Active Users:250 Time:09/04/2025 10:36:14 PM
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules
A difference exists if only in continued unabashed affirmation of a rather distasteful doctrine. Joel Send a noteboard - 04/10/2011 11:06:51 PM
I choose to be generous and interpret your subject line to mean "devout Mormons are perfectly sane" rather than a return to "all religious people are nuts." Turn the other cheek, and all that stuff. ;)
I know some mormons (I might even be related to some mormons) and I'm pretty sure I've never heard any sort of opinion like that before.

Why would they talk about something like this? Do you hear your run of the mill christian or jew discuss the curse of Ham? I really don't see that much difference, except the fact the mormons came around relatively recently so their "origin myths" are much more open to verification/validation and of course ridiculule. For example: you can say that Joseph Smith was a con man but how do you know that Jesus Christ wasn't?

Do I not qualify as a run of the mill Christian, or did you just not see me mention Ham twice in this very sub-thread? Since the first such is currently the post immediately below yours I assume you mean I am exceptional, which I choose to take as a compliment; my thanks. :) Ham certainly makes more sense as an origin myth, I agree, and the Mormon view of Indians can plausibly be read that way; neither is necessarily malicious or slanderous on that basis, though both can be easily be used to rationalize a great deal of inhumanity. On the other hand, people who wish to indulge inhuman behavior against each other are invariably adept at finding their own rationalizations, or dispensing with rationalizations altogether if they think they can avoid accountability. It is not like anyone was likely to show up in 1845 and tell the Mormons it was wrong to take the Indians land (OK, maybe the Quakers or Sam Houston, but the Quakers would have had to come a long way and Sam Houston had other priorities in 1845.)

Then again, the curse of Ham being used to justify slavery was much less in vogue around the time of Joseph Smith so actually this is something the mormon church should be embarrassed about.

I love this paragraph on wikipedia:

"After the death of Joseph Smith, Jr., Brigham Young, the church's second president, taught that Black Africans were under the curse of Ham, although the day would come when the curse would be nullified through the saving powers of Jesus Christ.[84] In addition, based on his interpretation of the Book of Abraham, Young believed that as a result of this curse Negroes were banned from the Mormon Priesthood,[85] but in 1978 Spencer W. Kimball claimed he received a revelation that extended the Priesthood to all worthy males.[86]"

WORTHY MALES is key.

Ham was VERY MUCH in vogue as a rationalization for slavery in the mid-1840s; it neared the peak of its popularity around that time and began to wane around a decade later as the Dred Scott and other events began to turn the tide of public opinion against slavery (until then, of course, it had been just, because a majority supported it. ;)) The MORMONS may not have hopped on that bandwagon until after Joseph Smiths death, but UT is not exactly "Cotton Country."

Any guesses on when the curse on Eve will be lifted?

No need. It will be lifted at the same time as the curse on Adam: At the resurrection of the saints and creation of a new heaven and earth. If you want to yell at the Mormons over something RELEVANT, try asking why they approved polygyny and not polyandry (though I think the answer ultimately comes down to fertility and the fact no one has to wonder who a childs MOTHER is.)
Honorbound and honored to be Bonded to Mahtaliel Sedai
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.

Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!

LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.
Reply to message
Mormons CaptainHammer - 03/10/2011 05:46:10 AM 2455 Views
Questions. Kuke - 03/10/2011 11:13:25 AM 1196 Views
Ooh! Ooh! Kuke - 03/10/2011 11:18:38 AM 1058 Views
I don't watch it. Gher - 04/10/2011 01:34:53 AM 1067 Views
Re: Questions. CaptainHammer - 03/10/2011 01:28:28 PM 1172 Views
Re: Questions. CaptainHammer - 03/10/2011 01:31:13 PM 998 Views
I don't understand why they would be called drinks, if they were not meant to be drunk. aerocontrols - 03/10/2011 03:28:48 PM 1100 Views
Why did I look up what Quorn is? I didn't need to know that. *NM* beetnemesis - 03/10/2011 02:04:20 PM 655 Views
Wyld Stallyns!! aerocontrols - 03/10/2011 03:26:54 PM 980 Views
STATION! *NM* Two Wongs - 03/10/2011 11:00:35 PM 589 Views
Re: One of the best replies, ever, on the internet. *NM* Gaps - 06/10/2011 02:43:07 AM 639 Views
....did we just get door-to-door'd...ONLINE?!?! *NM* LadyLorraine - 03/10/2011 11:34:19 AM 611 Views
Nope. Gher - 04/10/2011 01:32:43 AM 1045 Views
there's no real point to it LadyLorraine - 04/10/2011 02:37:24 AM 2065 Views
We could use an evil cackling smilie, we do have some other evil ones Isaac - 04/10/2011 02:49:12 AM 1006 Views
wasn't going to argue... *NM* LadyLorraine - 04/10/2011 02:57:00 AM 580 Views
Do you ever giggle at the name "Moroni?" Ghavrel - 03/10/2011 11:39:55 AM 1111 Views
There are Mormon literalists? Seriously? *NM* Legolas - 03/10/2011 03:02:18 PM 598 Views
In fairness, I wonder the same about Christian literalists. *NM* Ghavrel - 03/10/2011 07:57:19 PM 623 Views
Yeah, but if you're gonna believe absurdities... Legolas - 03/10/2011 09:02:32 PM 1106 Views
Are you trying to suggest that "Reformed" or some other brand of scientology is plausible? Joel - 04/10/2011 04:28:40 PM 1067 Views
Actually, no. It'd be like laughing at... Hosea. Or Nemeiah. It's just an old name. Gher - 04/10/2011 12:30:57 AM 1025 Views
I know they don't have multiple wives anymore, so no misconception there ironclad - 03/10/2011 01:23:50 PM 1030 Views
There are Fundamentalist "Mormons" who do... Danu - 03/10/2011 11:32:56 PM 949 Views
Don't get me wrong by the way, I've met wonderful Mormons ironclad - 04/10/2011 12:22:03 PM 1010 Views
Question: Why are you such a faggot? *NM* Urza - 03/10/2011 02:23:45 PM 505 Views
Answer: because it's the only way he could return your burning love for him. Nate - 03/10/2011 03:24:23 PM 724 Views
Oh dont be such a fuddy duddy. Urza - 03/10/2011 10:42:06 PM 630 Views
Better a faggot than a fuckwad. Cheers fuckwad! *NM* everynametaken - 04/10/2011 01:27:20 AM 625 Views
Well, I suppose you'ld be the one to know. *NM* Urza - 04/10/2011 01:54:35 AM 555 Views
Really? You really just pulled a "takes one to know one"? *NM* Kronin al'Sulc - 04/10/2011 04:19:22 PM 656 Views
Re: You embarrass yourself. *NM* Gaps - 04/10/2011 01:56:02 AM 510 Views
I'll tell you whats embarresing... Urza - 04/10/2011 02:08:02 AM 843 Views
That is hilarious. Nate - 04/10/2011 03:10:50 AM 728 Views
Goodness.. Urza - 04/10/2011 03:20:30 AM 660 Views
Re: Nate - 04/10/2011 03:28:25 AM 696 Views
You know, my mother had a saying. Urza - 04/10/2011 03:39:32 AM 736 Views
I think it's safe to say ... Nate - 04/10/2011 04:09:17 AM 634 Views
I'm not sure which would be sadder... Legolas - 04/10/2011 11:32:55 AM 770 Views
*NM* ironclad - 04/10/2011 12:19:01 PM 594 Views
Re: You flatter me. *NM* Gaps - 04/10/2011 01:31:01 PM 619 Views
OK, you need to delete the "Re:" You're using it incorrectly beetnemesis - 04/10/2011 01:55:53 PM 648 Views
"Re" doesn't have to mean "reply", it can also mean "regarding". Legolas - 04/10/2011 02:01:31 PM 676 Views
Re: Re: Gaps - 04/10/2011 02:06:58 PM 679 Views
Re: Re: Stephen - 04/10/2011 02:12:57 PM 646 Views
Re: Also. Gaps - 04/10/2011 02:08:15 PM 688 Views
you are still using it incorrectly. *NM* LadyLorraine - 04/10/2011 02:09:48 PM 627 Views
He's doing it on purpose though. Nate - 04/10/2011 03:31:39 PM 754 Views
Re: Yeah, it's just a shtick... Gaps - 04/10/2011 03:47:17 PM 649 Views
Those were the good old days. Nate - 04/10/2011 04:02:33 PM 665 Views
*NM* TaskmasterJack - 04/10/2011 10:02:30 PM 572 Views
I agree, it's driving me nuts *NM* ironclad - 04/10/2011 02:36:45 PM 561 Views
That's not quite right, actually. Nate - 04/10/2011 03:25:54 PM 585 Views
Disagree. *NM* TaskmasterJack - 04/10/2011 10:04:09 PM 591 Views
Considering that "CaptainHammer" is LDS, I'd rather doubt he's gay. Great Lord of Chaos - 04/10/2011 02:32:56 AM 626 Views
Re: Considering that "CaptainHammer" is LDS, I'd rather doubt he's gay. Urza - 04/10/2011 02:37:41 AM 655 Views
Heh. Oh, Ryan. Kronin al'Sulc - 04/10/2011 04:36:43 PM 761 Views
*sigh* to all of you above.... LadyLorraine - 04/10/2011 03:06:21 AM 667 Views
I thought that was "Do not talk about /b/"? *NM* Great Lord of Chaos - 04/10/2011 03:12:52 AM 652 Views
i don't know, but if THAT is the first rule... LadyLorraine - 04/10/2011 03:41:20 AM 622 Views
Please explain why you think we should consider you Christians. Tom - 03/10/2011 04:33:06 PM 1193 Views
you know, that does make me wonder though LadyLorraine - 03/10/2011 04:58:21 PM 1083 Views
We're not as immovable as we are sometimes portrayed. Dannymac - 03/10/2011 05:27:17 PM 1066 Views
"Even Christ didn't do that"? I can't agree. Legolas - 03/10/2011 09:00:34 PM 1051 Views
I conceded your last point. Dannymac - 03/10/2011 10:14:28 PM 944 Views
Point of Anal Retentive Dissent: Joel - 04/10/2011 03:54:00 PM 968 Views
That concept is alien to the Christian theological understanding, however. Tom - 03/10/2011 10:18:55 PM 1059 Views
I understand what both you and Danny are saying LadyLorraine - 04/10/2011 12:19:57 AM 1006 Views
Oh, that's very simple Tom - 04/10/2011 04:02:24 AM 1020 Views
I honestly don't know what it would take. Dannymac - 04/10/2011 07:41:55 AM 1022 Views
thank you, both of you LadyLorraine - 04/10/2011 01:46:05 PM 1008 Views
I love the Nicene Creed. It is such an excellent encapsulation. Rebekah - 03/10/2011 06:07:53 PM 1095 Views
Agreed. Joel - 04/10/2011 04:44:49 PM 973 Views
The absolute best part about your post (plus the best thing about Mo's/LDS's) Jeordam - 03/10/2011 09:02:17 PM 1048 Views
Glad you enjoyed it Tom - 03/10/2011 10:10:39 PM 1133 Views
Though they can cause interesting changes in patterns. Dannymac - 03/10/2011 10:16:55 PM 1065 Views
We believe that Jesus Christ is the Savior of all mankind, and the only way back to God. Gher - 04/10/2011 01:29:30 AM 1118 Views
If you think the Book of Mormon was well-written, there is really little left to discuss. Tom - 04/10/2011 03:57:08 AM 1289 Views
I never said well-written, I said complex. Gher - 04/10/2011 07:04:24 AM 1166 Views
Ignore facts all you want to. Tom - 05/10/2011 01:07:35 AM 1062 Views
Re: If you think the Book of Mormon was well-written, there is really little left to discuss. CaptainHammer - 04/10/2011 07:24:27 AM 1262 Views
Woah nelly. Ghavrel - 04/10/2011 10:04:33 AM 1065 Views
I have to "Wow" as well... racist much? LadyLorraine - 04/10/2011 01:52:48 PM 993 Views
Re: I have to "Wow" as well... racist much? CaptainHammer - 04/10/2011 04:42:47 PM 1100 Views
oh well that makes it all better... LadyLorraine - 04/10/2011 04:54:14 PM 1106 Views
Exactly ironclad - 04/10/2011 06:00:54 PM 1004 Views
Was the twin banging and the gay wedding the same event? Joel - 04/10/2011 06:36:03 PM 1084 Views
Yikes. Even for religion, that's more than a little crazy. Nate - 04/10/2011 03:47:56 PM 1072 Views
I don't think there's much of a difference in crazy as opposed to other more mainstream religions. Vivien - 04/10/2011 07:08:06 PM 1047 Views
A difference exists if only in continued unabashed affirmation of a rather distasteful doctrine. Joel - 04/10/2011 11:06:51 PM 1035 Views
Then why can't women be priests? Or enter the altar? The curse on Eve is very much in place. *NM* Aeryn - 05/10/2011 12:27:04 AM 565 Views
OK, within the Mormon context I can see that point. Joel - 05/10/2011 12:33:52 AM 985 Views
They can in quite a few denominations. *NM* Ghavrel - 05/10/2011 06:12:35 AM 617 Views
Whoops! You meant in LDS specifically. My mistake. *NM* Ghavrel - 05/10/2011 06:14:05 AM 577 Views
Right now I am not making an absolute statement but a relative one. Vivien - 05/10/2011 08:37:50 PM 833 Views
Yes, that is kind of the problem. Joel - 06/10/2011 12:13:27 AM 1005 Views
Oh, you didn't know? Joe Smith said black people are cursed for following Satan. Tom - 05/10/2011 01:10:35 AM 1025 Views
I guess this is a variation on Hams punishment; Ghav, at least should know better than to be shocked Joel - 04/10/2011 04:13:59 PM 974 Views
it's not that we're surprised because it's "novel" LadyLorraine - 04/10/2011 04:19:16 PM 1014 Views
It is not NECESSARILY racist. Joel - 04/10/2011 04:39:33 PM 1026 Views
Sure, except ... Nate - 04/10/2011 04:50:53 PM 1063 Views
Well, the funny thing is Christian doctrine presupposes everyone, along with their ancestors... Joel - 04/10/2011 06:31:13 PM 956 Views
Yeah, circular logic is fun, isn't it? Tom - 05/10/2011 01:09:25 AM 987 Views
It it is nigh impossible to be a "non-Nicene Christian." Joel - 04/10/2011 03:12:06 PM 1069 Views
I think we've had this discussion before. Gher - 06/10/2011 05:54:39 PM 1062 Views
Arianism is a bad comparison for arguing LDS=Christian. Joel - 06/10/2011 11:45:36 PM 944 Views
Wikipedia confirms what I already thought: you're off base with the monophysitism. Legolas - 07/10/2011 12:06:40 AM 1303 Views
I had not realized it was that late, but used it only as an example of multitudinous controversies. Joel - 07/10/2011 01:03:56 AM 1400 Views
Monophysites, miaphysites, monothelites, etc. certainly accept the consubstantiality of God/Christ Larry - 07/10/2011 11:58:05 AM 993 Views
Virtually everyone has a more sound Christology than Mormons. Tom - 07/10/2011 06:45:45 PM 1050 Views
Your ideas intrigue me and I would like to subscribe to your newsletter. Joel - 08/10/2011 05:30:38 PM 1061 Views
I can see that with the Monothelites (can see their appeal, in fact,) but not Monophysites. Joel - 07/10/2011 09:43:27 PM 963 Views
Tempting as it is to prove Joel wrong (since he so frequently is), I need to take issue with this. Tom - 07/10/2011 06:59:13 PM 1043 Views
I was just saying there were competing views. Gher - 07/10/2011 07:49:26 PM 1430 Views
Oh, there were definitely competing views, just not competing Christian views. Joel - 07/10/2011 09:26:22 PM 943 Views
That sounds really nice. Vivien - 04/10/2011 06:38:29 PM 1023 Views
Why wait though? Joel - 05/10/2011 12:12:21 AM 1192 Views
So that Vivien can avoid reading and thinking about the stuff that you just wrote. *NM* Aeryn - 05/10/2011 12:28:23 AM 543 Views
Ack, not reading and thinking111 Joel - 05/10/2011 12:36:11 AM 1013 Views
I really want an answer from a mormon. Vivien - 05/10/2011 08:48:49 PM 1043 Views
Good luck with that; just because I can see no explanation save that I offered does not preclude one Joel - 06/10/2011 07:03:50 AM 952 Views
Yeah, that's what I thought. Gher - 06/10/2011 05:43:57 PM 944 Views
I'm satisfied by that explanation. Vivien - 06/10/2011 08:51:15 PM 1188 Views
Re: I'm satisfied by that explanation. Gher - 07/10/2011 07:45:29 PM 1027 Views
Oh no you idn't... *waves finger and weaves head* everynametaken - 04/10/2011 03:53:07 AM 855 Views
....i don't know what you look like LadyLorraine - 04/10/2011 03:54:56 AM 984 Views
Shoot, my Mick Jagger strut is way better than my angry hispanic girl head/finger bob and weave. *NM* everynametaken - 05/10/2011 04:58:53 AM 678 Views
Took the words right out of my mouth, repeatedly. Joel - 04/10/2011 12:49:13 PM 1187 Views
Off-Topic Larry - 05/10/2011 01:14:16 AM 955 Views
Hmm Tom - 05/10/2011 02:03:13 AM 1146 Views
True Larry - 05/10/2011 02:13:00 AM 935 Views
I think of Protestantism in terms similar to a Xerox copy. Tom - 05/10/2011 04:57:42 AM 1052 Views
Maybe Xeroxes of abridged texts and dumbed down theology Larry - 06/10/2011 02:26:58 AM 1165 Views
I like that analogy - an echo chamber! *NM* Tom - 08/10/2011 10:44:04 PM 587 Views
Re: Off-Topic CaptainHammer - 05/10/2011 02:56:50 AM 1180 Views
Uhh... Larry - 05/10/2011 03:08:49 AM 981 Views
The people at the Nicene Council and the other councils were not prophets. CaptainHammer - 05/10/2011 04:59:50 AM 1095 Views
And you know that because... why, again? Joel - 05/10/2011 07:13:53 AM 1021 Views
Tough Crowd. Dannymac - 03/10/2011 04:44:31 PM 1137 Views
No questions. Have a nice day. TaskmasterJack - 03/10/2011 11:40:58 PM 984 Views
Why don't they have anything approaching a formal theology? *NM* Dan - 04/10/2011 03:58:16 AM 668 Views
Re: Why don't they have anything approaching a formal theology? CaptainHammer - 04/10/2011 05:23:12 PM 1096 Views
Danny is right, it is a pretty tough crowd, but better tough than weak and whitewashed. everynametaken - 04/10/2011 04:02:16 AM 1017 Views
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules

Reply to Message

Block Quote Paragraph Quote
Formatting
Smiley Codes