Active Users:331 Time:17/06/2025 06:29:42 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 2479 Views
Questions. Kuke - 03/10/2011 11:13:25 AM 1220 Views
Ooh! Ooh! Kuke - 03/10/2011 11:18:38 AM 1092 Views
I don't watch it. Gher - 04/10/2011 01:34:53 AM 1100 Views
Re: Questions. CaptainHammer - 03/10/2011 01:28:28 PM 1199 Views
Re: Questions. CaptainHammer - 03/10/2011 01:31:13 PM 1028 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 1128 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 664 Views
Wyld Stallyns!! aerocontrols - 03/10/2011 03:26:54 PM 1006 Views
STATION! *NM* Two Wongs - 03/10/2011 11:00:35 PM 599 Views
Re: One of the best replies, ever, on the internet. *NM* Gaps - 06/10/2011 02:43:07 AM 653 Views
....did we just get door-to-door'd...ONLINE?!?! *NM* LadyLorraine - 03/10/2011 11:34:19 AM 620 Views
Nope. Gher - 04/10/2011 01:32:43 AM 1071 Views
there's no real point to it LadyLorraine - 04/10/2011 02:37:24 AM 2098 Views
We could use an evil cackling smilie, we do have some other evil ones Isaac - 04/10/2011 02:49:12 AM 1033 Views
wasn't going to argue... *NM* LadyLorraine - 04/10/2011 02:57:00 AM 602 Views
Do you ever giggle at the name "Moroni?" Ghavrel - 03/10/2011 11:39:55 AM 1142 Views
There are Mormon literalists? Seriously? *NM* Legolas - 03/10/2011 03:02:18 PM 607 Views
In fairness, I wonder the same about Christian literalists. *NM* Ghavrel - 03/10/2011 07:57:19 PM 658 Views
Yeah, but if you're gonna believe absurdities... Legolas - 03/10/2011 09:02:32 PM 1132 Views
Are you trying to suggest that "Reformed" or some other brand of scientology is plausible? Joel - 04/10/2011 04:28:40 PM 1088 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 1052 Views
I know they don't have multiple wives anymore, so no misconception there ironclad - 03/10/2011 01:23:50 PM 1056 Views
There are Fundamentalist "Mormons" who do... Danu - 03/10/2011 11:32:56 PM 979 Views
Don't get me wrong by the way, I've met wonderful Mormons ironclad - 04/10/2011 12:22:03 PM 1037 Views
Question: Why are you such a faggot? *NM* Urza - 03/10/2011 02:23:45 PM 515 Views
Answer: because it's the only way he could return your burning love for him. Nate - 03/10/2011 03:24:23 PM 738 Views
Oh dont be such a fuddy duddy. Urza - 03/10/2011 10:42:06 PM 691 Views
Better a faggot than a fuckwad. Cheers fuckwad! *NM* everynametaken - 04/10/2011 01:27:20 AM 635 Views
Well, I suppose you'ld be the one to know. *NM* Urza - 04/10/2011 01:54:35 AM 564 Views
Really? You really just pulled a "takes one to know one"? *NM* Kronin al'Sulc - 04/10/2011 04:19:22 PM 669 Views
Re: You embarrass yourself. *NM* Gaps - 04/10/2011 01:56:02 AM 524 Views
I'll tell you whats embarresing... Urza - 04/10/2011 02:08:02 AM 855 Views
That is hilarious. Nate - 04/10/2011 03:10:50 AM 742 Views
Goodness.. Urza - 04/10/2011 03:20:30 AM 671 Views
Re: Nate - 04/10/2011 03:28:25 AM 708 Views
You know, my mother had a saying. Urza - 04/10/2011 03:39:32 AM 747 Views
I think it's safe to say ... Nate - 04/10/2011 04:09:17 AM 643 Views
I'm not sure which would be sadder... Legolas - 04/10/2011 11:32:55 AM 781 Views
*NM* ironclad - 04/10/2011 12:19:01 PM 604 Views
Re: You flatter me. *NM* Gaps - 04/10/2011 01:31:01 PM 632 Views
OK, you need to delete the "Re:" You're using it incorrectly beetnemesis - 04/10/2011 01:55:53 PM 663 Views
"Re" doesn't have to mean "reply", it can also mean "regarding". Legolas - 04/10/2011 02:01:31 PM 686 Views
Re: Re: Gaps - 04/10/2011 02:06:58 PM 691 Views
Re: Re: Stephen - 04/10/2011 02:12:57 PM 656 Views
Re: Also. Gaps - 04/10/2011 02:08:15 PM 701 Views
you are still using it incorrectly. *NM* LadyLorraine - 04/10/2011 02:09:48 PM 646 Views
He's doing it on purpose though. Nate - 04/10/2011 03:31:39 PM 772 Views
Re: Yeah, it's just a shtick... Gaps - 04/10/2011 03:47:17 PM 661 Views
Those were the good old days. Nate - 04/10/2011 04:02:33 PM 676 Views
*NM* TaskmasterJack - 04/10/2011 10:02:30 PM 585 Views
I agree, it's driving me nuts *NM* ironclad - 04/10/2011 02:36:45 PM 572 Views
That's not quite right, actually. Nate - 04/10/2011 03:25:54 PM 598 Views
Disagree. *NM* TaskmasterJack - 04/10/2011 10:04:09 PM 603 Views
Considering that "CaptainHammer" is LDS, I'd rather doubt he's gay. Great Lord of Chaos - 04/10/2011 02:32:56 AM 637 Views
Re: Considering that "CaptainHammer" is LDS, I'd rather doubt he's gay. Urza - 04/10/2011 02:37:41 AM 664 Views
Heh. Oh, Ryan. Kronin al'Sulc - 04/10/2011 04:36:43 PM 783 Views
*sigh* to all of you above.... LadyLorraine - 04/10/2011 03:06:21 AM 679 Views
I thought that was "Do not talk about /b/"? *NM* Great Lord of Chaos - 04/10/2011 03:12:52 AM 667 Views
i don't know, but if THAT is the first rule... LadyLorraine - 04/10/2011 03:41:20 AM 633 Views
Please explain why you think we should consider you Christians. Tom - 03/10/2011 04:33:06 PM 1219 Views
you know, that does make me wonder though LadyLorraine - 03/10/2011 04:58:21 PM 1107 Views
We're not as immovable as we are sometimes portrayed. Dannymac - 03/10/2011 05:27:17 PM 1091 Views
"Even Christ didn't do that"? I can't agree. Legolas - 03/10/2011 09:00:34 PM 1076 Views
I conceded your last point. Dannymac - 03/10/2011 10:14:28 PM 970 Views
Point of Anal Retentive Dissent: Joel - 04/10/2011 03:54:00 PM 996 Views
That concept is alien to the Christian theological understanding, however. Tom - 03/10/2011 10:18:55 PM 1085 Views
I understand what both you and Danny are saying LadyLorraine - 04/10/2011 12:19:57 AM 1030 Views
Oh, that's very simple Tom - 04/10/2011 04:02:24 AM 1054 Views
I honestly don't know what it would take. Dannymac - 04/10/2011 07:41:55 AM 1047 Views
thank you, both of you LadyLorraine - 04/10/2011 01:46:05 PM 1033 Views
I love the Nicene Creed. It is such an excellent encapsulation. Rebekah - 03/10/2011 06:07:53 PM 1127 Views
Agreed. Joel - 04/10/2011 04:44:49 PM 997 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 1074 Views
Glad you enjoyed it Tom - 03/10/2011 10:10:39 PM 1156 Views
Though they can cause interesting changes in patterns. Dannymac - 03/10/2011 10:16:55 PM 1116 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 1143 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 1317 Views
I never said well-written, I said complex. Gher - 04/10/2011 07:04:24 AM 1198 Views
Ignore facts all you want to. Tom - 05/10/2011 01:07:35 AM 1086 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 1287 Views
Woah nelly. Ghavrel - 04/10/2011 10:04:33 AM 1088 Views
I have to "Wow" as well... racist much? LadyLorraine - 04/10/2011 01:52:48 PM 1016 Views
Re: I have to "Wow" as well... racist much? CaptainHammer - 04/10/2011 04:42:47 PM 1125 Views
oh well that makes it all better... LadyLorraine - 04/10/2011 04:54:14 PM 1128 Views
Exactly ironclad - 04/10/2011 06:00:54 PM 1046 Views
Was the twin banging and the gay wedding the same event? Joel - 04/10/2011 06:36:03 PM 1112 Views
Yikes. Even for religion, that's more than a little crazy. Nate - 04/10/2011 03:47:56 PM 1112 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 1077 Views
A difference exists if only in continued unabashed affirmation of a rather distasteful doctrine. Joel - 04/10/2011 11:06:51 PM 1063 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 578 Views
OK, within the Mormon context I can see that point. Joel - 05/10/2011 12:33:52 AM 1008 Views
They can in quite a few denominations. *NM* Ghavrel - 05/10/2011 06:12:35 AM 628 Views
Whoops! You meant in LDS specifically. My mistake. *NM* Ghavrel - 05/10/2011 06:14:05 AM 590 Views
Right now I am not making an absolute statement but a relative one. Vivien - 05/10/2011 08:37:50 PM 859 Views
Yes, that is kind of the problem. Joel - 06/10/2011 12:13:27 AM 1031 Views
Oh, you didn't know? Joe Smith said black people are cursed for following Satan. Tom - 05/10/2011 01:10:35 AM 1056 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 999 Views
it's not that we're surprised because it's "novel" LadyLorraine - 04/10/2011 04:19:16 PM 1039 Views
It is not NECESSARILY racist. Joel - 04/10/2011 04:39:33 PM 1060 Views
Sure, except ... Nate - 04/10/2011 04:50:53 PM 1092 Views
Well, the funny thing is Christian doctrine presupposes everyone, along with their ancestors... Joel - 04/10/2011 06:31:13 PM 982 Views
Yeah, circular logic is fun, isn't it? Tom - 05/10/2011 01:09:25 AM 1011 Views
It it is nigh impossible to be a "non-Nicene Christian." Joel - 04/10/2011 03:12:06 PM 1097 Views
I think we've had this discussion before. Gher - 06/10/2011 05:54:39 PM 1090 Views
Arianism is a bad comparison for arguing LDS=Christian. Joel - 06/10/2011 11:45:36 PM 985 Views
Wikipedia confirms what I already thought: you're off base with the monophysitism. Legolas - 07/10/2011 12:06:40 AM 1332 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 1425 Views
Monophysites, miaphysites, monothelites, etc. certainly accept the consubstantiality of God/Christ Larry - 07/10/2011 11:58:05 AM 1016 Views
Virtually everyone has a more sound Christology than Mormons. Tom - 07/10/2011 06:45:45 PM 1073 Views
Your ideas intrigue me and I would like to subscribe to your newsletter. Joel - 08/10/2011 05:30:38 PM 1087 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 982 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 1071 Views
I was just saying there were competing views. Gher - 07/10/2011 07:49:26 PM 1457 Views
Oh, there were definitely competing views, just not competing Christian views. Joel - 07/10/2011 09:26:22 PM 969 Views
That sounds really nice. Vivien - 04/10/2011 06:38:29 PM 1046 Views
Why wait though? Joel - 05/10/2011 12:12:21 AM 1215 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 552 Views
Ack, not reading and thinking111 Joel - 05/10/2011 12:36:11 AM 1036 Views
I really want an answer from a mormon. Vivien - 05/10/2011 08:48:49 PM 1067 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 978 Views
Yeah, that's what I thought. Gher - 06/10/2011 05:43:57 PM 976 Views
I'm satisfied by that explanation. Vivien - 06/10/2011 08:51:15 PM 1211 Views
Re: I'm satisfied by that explanation. Gher - 07/10/2011 07:45:29 PM 1054 Views
Oh no you idn't... *waves finger and weaves head* everynametaken - 04/10/2011 03:53:07 AM 880 Views
....i don't know what you look like LadyLorraine - 04/10/2011 03:54:56 AM 1010 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 691 Views
Took the words right out of my mouth, repeatedly. Joel - 04/10/2011 12:49:13 PM 1210 Views
Off-Topic Larry - 05/10/2011 01:14:16 AM 992 Views
Hmm Tom - 05/10/2011 02:03:13 AM 1174 Views
True Larry - 05/10/2011 02:13:00 AM 964 Views
I think of Protestantism in terms similar to a Xerox copy. Tom - 05/10/2011 04:57:42 AM 1076 Views
Maybe Xeroxes of abridged texts and dumbed down theology Larry - 06/10/2011 02:26:58 AM 1188 Views
I like that analogy - an echo chamber! *NM* Tom - 08/10/2011 10:44:04 PM 598 Views
Re: Off-Topic CaptainHammer - 05/10/2011 02:56:50 AM 1220 Views
Uhh... Larry - 05/10/2011 03:08:49 AM 1002 Views
The people at the Nicene Council and the other councils were not prophets. CaptainHammer - 05/10/2011 04:59:50 AM 1120 Views
And you know that because... why, again? Joel - 05/10/2011 07:13:53 AM 1052 Views
Tough Crowd. Dannymac - 03/10/2011 04:44:31 PM 1165 Views
No questions. Have a nice day. TaskmasterJack - 03/10/2011 11:40:58 PM 1012 Views
Why don't they have anything approaching a formal theology? *NM* Dan - 04/10/2011 03:58:16 AM 680 Views
Re: Why don't they have anything approaching a formal theology? CaptainHammer - 04/10/2011 05:23:12 PM 1120 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 1050 Views
Back to Messageboard Post New Thread Search Help Stats Rules

Reply to Message

Block Quote Paragraph Quote
Formatting
Smiley Codes