Responsibility towards the ignorant

Leave him to his own happiness – and be willing to step in if it stops working for him at some point. Destroying a paradigm that brings happiness to someone is NEVER a good thing – especially since there is NO guarantee that what you offer him to replace it will work for him.

Well, there were a few things in your description that I might add some nuance to because he’s actually not on track–he may be smug in his orthodoxy, but misinformed about the church’s actual stance.

You mentioned his belief that the temple ceremony came straight from Solomon’s temple, but it might be good to remind him that ancient temples revolved around the Law of Moses, not the higher law which had not yet been received. The temple rites of the ancient Israelites are actually well documented and are not like the current temple ceremonies. But there are some common symbols that are meaningful. Additionally, you said he is a biblical racist. I’m not totally sure what that means, but I make it a practice to encourage people to abandon prejudice. Someone who feels racism is justified is not on the right track.

I actually am not sure I would simply allow him to persist in his erroneous notions. But I also wouldn’t go out of my way to correct him. That would assume that I actually know what I’m talking about 😳 . I would probably just let things happen. If he asks you, you give him your honest opinion (in a very gentle way that admits uncertainty). I think there’s a middle ground between just allowing him to continue, and evangelically preaching the “truth” to him. You also might approach it in a very nonchalant way, such that it is not a direct threat to his ideas.

“But he thinks the temple stuff is exactly from Solomon’s temple, the tower of babel is literal for him, he knows very little about seers stones, treasure hunting, papyrus, early polygamy, witnesses ect…..He listens to the leaders and absorbs and obeys. He thinks polygamy will come back since it was a revelation and commandment, he believes in the law of consecration, he is a biblical racist. “

Er, uh…..I know about the above but believe the way your friend does after spending years questioning.

With respect, please leave a small window open in your mind that he may not be as “ignorant” as you think.

” He thinks polygamy will come back since it was a revelation and commandment, “

May I ask why you think that it won’t?

“He believes in the law of consecration,”

Is there something wrong with that that I’m missing?

” he is a biblical racist. “

Ditto. I won’t even start on the race thing because we would never agree…however, I will say that the idea of blacks being denied the priesthood is one heck of a lot bigger than just “biblical”. There are many references in the BoM, the PoGP, and the teachings of the early prophets of this dispensation.

My opinion only….

Mileage will certainly vary.

spacious maze, Bruce has been very open about the fact that he’s a fundamentalist Mormon. He is very respectful here and doesn’t push his views, and it’s important that we remember that when he comments. He and I disagree about many things, and this is a great example, but I respect that he contributes positively on many topics here.

I’m not disagreeing with what you said; I’m only asking for a little understanding for Bruce’s unique presence here.

My apologies for appearing to push my views…that was a bit strong I suppose.

I’m just saying that the guy needs the benefit-of-the-doubt that his thinking may actually be correct.

Much of out science and secular understanding today will probably be silliness and folly in a few generations. Those in the “soft, gentle darknesses” of their faith may yet be proven correct IMHO.

Just sayin….

I’m not sure that it would be in the interest of people trying to stay in the Church to describe fundamentalist views on blacks and the priesthood but, since you asked, I’ll try.

Black people are God’s children, our brothers and sisters, and deserving of as much love and respect as anyone else. They should be treated as equals. I’ve known many wonderful black folks and hold absolutely nothing against them.

However, for some reason, God has declared that they are not to be priesthood holders until after the millinium.

Is it for some pre-existant fence-riding? I don’t know. Certain scriptures and comments from early prophets seem to indicate that.

I personally wish it wasn’t this way. It’s certainly not a comfortable position to take and it sure doesn’t win you any points in today’s world. I also personally wish God did not command us to practice celestial plural marriage….same deal.

(I also personally wish to win the lottery.) The problem is, these are not my decisions. It is not for me to tell God what kind of god He needs to be or judge his decisions by my limited human knowledge and insight. That would be indicative of a severe ego-trip on my part IMHO.

Fundamentalists fully realize the awkward postion that their view on blacks in the priesthood puts them with today’s society. It’s not a lot different than the early saints practicing polygamy….you do it because you know/believe it’s right, and you accept the consequences. We get to be called wonderful things like “racist” and be accused of “hatred” when, in reality, the idea that there is no difference in races is only an eyeblink in human history. It doesn’t matter if we harbor the most kind and loving feeling toward black people possible….if we support the view that they, for some reason, aren’t to have the priesthood yet, we are viewed as vile humans.

As far as folks leaving the Church because of it’s former beliefs on race…I think that the present leaders have come up with some pretty good explanations for the practice. It’s explained as tradition from 19th century America, mistaken leaders, etc. I certainly understand and agree for the Church to expand it is totally necessary to take positions like that.

I do find it peculiar that some of the same people that would leave the Church because of former teachings regading blacks think nothing of a bible full of references, and rules of conduct toward, slaves. I don’t see anyone “struggling” with that fact.

Surely slavery is as “bad” as racism…although in our present mindset…I don’t know.

If one believes that new revelations and principles somehow “trump” former revelations and principles, then I don’t see the problem. The Church has made it clear that all former teachings regarding the priesthood ban were wrong…or at least thats what I think they’re trying to say.

Sorry to ramble on…It’s not for me to turn this into a fundamentalist belief launch pad. If the moderators view this post as offensive or it starts an agruement, please delete it. That’s not my intention and arguement in a blog format over such issues would not benefit anyone IMHO.

I sometimes think though, that some folks leaving the Church over former beliefs like this are looking for an excuse to leave anyway. I know that’s not the case with everyone, but I sincerely hope the Church comes forth with a way to reconcile their history. It just doesn’t pay to hide things IMHO.