Mister Scratch wrote:Sadly, I think that at least on one level, you are correct, Mak. Unfortunately (and embarrassingly) for the Church, this means---among other things---that the long-standing, scripturally- and doctrinally-sanctioned ban on interracial marriage is still in effect.
Mister Scratch wrote:Sadly, I think that at least on one level, you are correct, Mak. Unfortunately (and embarrassingly) for the Church, this means---among other things---that the long-standing, scripturally- and doctrinally-sanctioned ban on interracial marriage is still in effect.
Would you like to start a thread on that?
Not really. I have already said my peace on that topic both on the old FAIRboard (I was queued for my argument over there), and on the earlier incarnation of this board. The gist of what I said in both places was that the old ban on interracial marriage (reinforced, incidentally, on the front page of the same issue of Church News that announced the lifting of the priesthood ban) has never been publicly rescinded. If you want to start a new thread, by all means go ahead. Perhaps I will add to it. It is an intriguing (not to mention disquieting) topic, after all.
Mister Scratch wrote:Not really. I have already said my peace on that topic both on the old FAIRboard (I was queued for my argument over there), and on the earlier incarnation of this board. The gist of what I said in both places was that the old ban on interracial marriage (reinforced, incidentally, on the front page of the same issue of Church News that announced the lifting of the priesthood ban) has never been publicly rescinded. If you want to start a new thread, by all means go ahead. Perhaps I will add to it. It is an intriguing (not to mention disquieting) topic, after all.
Are you saying that it should have been shouted from the rooftops, or are you saying it's still in effect?
Mister Scratch wrote:Not really. I have already said my peace on that topic both on the old FAIRboard (I was queued for my argument over there), and on the earlier incarnation of this board. The gist of what I said in both places was that the old ban on interracial marriage (reinforced, incidentally, on the front page of the same issue of Church News that announced the lifting of the priesthood ban) has never been publicly rescinded. If you want to start a new thread, by all means go ahead. Perhaps I will add to it. It is an intriguing (not to mention disquieting) topic, after all.
Are you saying that it should have been shouted from the rooftops, or are you saying it's still in effect?
I cited it to point out that problems inherent with your argument re: commandments vs. doctrine vs. "advice" or whatever other level of authority any given Church utterance might have.
As to the question of whether it is "still in effect," I think it depends on how one interprets "doctrine" for one thing. Frankly, I don't know whether it is genuinely "in effect" anymore. Obviously, interracial sealings have taken place in temples throughout the world. But on what basis? When and how was the ban lifted? We don't know.
If the ban really is still in effect, then yes: I do think it should be "shouted from the rooftops" in order to agitate the powers that be to change it.
Mister Scratch wrote:I cited it to point out that problems inherent with your argument re: commandments vs. doctrine vs. "advice" or whatever other level of authority any given Church utterance might have.
I think "practice" is the word you're not really searching for.
Mister Scratch wrote:As to the question of whether it is "still in effect," I think it depends on how one interprets "doctrine" for one thing. Frankly, I don't know whether it is genuinely "in effect" anymore. Obviously, interracial sealings have taken place in temples throughout the world. But on what basis? When and how was the ban lifted? We don't know.
If the ban really is still in effect, then yes: I do think it should be "shouted from the rooftops" in order to agitate the powers that be to change it.
Would you mind posting a good reference for this ban?
Mister Scratch wrote:I cited it to point out that problems inherent with your argument re: commandments vs. doctrine vs. "advice" or whatever other level of authority any given Church utterance might have.
I think "practice" is the word you're not really searching for.
Mister Scratch wrote:As to the question of whether it is "still in effect," I think it depends on how one interprets "doctrine" for one thing. Frankly, I don't know whether it is genuinely "in effect" anymore. Obviously, interracial sealings have taken place in temples throughout the world. But on what basis? When and how was the ban lifted? We don't know.
If the ban really is still in effect, then yes: I do think it should be "shouted from the rooftops" in order to agitate the powers that be to change it.
Would you mind posting a good reference for this ban?
BY taught that the punishment for interracial marriage was "death on the spot." The other reference can be found in the June, 1978 issue of Church News. Both of these items can be found in the back of Quinn's Mormon Hierarchy: Extensions of Power. Perhaps I will dig them up later on. Or else you can simply read the old thread on MAD, since, if I'm not mistaken, you have an account there. It would be quite easy for you to find, and, as I indicated above, the bulk of my argument is all there.
Hi! I have a question here. Is drink beer or any other drinks that are low in alcohol content really against the Word of Wisdom? Here is Doc. and Cov. Section 89:5-7:
Doctrine and Covenants Section 89:5-7:
5 That inasmuch as any man drinketh wine or strong drink among you, behold it is not good, neither meet in the sight of your Father, only in assembling yourselves together to offer up your sacraments before him.
6 And, behold, this should be wine, yea, pure wine of the grape of the vine, of your own make.
7 And, again, strong drinks are not for the belly, but for the washing of your bodies.
It states there that it is not good for man to drink wine and stong drinks, however, it states nothing about beer or any other drink that is low in alcohol content. Here is an intereseting part about the Word of Wisdom from that Wiki article about it:
The revelation allows for the use of "mild drinks" such as beer, though currently the LDS Church practice encourages complete prohibition of alcohol consumption. Many church members see the purpose of the Word of Wisdom as one primarily of obedience, and that specific health benefits are merely a side effect.
Brackite wrote:Hi! I have a question here. Is drink beer or any other drinks that are low in alcohol content really against the Word of Wisdom? Here is Doc. and Cov. Section 89:5-7:
Doctrine and Covenants Section 89:5-7:
5 That inasmuch as any man drinketh wine or strong drink among you, behold it is not good, neither meet in the sight of your Father, only in assembling yourselves together to offer up your sacraments before him.
6 And, behold, this should be wine, yea, pure wine of the grape of the vine, of your own make.
7 And, again, strong drinks are not for the belly, but for the washing of your bodies.
It states there that it is not good for man to drink wine and stong drinks, however, it states nothing about beer or any other drink that is low in alcohol content. Here is an intereseting part about the Word of Wisdom from that Wiki article about it:
The revelation allows for the use of "mild drinks" such as beer, though currently the LDS Church practice encourages complete prohibition of alcohol consumption. Many church members see the purpose of the Word of Wisdom as one primarily of obedience, and that specific health benefits are merely a side effect.
And we're supposed to accept the authority of Wikipedia? Are you joking? Could you do better than that, please?
Wikipedia is just rightly Pointing out that the Word of Wisdom does Not prohibit the consumption of beer or any other drinks that are low in alcohol content. Anyway, it is pretty well documented that Joseph Smith along with some of the other early Latter-day Saints did drink beer on occasions. Please Check out and See: http://www.xmission.com/~country/reason/w_wisdom.htm