enter the Celestial Kingdom while the previously pre-earth noble spirits who were less valiant in their mortal life to be sent to the terrestrial or telestial life? I forgot what you said about Abraham 1. Seems quite clear to me that descendants of Egyptus were denied the priesthood. Do you think the leaders of our Church were unaware of the 2nd Article of Faith?

[@donseegmiller7759]

So are you saying that just as God allowed the Israelites to have a king for hundreds of years, the Lord allowed our wonderful prophets to deny the priesthood to the blacks for over 100 years? I just cannot buy into it. The apostles,seers and revelators met once a week for years to discuss very difficult issues of the world wide church - but they messed up with the blacks and the priesthood? The Lord just didn’t see fit to tell them it was wrong until 1978?

[@lightrevolutionsdotcom9415]

Interesting "HUMAN PERMUTATION". Can you see how you two are also not speaking 'thus saith the Lord', as you "reconfigure" thoughts & statements & actions PRE- 1978! And we criticize the "Nicene Creed"? The idea of the Restoration fast becomes religious Evolution, more & more like Catholic & Protestant history, for better and worse.

[@donseegmiller7759]

I am surprised that you put Out living prophets in a category with the likes of Judah lying with his daughter in-law; Peter before his true conversion etc. The black skin was not the curse but only a sign of the curse. Why no clarification of Abraham 1 of a counterfeit priesthood? You chuckle at fence sitters being equal to less valiant. Abraham 3 21-22. If there were valiant spirits, why not less valiant. In this life, which is only a speck of time in eternity, we will be judged according to how we live according to our opportunities.

[@jeffreykinney8086]

My sensibilities are appalled too, LOL. But likely not at the targets you two mitts are aiming at.

[@kirklandmeadows]

When a prophet slander's God's character with lies he should be apostasize not excused and embraced and quoted in conferences and have A university named after him.

[@treesap2]

@@towardcivicliteracy Moral nuance... You mean like Nephi lobbing off Laban's head while he is drunk? This is a perfect example of moral nuance that members clearly ignore. Everything is black and white in our lives, but it was really weird in the Old Testament and the Book of Mormon.

[@l.lamaradams1842]

@@towardcivicliteracy But also filled fraught with invalid assumptions, and based on the invalid assumption that blacks were not denied the priesthood by the Lord, thus ignoring Abraham 1:26-27 and Official Declaration 2.

[@towardcivicliteracy]

@@l.lamaradams1842 I have no idea what you're talking about. What is also filled [] with invalid assumptions? Reeve and Givens don't "assume" anything. They're scholars. They both have also openly and repeatedly spoken about the priesthood denial and openly talked about both Abraham and OD2. Givens has spoken more on how Utah "Mormon" and western culture interacts with LDS scriptures and doctrine, while Reeve is more the historian. Reeve's book seems to do a very good job of revealing the racial politics that the Church was dealing with in the 1800s. I'm only saying it demonstrates that the picture is not as simple as being nice, non-violent, etc. Reeve actually believes, and has said (as an active member, in good standing) that many early Church leaders held racist ideas. Many people operate under a historically privileged lens that completely obscures the kind of moral complexity that actually shows up in the lives of historical people. "Racism," today is a question of being nice, using the proper words, etc. Fighting racism in the 1800s involved wondering, as the saints in Kirtland had to, whether to risk their lives inviting an abolitionist to the Kirtland temple to speak. (Which they did!) Blacks were treated (and were thought to be) like animals in the 1800s. And the LDS Church was ordaining them to the priesthood, while traveling through the racial "powder keg" of the Midwest, where the question of expanding slavery was still a thing in territorial, state and national legislatures. LDS, themselves, were thought of as non-human and non-white.

[@towardcivicliteracy]

@@treesap2 Nephi killing Laban was likely a valid case of self-defense (and even legally so under the Law of Moses). I've NEVER ran across a single critic who actually knew the Book of Mormon context of the story, then challenged the Nephi-Laban story for its moral legitimacy. I've only been a believer for more than 25 years. LOL But, bringing it out of its context makes for a popular canard.

[@bgardunia]

So God let the prophet lead the church astray. That is your thesis?

[@laurimuse1390]

He lets all have agency in all roles and responsibilities

[@treesap2]

What does it mean to lead the church astray?

[@shawnlarrabee45]

Whether acting as governor, president, prophet or whatever the chosen mouth piece of God should always speak the words of God. Otherwise, we can only trust their words as much as any other person, since everyone at some point, if they speak long enough, has the same probability of speaking Gods truth and "prophets" are useless.

[@85jre]

that is not realistic. Prophets are not God. The whole history of the scriptures is the history of God working through imperfect persons. D&C 6:19 is instructive since init the Lord tells Oliver Cowdery to admonish Joseph Smith in his faults and also receive admonition of him. The clear teaching is that we are expected to receive instruction and follow imperfect leaders.

[@NancyRoche]

We shouldn't downplay the role of personal revelation in the revelation process. We individually have been given the right and gift to have truth confirmed to us. Or denied. We are responsible for our own conclusions about what prophets say as well as our obedience. Chew before you swallow?

[@shawnlarrabee45]

@@85jre it's not real. You said it perfectly.

[@JohnWilliams-dy5dz]

Shawn Larrabee “realistic”. Way to spin his words.

[@shawnlarrabee45]

@@JohnWilliams-dy5dz Real or Realistic, it's the same to me. If the Church has the priesthood power to heal the sick, why aren't the men out providing blessings for people with COVID? You would say it's not realistic. I would say it's because the power to heal people using the priesthood isn't real. Why can we expect true prophets to be TRUE and always lead us speak the will of God? Again, You: not realistic. Me: not real. I'm not going to trust a compass if it's only correct some of the time.

[@keithmills4748]

It doesn't matter what spin you put on this ... and apologists are very good at spin ... the basic fact is the early mormon church taught that blacks were cursed by god to be born with a black skin ... and I reiterate ... it was considered a curse ... also put in place so they would be undesirable to others which is in fact segregation ... no getting away from this fact

[@lightrevolutionsdotcom9415]

Interesting discussion, but fraught with problems, omissions, dishonesty, further confusion & perhaps even bigger questions! So next, you will exercise your advanced educations to promulgate "evolution" over creation, that different races evolved over millions of years ...

[@kingofcascadia]

It's long past time we re-named Brigham Young University after a more deserving individual.

[@donseegmiller7759]

How about University of Sidney Rigdon? Not quite the same ring to it. Lest we forget how great a man was BY who loved JS Never once did he falter in following JS.

[@fabmor6051]

I'm grateful for your open discussion on the church's racist history..yet there are many questions still to be explained..its a true shame that such men as Brigham Young were sustained as a Prophet ,Seers and Reverlators.

[@tjedwards4254]

Cringe.

[@deweydewey6714]

Josrph Smithbalso stated that if any man teach dictrine contrary to scripture, mark thst man down as an imposter, and thst is exactly what thus man us, an imposter!!! Continued...

[@donseegmiller7759]

Dewey Dewey speaks from unlearned lips.