Some scholars/apologists have. Also, I think that most well read members would admit and/or support the fact that Nephi had some hard/hurt feelings towards his brothers Laman and Lemuel.
My guess is that translated into a form of racism/division between the Nephites and the Lamanites.
Regards,
MG
More likely that Joseph included this imaginary tale of being cursed with black skin as part of the racism of his day. Christians at that time were struggling to justify their support of slavery.
Tales of God sanctioned theft and murder and racist skin curses do not pass muster no matter whether these "well read" members have progressed through the entire Dick and Jane series.
Earlier quote:
Could the Nephites have been racist in their views of the Lamanites? Perhaps, in the same sense that the biblical patriarchs were racist when it came to their pagan neighbors, the Hittites, the Canaanites, and the Amorites, and did not want their offspring to marry these unbelievers. But once the Lamanites had been converted to the Nephite religion, the barriers separating these people dissolved. Even before they were converted, the Nephites considered the Lamanites to be “brethren,” a term used more than fifty times in reference to the Lamanites in the Book of Mormon. This is hardly a term that one would expect to find in a society that holds racist views of a neighboring people. And if Joseph Smith’s racism is reflected in the Book of Mormon, why does that volume have large numbers of Lamanites becoming good guys and, indeed, more righteous than the Nephites in the decades before Christ’s appearance? https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/con ... -of-Mormon
Because of the teachings of the LDS General Authorities based on LDS scripture. The events in the Mormon story set the stage for over 130 years of blatant LDS racism, and that racism remains written in the Book of Mormon.
Your link does not rise to the level of your assertion, of an apologist "calling out" the racism in the Book of Mormon. It's a mealy mouthed attempt at nodding and winking, and then calls Nephi a racist. "I Nephi, having been born of goodly parents am a racist" really? You have overpromised and underdelivered. Yet again.
Premise 1. Eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable.
Premise 2. The best evidence for the Book of Mormon is eyewitness testimony.
Conclusion. Therefore, the best evidence for the Book of Mormon is notoriously unreliable.
To govern human behavior. Are all laws moral and just in your view? Today nine states plus DC allow the termination of a viable fetus at any point in gestation. Is this a moral and just law in your view?
Back to the questions: where did you get the idea ("value") that "in order to not die" is a moral demaration? Why isn't mere convenience or a simple benefit a moral demarcation?
Good question. You tell me.
Not a mind reader. But I understand why you might not want to answer any questions.
Identifying as African-American Lesbian who is identifying as a Gay Man and a Gay Journalist
Pronouns: what/me/worry
Rocker and a mocker and a midnight shocker
Your link does not rise to the level of your assertion, of an apologist "calling out" the racism in the Book of Mormon. It's a mealy mouthed attempt at nodding and winking, and then calls Nephi a racist. "I Nephi, having been born of goodly parents am a racist" really? You have overpromised and underdelivered. Yet again.
Today nine states plus DC allow the termination of a viable fetus at any point in gestation ...
[...]
Could you perhaps be more specific? For instance, could you give a reference to the law of a state that allows the termination of a viable foetus (meaning, I presume, one capable of living normally if born) in the final week of a pregnancy?
Maksutov:
That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
Mayan Elephant:
Not only have I denounced the Big Lie, I have denounced the Big lie big lie.
MG 2.0 wrote:
...Some scholars/apologists have. Also, I think that most well read members would admit and/or support the fact that Nephi had some hard/hurt feelings towards his brothers Laman and Lemuel.
My guess is that translated into a form of racism/division between the Nephites and the Lamanites...
More likely that Joseph included this imaginary tale of being cursed with black skin as part of the racism of his day. Christians at that time were struggling to justify their support of slavery.
Tales of God sanctioned theft and murder and racist skin curses do not pass muster no matter whether these "well read" members have progressed through the entire Dick and Jane series.
Far, far, far more likely than "his brother hurt his feelings...therefore racism."
Nor does the Fairmormon link provided by the poster use that kind of reasoning, simplistic as it is. The Fairmormon quote simply says 'how can the Book of Mormon be racist when the story shows that once that race started acting properly, they were fully accepted?'
Wonder what would happen if members called out the racism inherent in Mormon scriptures.
There has been a lot of discussion on this topic over the years. I don't know if you're old enough to remember Eugene England when he was alive, but he had his opinions on different things. In regards to this particular topic he said:
Eugene England agreed that “Lamanite” genetic identity in the Book of Mormon had not been imposed by a deity but rather had been constructed by the culturally dominant Nephites: “The entire record,” England wrote, “probably reflects the Nephites’ own elitist, race-conscious—even somewhat paranoid perspective.” England’s argument set a precedent for a line of racial analysis: “not that God cannot do genetic tricks, but . . . that he does not”—the Book of Mormon’s Lamanites darkened their skin, he posited, either through self-marking or through sexual relationships with indigenous peoples. https://archive.bookofmormoncentral.org ... acebom.pdf
He hasn't been the only one to discuss this.
The ancient societies, not understanding things scientifically, would put 'god' as the causation of just about everything.
And yet, here we are judging those from the past and placing our own cultural sensitivities in their laps.
