Was the priesthood ban revelation?

Public forum to discuss questions about Mormon history and doctrine.
User avatar
gospeltangents
Posts: 156
Joined: 10 Jul 2017, 22:50
Location: Utah
Contact:

Re: Was the priesthood ban revelation?

Post by gospeltangents » 23 Oct 2017, 12:56

Have any of you seen the now deleted section 101 from the D&C? So was God lying during that revelation?
I talked about that with Mark Staker. There is some evidence that original D&C 101, the "Declaration on Marriage" may have been written by Oliver Cowdery, not Joseph Smith. (Brigham Young may have confirmed this.) Mark Staker says that he could see it being re-canonized eventually, as monogamy is the church's standard. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2CP5Vs ... IidW5hUQzr
See my latest interviews on Mormon History, Science & Theology at www.gospeltangents.com

User avatar
hawkgrrrl
Site Admin
Posts: 3375
Joined: 22 Oct 2008, 16:27

Re: Was the priesthood ban revelation?

Post by hawkgrrrl » 23 Oct 2017, 15:27

I'm with Curt. No. Not by a long shot was it revelation, and in fact, the Bickertonites who broke off during the succession crisis (originally under Sidney Rigdon) never had a race ban. Chew on that.

I just wanted to add that when I hear members say that we had the race ban because "the members" just weren't ready yet for such a progressive policy, they are overlooking the fact that we literally created a church which hardly any black people joined because the policies were so clearly racist. So the "members" not being ready means "white people" weren't ready--and assumes that God cares more about whites than blacks. It's a vote of no confidence in the gospel, in revelation, and in the love heavenly parents have for their children.

User avatar
LookingHard
Posts: 2798
Joined: 20 Oct 2014, 12:11

Re: Was the priesthood ban revelation?

Post by LookingHard » 23 Oct 2017, 17:42

hawkgrrrl wrote:
23 Oct 2017, 15:27
I'm with Curt. No. Not by a long shot was it revelation, and in fact, the Bickertonites who broke off during the succession crisis (originally under Sidney Rigdon) never had a race ban. Chew on that.

I just wanted to add that when I hear members say that we had the race ban because "the members" just weren't ready yet for such a progressive policy, they are overlooking the fact that we literally created a church which hardly any black people joined because the policies were so clearly racist. So the "members" not being ready means "white people" weren't ready--and assumes that God cares more about whites than blacks. It's a vote of no confidence in the gospel, in revelation, and in the love heavenly parents have for their children.
Yep. Women can't have the priesthood because the men are not ready for it? OK, maybe 15 men are not ready for it.

User avatar
gospeltangents
Posts: 156
Joined: 10 Jul 2017, 22:50
Location: Utah
Contact:

Re: Was the priesthood ban revelation?

Post by gospeltangents » 23 Oct 2017, 19:34

I will add that the RLDS never had a race ban either, and currently have a black apostle. Here's a photo of 8 of the 12, with several female apostles too.

Image

https://mormonheretic.org/2016/02/15/co ... 8-to-1985/
See my latest interviews on Mormon History, Science & Theology at www.gospeltangents.com

DoubtingTom
Posts: 226
Joined: 22 Mar 2017, 12:13

Re: Was the priesthood ban revelation?

Post by DoubtingTom » 25 Oct 2017, 22:29

This is an interesting discussion. I think the consensus is that the ban was definitely not revelation. So here is a bigger question: what is revelation? Is it God revealing to man His will? Or is it man having an "epiphany" that he thinks is God's will? Does the first type of revelation happen with any sort of frequency in the church to either the brethren or to its members? And finally, does it matter?

What if there is no "revelation" (in the traditional sense as coming directly from God), just mankind having moments of inspiration, epiphany, or transcendence? Would you be able to tell the difference?.

AmyJ
Posts: 600
Joined: 27 Jul 2017, 05:50

Re: Was the priesthood ban revelation?

Post by AmyJ » 26 Oct 2017, 07:29

I like to believe that God reveals his will to men. But I am not even sure if that is because I need to believe, or because that is how it actually works.

I personally need to believe that God answers prayers and provides answers to humanity - but there is a healthy dose in the BoM and Bible of "God's will" being specific concepts and ideas that I believe were either God working line upon line or man's understanding of the situation being sold as "God's will". Isaiah makes a whole lot more sense to me when I realize he was going through the anger and bargaining steps of the bereavement process while his people were being led into captivity. At this point, it makes sense to me that Nephi and Jacob quoted him so much because they were going through a similar process regarding leaving Jerusalem and Jewish culture as they knew it. It also doesn't help that part of their worldview was the destruction of their posterity - even after all they could do. At this point, I don't know what else to make of the rest of the prophesies in Isaiah (Old Testament) or the additional information provided by Nephi regarding the 2nd coming, coming forth of the Book of Mormon, or other minute stuff specific to LDS culture.

I think sometimes when an idea enters your mind that is completely outside of your thinking and processing, that is revelation. I think that a lot of "revelation" is actually the brain finishing up processing stuff and coming to specific conclusions. I wonder how much lore from the Bible/early BoM is exaggeration to tell a story, or the result of other circumstances. Lehi might be a visionary person - or he might have been under the influence of something, or had a brain that was designed to see things in terms of visions...

User avatar
dande48
Posts: 794
Joined: 24 Jan 2016, 16:35
Location: Wherever there is danger

Re: Was the priesthood ban revelation?

Post by dande48 » 26 Oct 2017, 18:44

DoubtingTom wrote:
25 Oct 2017, 22:29
This is an interesting discussion. I think the consensus is that the ban was definitely not revelation. So here is a bigger question: what is revelation? Is it God revealing to man His will? Or is it man having an "epiphany" that he thinks is God's will? Does the first type of revelation happen with any sort of frequency in the church to either the brethren or to its members? And finally, does it matter?

What if there is no "revelation" (in the traditional sense as coming directly from God), just mankind having moments of inspiration, epiphany, or transcendence? Would you be able to tell the difference?.
I'm not a literal believer in the anthropomorphic Abrahamic God; you could probably pull most of my answers from that alone. At the same time, I do see the value in other's beliefs in God. I think most people would not go to the trouble to live wholesome, virtuous lives without a belief in religious authority. The Book of Mormon itself blatantly states that without God there is no good or evil. I've personally seen many people, who when leaving the Church, swing to the opposite end of the spectrum, and end up living some pretty amoral lives. Others would surley give up hope and slink into dispair. And without religious authority, without that connection to "revelation", where will people turn to for purpose and spiritual fulfillment?

To answer your last question, I think it would be very easy to tell if there was revelation, and very difficult to tell if there wasn't.
"The whole world is a comedy to those that think, a tragedy to those that feel." - Horace Walpole

"Even though there are no ways of knowing for sure, there are ways of knowing for pretty sure."
-Lemony Snicket

Post Reply