The zealot defenders of blacks and the priesthood

[SteelBlue]

Originally Posted by OrangeUte

I have been avidly interested in this issue for many, many years. Having served a mission in Africa, I was drawn to the history of this issue by the many questions I was posed, both from white and black members and non-member investigators. I think the points you have made are very well taken.

How has the white membership in South Africa handled the 1978 revelation? Did you find that they viewed it as favorably as we do, or were there some older folks murmuring?

Another question I have is how did the church handle the post revelation but pre-abolition of S. African apartheid days there? Did apartheid ensure that blacks and whites did not live close enough to be in the same branches/wards/stakes? Or were our black and white congregations meeting together before apartheid ended?

[JohnnyLingo]

That's like Satan walking into a CEO meeting in heaven and complaining about how the board meetings are so tense and how people stare at him with frowns.

You are Satan

We are heaven.

Get thee hence to cougarboard.

And you are Heavenly Father.

You have the authority and the power to cast me from heaven.

Just thought I'd remind you.

Also, I love your avatar, but you flatter me by placing me in the same league as Tex and Indy. I'm just a punk kid who's never had an original thought in his life.

How has the white membership in South Africa handled the 1978 revelation? Did you find that they viewed it as favorably as we do, or were there some older folks murmuring?

In a lot of cases, poorly. From the members I spoke to about it when I was in Cape Town, in the meeting where the announcement was made, men stood up and walked out of the church forever. Took their families with them. Still difficult in many areas of South Africa. Missionaries know that if they baptize a poor black family into a middle-class white ward, the converts will have a hard time being accepted. In most cases they're gone within a couple months.

[All-American]

Originally Posted by JohnnyLingo

My answer is that numerically, there are more insulting posts on CB since its membership is significantly larger than CG's.

But the level of insults throw around here are definitely more below the belt and mean-spirited.

Interesting. I'm not certain that I'd agree, but far be it for me to tell you what you are seeing. I do think there's been more ill will here as of late than previously.

[JohnnyLingo]

I do think there's been more ill will here as of late than previously.

Oh I don't disagree. Accusing people of murder and sodomy are standard practice round here parts.

[myboynoah]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

Maybe I'm not being clear enough. I'm not sure if what they did in South Africa was proper or not, but you used it in the apparent attempt to show how wrong the ban and all that attended it was.

My point is the larger issue that God had or does have policies that would appear to be racist or sexist or any other -ist to some people. What was done in South Africa is completely irrelevant in that regard.

I suspect his intent, as was the intent of my original post, was to point to the absurd lengths to which Church leaders went to try to administer the policy. At some point, one must look around at the absurdity and wonder whether or not the current path might not be wrong. I'm inclined to believe that all those absurdities played a role in the awakening that led to the 1978 revelation.

[UtahDan]

Originally Posted by JohnnyLingo

Good to see nothing's really changed here. The same people still throw out juvenile insults and make outrageous statements in the name of enlightenment.

What is your avatar holding over his head? It looks suspiciously like a large jar of something.......

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by myboynoah

I suspect his intent, as was the intent of my original post, was to point to the absurd lengths to which Church leaders went to try to administer the policy. At some point, one must look around at the absurdity and wonder whether or not the current path might not be wrong. I'm inclined to believe that all those absurdities played a role in the awakening that led to the 1978 revelation.

Exactly.

[JohnnyLingo]

Originally Posted by All-American

Interesting. I'm not certain that I'd agree, but far be it for me to tell you what you are seeing. I do think there's been more ill will here as of late than previously.

My reading comprehension = fail.

You said you do think there's been more ill will here as of late.

I am an idiot.

In response to your post now that I've read is correctly, it's odd how peace is disturbed when people of differing opinions discuss topics like religion and politics.

It sure would be boring here without Indy, Tex, Seattle or myself. Cougarguard would be one neverending "I love you, you love me"-fest.

[SeattleUte]

There was (and may remain), a real life, practical purpose for the priesthood ban (and perhaps even the memory of the priesthood ban) that is plain as the nose on your face, and the ban has been very effective for its intended purpose. This is the great unmentionable. To the extent people today continue to defend the ban they help to retain its vitality and further this original purpose. Just like those arcane food prohibitions in Leviticus 11, the ban was born of real life, practical concerns.

[All-American]

Originally Posted by JohnnyLingo

My reading comprehension = fail.

You said you do think there's been more ill will here as of late.

I am an idiot.

In response to your post now that I've read is correctly, it's odd how peace is disturbed when people of differing opinions discuss topics like religion and politics.

It sure would be boring here without Indy, Tex, Seattle or myself. Cougarguard would be one neverending "I love you, you love me"-fest.

I don't think differing opinions necessitate antagonism. I would argue that the ability to coexist with people who think differently than you is the truest mark of enlightenment-- which, goodness knows, we don't always reach here.