Quote:
Originally Posted by Indy Coug
We have multiple accounts of various peoples in the scriptures that were prevented from receiving Gospel blessings (Mosaic Jews from the Melchizedek Priesthood, Gentiles from being preached the Gospel) or were distinguished by God based on their skin color (Lamanites vs Nephites).
I'm saying that given all the above, any reasonably open minded person could not possibly definitively conclude that God didn't have His own reasons to not allow blacks the priesthood.
If you think that stance is sufficient to characterize me as being a racist or defending racism, then I believe you're too close-minded on the subject and/or you're purposefully being intellectually disingenuous.
|
I just don't buy this bullshit.
In a vacuum, the logical premises can be stated as an argument but given the history of racism, and the fact we have people reporting their causes of exclusion for their own benefit, it's just people covering up for their own defeciencies and blaming God in the process.
I think you're taking the least probable scenario to defend institutional racism. Could one make the intellectual argument you're making? You just did. Is it very persuasive in light of social conditions and other events? Not to me. So in my mind, you're happy to defend a racist policy and blame God for it, when the most probable reason for it lies with the fallibity of men.
Whenever a problme arises, people are wont to blame God. Let's see, who is more likely to have been racist, Brigham Young, a nineteenth century man, or the perfect God who loves all of his children?