• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Is this what Mormons really believe?

Not dismissing them . They are out there , and most do Vote. A relative small number in Iowa in early 2008 derailed Romney at a key juncture for no other reason than his being LDS. Huckabee fed into that and his quiet view today - despite being a TV host has not changed much.
That pretty much has nothing at all to do with what I posted.
 
and I just explained where part of that doctrine originated...it was copied from other religions. There is much more in common with protestants that there are differences. People who seek out the differences and make issue of them are the ones who WANT to believe that their religion is superior....and all others are false...

That's not what Joseph Smith said. Are you calling him a liar?
 
Many have drifted away from the Church and become inactive. Two subgroups exist. Those who just want the inactivity (to be left alone from certain Church lifestyle) and those with an Axe to grind based on their experiences during their adolescence or possibly a Bad Marriage. Some even develop a super resentment against those in the Church who are seemingly prosperous and have a viable Well adjusted family .

You forgot the category of people who are only interested in accurate information about religious doctrine because they are intellectually curious. ;) But, nice try at an ad hom. You know ad hominems are illogical, right? Kind of like the beliefs about the Mark of Cain. :D
 
The fairly small group you describe easily fits into the Honestly Inactive category. Now someone in an LDS leadership calling might get edgy if you raised a few topics, but most will recognize the Honest opinions of others. In short it's best to keep certain thoughts to a small confined setting because Open assertiveness is rather impolite. There are times for everything and most knowledgeable people in the Church do admit that a lot is changing.
 
You forgot the category of people who are only interested in accurate information about religious doctrine because they are intellectually curious. ;) But, nice try at an ad hom. You know ad hominems are illogical, right? Kind of like the beliefs about the Mark of Cain. :D
I first heard it as a baptist back in the 60's.....
from wikipedia....
Historically, some Christians have interpreted the Biblical passages so that the "mark" is thought to be part of the "curse". In 18th century America and Europe, it was commonly assumed that Cain's "mark" was black skin[citation needed], and that Cain's descendants were black and still under Cain's curse.

Curse and mark of Cain - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

also Argument - The Black Mark of Cain
 
I first heard it as a baptist back in the 60's.....
from wikipedia....
Historically, some Christians have interpreted the Biblical passages so that the "mark" is thought to be part of the "curse". In 18th century America and Europe, it was commonly assumed that Cain's "mark" was black skin[citation needed], and that Cain's descendants were black and still under Cain's curse.

Curse and mark of Cain - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

also Argument - The Black Mark of Cain

So, do you want to discuss the dark skins of the lamanites, or do you just want to keep playing with your strawman?
 
What I'm curious about is WHY anyone today in the US or the World is even remotely concerned about the influence or intentions of Mormons when there are much,much,bigger problems all around (???) The LDS Church based on their articles of Faith respects all laws whatever area they are i, and complies with local sensibilities. They also utterly respect the "Free Agency" of others including former members IF they wish to be left alone.
 
So, do you want to discuss the dark skins of the lamanites, or do you just want to keep playing with your strawman?
Does the LDS church disallow the priesthood to any man of color today? Have they ever denied membership based on color?
 
What I'm curious about is WHY anyone today in the US or the World is even remotely concerned about the influence or intentions of Mormons when there are much,much,bigger problems all around (???) The LDS Church based on their articles of Faith respects all laws whatever area they are i, and complies with local sensibilities. They also utterly respect the "Free Agency" of others including former members IF they wish to be left alone.

The biggest, unspoken, concern of a lot of protestant church leaders is that almost all LDS serve without pay, while almost all protestants get paid. If protestant preachers had to get jobs and earn a living outside of their church functions, there would be a lot less of them.
My Jr. High algebra teacher was a baptist preacher, and he paid tithing to his church, and took no money from his church.
 
I'd also like to point out that MANY in LDS leadership positions are High Salaried Professionals with 3 figures or more income and regularly part with their 10% without question. Some could earn much more if they could devote more time to their careers. Also few have Children in Private Schools like a lot of Wine & Cheese Liberals do.
 
I'd also like to point out that MANY in LDS leadership positions are High Salaried Professionals with 3 figures or more income and regularly part with their 10% without question. Some could earn much more if they could devote more time to their careers. Also few have Children in Private Schools like a lot of Wine & Cheese Liberals do.
More like ALL of them....
There are several multi-millionaires in my neighborhood who pay their 10%. They can't hold church callings without it.... in my son's ward in AZ, same deal, and he was ward clerk up until recently. He can't give names or numbers, but he has processed some very large checks from those rich people. That is why the LDS church can afford to send tons of food to disaster areas.
People who just talk about their faith are phonies. The real believers are those who financially support their faith.
 
Also If anyone in a Given Ward or Stake is beset with a sudden problem either some accident out of the blue, Family emergency or even Financial Hard times there is an immediate resource within the Church to help out. Not forever and obviously Family living elsewhere will be approached, but initially YOU ARE NOT ALONE. Obviously this is not unique to Mormons, but they are pound for pound more efficient at it. They take care of their own, and these is little gossip over it and 99% of whatever internal talk exists is not critical of those needing help but a genuine desire to help out.
 
Also If anyone in a Given Ward or Stake is beset with a sudden problem either some accident out of the blue, Family emergency or even Financial Hard times there is an immediate resource within the Church to help out. Not forever and obviously Family living elsewhere will be approached, but initially YOU ARE NOT ALONE. Obviously this is not unique to Mormons, but they are pound for pound more efficient at it. They take care of their own, and these is little gossip over it and 99% of whatever internal talk exists is not critical of those needing help but a genuine desire to help out.
Yeah, they do, and it is almost as if they were some kind of "christian" religion....:2razz: That was sarcasm, of course....I have seen the LDS church help out non-members. And when a fund drive is done for a member of the community, you can expect at least $20,000 to be raised. We have had several people in the Logan, Utah area come down with rare and serious diseases in the 3 years we have lived here, and such fund raising draws donations from all over Cache Valley.
 
Just came into the discussion so sorry if I repeat anything. But basically this is the first thing me and my BYU Roomies said when we saw this Ad a few years back:

"BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA WTF IS THIS CRAP! Did they REALLY just say something so stupid?"

I then showed them this remix and laughed even more. Mormon Jesus FRICK YES

Basically the whole thing is taking a few points made by some of the leaders of the Church and then blowing them WAY out of proportion. And then the rest of the 90% of the thing is just pure crap.
 
Does the LDS church disallow the priesthood to any man of color today? Have they ever denied membership based on color?

Another strawman. The LDS church STILL TEACHES that people with dark skin were less valiant in the pre-existence.
 
I'd also like to point out that MANY in LDS leadership positions are High Salaried Professionals with 3 figures or more income and regularly part with their 10% without question. Some could earn much more if they could devote more time to their careers. Also few have Children in Private Schools like a lot of Wine & Cheese Liberals do.

This has absolutely nothing to do with "Do Mormons Reallyh Believe This." Nice attempted deflection, though.
 
After seeing the video mormns are waaay cooler in my book, a neat and down to earthy religion in my eyes now.
 
Yes. The LDS Church teaches that people who have dark skin were less valiant in the pre-existence.
They stopped teaching that in 1979 when the church leadership suddenly had a revelation that God had forgiven all "the descendants of Cain" and took it out of their doctrine. The fact that you said they still do and that "they were less valiant in the pre-existence" makes your knowledge of the LDS church and it's doctrine very suspect.

The LDS church doesn't have a theology. What they have is a doctrine laid down by Joseph Smith. According to the doctrine the "curse of Cain" was God's punishment to all Cain's descendants that they would cursed with dark skin and while blacks could join the church, they could never hold the priesthood.

It's nonsense, but that is what it was Mormons believed until 1979. But many of the older Mormons still believe it, even if they don't talk about it anymore.
 
Last edited:
They stopped teaching that in 1979 when the church leadership suddenly had a revelation that God had forgiven all "the descendants of Cain" and took it out of their doctrine. The fact that you said they still do and that "they were less valiant in the pre-existence" makes your knowledge of the LDS church and it's doctrine very suspect.

The LDS church doesn't have a theology. What they have is a doctrine laid down by Joseph Smith. According to the doctrine the "curse of Cain" was God's punishment to all Cain's descendants that they would cursed with dark skin and while blacks could join the church, they could never hold the priesthood.

It's nonsense, but that is what it was Mormons believed until 1979. But many of the older Mormons still believe it, even if they don't talk about it anymore.

I've actually always wondered how this got into the Church in the first place. I mean the people of the Church aren't perfect and we've had to give out notices and what not telling people that "No you are interpreting this wrong", but the skin part always confused me. In my religion classes they always would point out that in the Book of Mormon when it's talking about the "Curse" it always comes along with the phrase "removed from the presence of God" or something like that. They said that being removed from the presence of god was the curse and that skin was just a marker. Basically it's an easy way to tell those who probably don't follow God and are more likely to be contentious against you. I mean these were time where people would kill people because of their believes, God basically just gave them an advantage to know who to stay away from if you want to live.

The Book of Mormon even states this little nugget:

Jacob 3:9

9 Wherefore, a commandment I give unto you, which is the word of God, that ye revile no more against them because of the darkness of their skins; neither shall ye revile against them because of their filthiness; but ye shall remember your own filthiness, and remember that their filthiness came because of their fathers.

Which I always interpreted as meaning that you should not base anyone on their skin (and notice that it is a direct commandment) because their skin wasn't their chose it was brought on because of their ancestors sins. So I always wondered how a direct commandment that specifically goes against racism took so long to be fully put into effect in the church.
 
Last edited:
OMG. The mark of Cain applied ONLY to blacks. However, the book of Mormon STILL has scriptures that show that the Lamanites (native Americans) skins became dark because they rebelled against God. And, there is STILL a belief in the church that people with dark skins were less valiant in the pre-existence.

I've provided the scriptural references and additional supportive quotes from LDS Church presidents. And you have the audacity to call ME questionable? What have you contributed to this discussion, factually? You've provided ZERO evidence of your claims here.
 
OMG. The mark of Cain applied ONLY to blacks. However, the book of Mormon STILL has scriptures that show that the Lamanites (native Americans) skins became dark because they rebelled against God. And, there is STILL a belief in the church that people with dark skins were less valiant in the pre-existence.

I've provided the scriptural references and additional supportive quotes from LDS Church presidents. And you have the audacity to call ME questionable? What have you contributed to this discussion, factually? You've provided ZERO evidence of your claims here.

WOAH Buddy slow down there and take a chill pill.

I was just stating what I was thinking. Sorry for not fulling understanding what we are discussing. I never called you into question. Someone is a little cranky tonight.
 
I respect members of the LDS church for their devotion, but I think their theology is crazy. At Mormons (or any former Mormons/anyone who knows about Mormonism). Which book is more sacred? The Bible or the Book of Mormon? Who is more important/holy, Jesus or Joseph Smith?
 
I respect members of the LDS church for their devotion, but I think their theology is crazy. At Mormons (or any former Mormons/anyone who knows about Mormonism). Which book is more sacred? The Bible or the Book of Mormon? Who is more important/holy, Jesus or Joseph Smith?

You really can't compare BoM and Bible in my opinion at least. If you don't have one then the other one isn't very effective. They have to work in Tandem. Mormons usually put more emphasis on the BoM because everyone and their dad already knows about the Bible.

Jesus. Joseph Smith doesn't even compare. Smith is great and all and a cornerstone of our religion, but seriously without Jesus who gives a care what Smith did. Without Jesus Smith would be just another farm town bumpkin.
 
OMG. The mark of Cain applied ONLY to blacks. However, the book of Mormon STILL has scriptures that show that the Lamanites (native Americans) skins became dark because they rebelled against God. And, there is STILL a belief in the church that people with dark skins were less valiant in the pre-existence.

I've provided the scriptural references and additional supportive quotes from LDS Church presidents. And you have the audacity to call ME questionable? What have you contributed to this discussion, factually? You've provided ZERO evidence of your claims here.
Where in the BoM does it say the Lamanites are the native Americans aka red skins?
 
"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. Such spirits are sent to earth through the lineage of Cain, the mark put upon him for his rebellion against God and his murder of Abel being a black skin...The present status of the negro rests purely and simply on the foundation of pre-existence" (Mormon Doctrine, p.527, 1966 ed.).
http://mrm.org/curse-of-cain
 
Back
Top Bottom