Comments on: How do you explain to an investigator about Blacks and the Priesthood?

By: john

john — Tue, 28 Jun 2016 06:20:00 +0000

The best answer is that the priesthood ban was a mistake. It was not of God. The revelation received in 1978 corrected something that had been wrong for generations. That is the best way to answer the question because it is the truthful answer. Discrimination against someone based on the color of their skin is very wrong. The lifting of the ban has a specific section in the D&C. There is no section in the D&C issued in 1852 banning the priesthood. It is Brigham Young’s word alone. I tell the truth to people about it.

By: SRR

SRR — Tue, 21 Jun 2016 18:39:00 +0000

It always amazes me how members of the Church try to justify the priesthood ban. I think it would be better to acknowledge that it was wrong from the start. Joseph Smith did not restrict people of African descent from the priesthood. Brigham Young is the prophet that started the priesthood ban. He believed in the curse of Cain doctrine that was simply made up by the evangelical churches in the Southern United States. This false concept was not accepted by the main bodies of the Christian Churches outside of the Southern United States. There is no scriptural basis for it. The Church today denounces this theory as wrong. If it is untrue today, it was never true. The largest evangelical southern church – the Southern Baptist also have denounced this theory as wrong and have apologized for it. It was the Church that made it up in the first place. Folks, it was made up to justify enslaving others for financial gain. It is really that simple.
It is clear that Brigham Young was mistaken on this subject. He borrowed this false concept from southern evangelicals. It was never of God. It was very wrong. We need to accept that and stop making excuses about it.
I was taught the priesthood ban as a child and that people of color were somehow less valiant in the pre-existence. The Church today has also retracted this theory. That also was never true, yet it was taught to the Saints for 130 plus years.
Instead of coming up with other false theories about the priesthood ban, we should simply except that it was a mistake of Brigham Young and apologize for it.

By: RazzleD

RazzleD — Sun, 20 Sep 2015 02:31:00 +0000

In reply to RIPJameson. The Brazilian Saints were confused which Brazilians could or could not hold the Priesthood at the time before the revelation. They were not African Americans. Most blacks in America before the Civil War were not considered Americans let alone African Americans. The 19th century Saints in Missouri were encouraged not to baptize black people because Missouri was a slave state and would be counted as part of the South in an impending civil war. The Missouri Saints were just trying to preserve their own lives.

By: RazzleD

RazzleD — Sun, 20 Sep 2015 02:05:00 +0000

In this case, the term Black Men would not be appropriate since temple ordinances are blessings of the Priesthood. At the time of the revelation, Black Men and Women, received their temple covenants.

By: joe

joe — Wed, 01 Apr 2015 19:07:00 +0000

You can also talk about how the Gospel was at first withheld from the Gentiles in the New Testament. That also means the right to holding the priesthood.

By: ppeebles

ppeebles — Sun, 08 Mar 2015 03:25:00 +0000

It’s interesting to note that even a website that was started by some of the leaders of the LDS Black community use the term “Blacks quite often.” For example: http://blacksinthescriptures.com/

By: Leslie G Nelson

Leslie G Nelson — Wed, 25 Feb 2015 21:46:00 +0000

In reply to Gary Nd Crystal Vest. Gary, that is the best answer I have seen to this question. Thanks!

By: ppeebles

ppeebles — Wed, 25 Feb 2015 20:11:00 +0000

In reply to RIPJameson. Oh and as a side note to you...the only place Black was mentioned, was in the question that was submitted. And the person that submitted it is in fact black himself. Have a good day. :)

By: Bryan Hansen

Bryan Hansen — Mon, 23 Feb 2015 18:18:00 +0000

I think one point that gets ignored is just how few people in other churches can hold the priesthood. One response given by a black member is “Do you hold the priesthood in your church?” That leads to a conversation about why does it matter.

By: Gary Nd Crystal Vest

Gary Nd Crystal Vest — Sat, 21 Feb 2015 23:00:00 +0000

For me I found that I needed that question answered too. It came through reading the Old Testament. Why were only the sons of Levi allowed to hold the priesthood? Did that make the rest of the tribes of Israel less righteous? When I understood that this did not make the rest of the tribes “less than” I understood there was some kind of “Order” then the Spirit confirmed to me that this question had some of the same reasons. When explaining this to others outside our faith I proposed this question, “Why did the Lord restrict the Priesthood to be held by men from the other tribes of Israel?”

By: ppeebles

ppeebles — Sat, 21 Feb 2015 14:39:00 +0000

In reply to RIPJameson. For the purpose of this answer, black was more appropriate. Since this is a worldwide church, "African American" certainly wouldn't apply to the majority of areas that the church has a presence. You certainly wouldn't call someone living in Africa "African American."

By: ppeebles

ppeebles — Sat, 21 Feb 2015 14:21:00 +0000

In reply to RIPJameson. Actually it is the more preferred term. Also, since we are talking about a world wide church "African American" wouldn't apply to most of the areas that the church has a presence. You certainly wouldn't call those in Africa "African American."