Church says it was an "error" that their Come Follow Me manual called the black skin curse a... black skin curse

Discussions toward a better understanding of LDS doctrine, history, and culture. Discussion of Christianity, religion, and faith in general is welcome.
User avatar
jfro18
Posts: 1553
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2018 8:41 pm

Church says it was an "error" that their Come Follow Me manual called the black skin curse a... black skin curse

Post by jfro18 » Sat Jan 18, 2020 7:50 am

https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2020/01 ... ds-church/

The Mormon church is saying that it was an error that they printed in the CFM manuals that the curse of black skin was a literal curse of black skin, even though that's what the Book of Mormon directly says. It's also what Joseph Smith's revelations say as they identify the "Lamanites" by the color of their skin.

This is some awful gaslighting even for them - to tell us what we're reading in the Book of Mormon isn't actually what they meant is just embarrassing.

"And he had caused the cursing to come upon them, yea, even a sore cursing, because of their iniquity. For behold, they had hardened their hearts against him, that they had become like unto a flint; wherefore, as they were white, and exceedingly fair and delightsome, that they might not be enticing unto my people the Lord God did cause a skin of blackness to come upon them."

User avatar
Jeffret
Posts: 904
Joined: Mon May 29, 2017 6:49 pm

Re: Church says it was an "error" that their Come Follow Me manual called the black skin curse a... black skin curse

Post by Jeffret » Sat Jan 18, 2020 9:46 am

It really shows that their disavowal of these very racist doctrines is only a very thin veneer.
"Close your eyes, for your eyes will only tell the truth,
And the truth isn't what you want to see" (Charles Hart, "The Music of the Night")

User avatar
Yobispo
Posts: 151
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 2:35 pm

Re: Church says it was an "error" that their Come Follow Me manual called the black skin curse a... black skin curse

Post by Yobispo » Sat Jan 18, 2020 12:18 pm

This one is SOOOO egregious that I am almost forced to bring it up with my TBM family. They are force-feeding the gaslighting now.

User avatar
StarbucksMom
Posts: 286
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 11:14 am

Re: Church says it was an "error" that their Come Follow Me manual called the black skin curse a... black skin curse

Post by StarbucksMom » Sat Jan 18, 2020 12:22 pm

Umm, ok Russ & co., I will listen for a minute. If the black skin isn’t really black skin, and fair or light skin isn’t really light skin, and a curse of black skin really isn’t a curse, then:
what. EXACTLY. is. it?

User avatar
jfro18
Posts: 1553
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2018 8:41 pm

Re: Church says it was an "error" that their Come Follow Me manual called the black skin curse a... black skin curse

Post by jfro18 » Sat Jan 18, 2020 1:50 pm

Yobispo wrote:
Sat Jan 18, 2020 12:18 pm
This one is SOOOO egregious that I am almost forced to bring it up with my TBM family. They are force-feeding the gaslighting now.
I want to bring this up SO badly with my wife, but she takes everything I say as a personal attack and it's not worth it.

This just feels worse than the normal gaslighting. I did a write-up this week about their "now you know" video on Joseph and freemasonry and also about Eyring's latest attacks on doubts at BYU-I, but this feels like a whole new level of gaslighting to the members.

It's just so wrong.

User avatar
Hagoth
Posts: 4655
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2016 1:13 pm

Re: Church says it was an "error" that their Come Follow Me manual called the black skin curse a... black skin curse

Post by Hagoth » Sat Jan 18, 2020 2:56 pm

So are they apologizing because the Book of Mormon is wrong, or for the church's racist beliefs, or for the fact that their editors accidentally exposed actual doctrine that they're trying to keep on the down-low?
“The easy confidence with which I know another man's religion is folly teaches me to suspect that my own is also.” -Mark Twain

Jesus: "The Kingdom of God is within you." The Buddha: "Be your own light."

consiglieri
Posts: 326
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 12:02 pm

Re: Church says it was an "error" that their Come Follow Me manual called the black skin curse a... black skin curse

Post by consiglieri » Sat Jan 18, 2020 3:20 pm

I'm not sure they're apologizing...

User avatar
blazerb
Posts: 857
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2017 4:35 pm

Re: Church says it was an "error" that their Come Follow Me manual called the black skin curse a... black skin curse

Post by blazerb » Sat Jan 18, 2020 8:28 pm

I saw an interesting theory on reddit. The church found the error in the printed manuals but still sent them out. Then it changed the online manual. This was the older members, who are more likely to use the printed manual, get to see the same doctrine they have always known. The younger members, who are more likely to use the online manual, don't see the offensive doctrine. I would not put it past the COB minds to purposely go down this path.

User avatar
2bizE
Posts: 1799
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 9:33 pm

Re: Church says it was an "error" that their Come Follow Me manual called the black skin curse a... black skin curse

Post by 2bizE » Sat Jan 18, 2020 8:42 pm

To me, this means the editors don’t even know about the essays and that the doctrine has changed. There is much discrepancy of knowledge in the church.
~2bizE

User avatar
Palerider
Posts: 1847
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2016 8:44 am

Re: Church says it was an "error" that their Come Follow Me manual called the black skin curse a... black skin curse

Post by Palerider » Sat Jan 18, 2020 8:57 pm

Just thinkin'....

The church is so thorough in proofreading it's publications, I'm wondering if this isn't a hatchet job from within where someone at the last moment, just before they went to press, made this change in the text in order to embarrass the church. Forcing the old doctrine into the light.

That's something they would want to keep on the down-low for sure because it means they have intrigue within the belly of the beast that can't be controlled. :oops:
"There is but one straight course, and that is to seek truth and pursue it steadily."

"Truth will ultimately prevail where there is pains to bring it to light."

George Washington

User avatar
Jeffret
Posts: 904
Joined: Mon May 29, 2017 6:49 pm

Re: Church says it was an "error" that their Come Follow Me manual called the black skin curse a... black skin curse

Post by Jeffret » Sat Jan 18, 2020 8:59 pm

blazerb wrote:
Sat Jan 18, 2020 8:28 pm
I saw an interesting theory on reddit. The church found the error in the printed manuals but still sent them out. Then it changed the online manual. This was the older members, who are more likely to use the printed manual, get to see the same doctrine they have always known. The younger members, who are more likely to use the online manual, don't see the offensive doctrine. I would not put it past the COB minds to purposely go down this path.
That's giving the Church credit for a lot more savviness than I've ever seen them display. I've seen them mess up only to respond and handle it even more poorly. I can't think of a time I've seen them do something that slick. (Although, admittedly, this one isn't really turning out all that well I would say.)
"Close your eyes, for your eyes will only tell the truth,
And the truth isn't what you want to see" (Charles Hart, "The Music of the Night")

User avatar
jfro18
Posts: 1553
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2018 8:41 pm

Re: Church says it was an "error" that their Come Follow Me manual called the black skin curse a... black skin curse

Post by jfro18 » Sat Jan 18, 2020 9:00 pm

Palerider wrote:
Sat Jan 18, 2020 8:57 pm
Just thinkin'....

The church is so thorough in proofreading it's publications, I'm wondering if this isn't a hatchet job from within where someone at the last moment, just before they went to press, made this change in the text in order to embarrass the church. Forcing the old doctrine into the light.

That's something they would want to keep on the down-low for sure because it means they have intrigue within the belly of the beast that can't be controlled. :oops:
I'm not big into conspiracy, but you are correct that these are heavily correlated and proofread materials so it's almost unthinkable that it got through without anyone catching that.

And I saw the idea that maybe the print was left for the older people and the digital was changed so the youth would have no idea what the church taught, but that's definitely a calculated risk given that someone was going to notice and blow it up to a bigger issue than it would've been had they just been honest about the text of their own scriptures.

What a mess... I'm glad it's shining a spotlight on the racist thoughts of the author of the Book of Mormon though, and the God he claimed to speak for.

User avatar
moksha
Posts: 3267
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 4:22 am

Re: Church says it was an "error" that their Come Follow Me manual called the black skin curse a... black skin curse

Post by moksha » Sat Jan 18, 2020 11:40 pm

Palerider wrote:
Sat Jan 18, 2020 8:57 pm
The church is so thorough in proofreading its publications, I'm wondering if this isn't a hatchet job from within where someone at the last moment, just before they went to press, made this change in the text in order to embarrass the church. Forcing the old doctrine into the light.
Old but unrepudiated doctrine. The Church needs to apologize for its past racial policy and let the members know in no uncertain terms that they were wrong. Maintaining a stiff-necked and unrepentant posture is no way to heal. Being too arrogant to say sorry does not mesh with the claim that they are servants of the Lord.
Good faith does not require evidence, but it also does not turn a blind eye to that evidence. Otherwise, it becomes misplaced faith.
-- Moksha

User avatar
Palerider
Posts: 1847
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2016 8:44 am

Re: Church says it was an "error" that their Come Follow Me manual called the black skin curse a... black skin curse

Post by Palerider » Sun Jan 19, 2020 12:06 am

moksha wrote:
Sat Jan 18, 2020 11:40 pm
Palerider wrote:
Sat Jan 18, 2020 8:57 pm
The church is so thorough in proofreading its publications, I'm wondering if this isn't a hatchet job from within where someone at the last moment, just before they went to press, made this change in the text in order to embarrass the church. Forcing the old doctrine into the light.
Old but unrepudiated doctrine. The Church needs to apologize for its past racial policy and let the members know in no uncertain terms that they were wrong. Maintaining a stiff-necked and unrepentant posture is no way to heal. Being too arrogant to say sorry does not mesh with the claim that they are servants of the Lord.
The article mentioned that the doctrine had been "denounced" but I wasn't too sure of that.

To openly and cleanly apologize would mean naming names and that means that "someone", some past prophet, led the church astray for quite awhile. And then later prophets just bobbleheaded along with the mistake. That means everyone up until Kimball was guilty. What a can of worms!

Nope. Can't have that! Just bury it and hope it doesn't stink too badly.
"There is but one straight course, and that is to seek truth and pursue it steadily."

"Truth will ultimately prevail where there is pains to bring it to light."

George Washington

lostinmiddlemormonism
Posts: 359
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2016 8:40 am

Re: Church says it was an "error" that their Come Follow Me manual called the black skin curse a... black skin curse

Post by lostinmiddlemormonism » Sun Jan 19, 2020 7:27 am

To me the really interesting part of this is that you now have church leadership openly saying that part of the Book of Mormon isn't true. That it doesn't actually mean what is there in plain text.

So if we can't trust what the Book of Mormon says, then what other parts are inaccurate? Perhaps Nephi wasn't really following the commandments of God when he murdered Laban. I mean I know the Book says he was, but we can't really trust the Book, can we? Maybe Jesus didn't really appear in the New World, it was just allegorical after all.

For a religion that insists it is either all true or it is nothing, this is a dangerous tightrope to try to walk.

-lost

User avatar
Hagoth
Posts: 4655
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2016 1:13 pm

Re: Church says it was an "error" that their Come Follow Me manual called the black skin curse a... black skin curse

Post by Hagoth » Sun Jan 19, 2020 8:56 am

lostinmiddlemormonism wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 7:27 am
To me the really interesting part of this is that you now have church leadership openly saying that part of the Book of Mormon isn't true. That it doesn't actually mean what is there in plain text.
But that's just business as usual these days. It doesn't meant the book isn't true, just like the fact that Joseph couldn't read Egyptian on papyri that didn't have the story of Abraham is any impediment to claiming that he translated the BoA from the papyri. I think the church denounces the interpretation of "curse of black skin" as meaning that someone was cursed by having their skin turned black. A truly spiritually tuned person will certainly recognize that this really means the same as "their hearts were hardened." You know, poetic license.
“The easy confidence with which I know another man's religion is folly teaches me to suspect that my own is also.” -Mark Twain

Jesus: "The Kingdom of God is within you." The Buddha: "Be your own light."

User avatar
deacon blues
Posts: 1319
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 7:37 am

Re: Church says it was an "error" that their Come Follow Me manual called the black skin curse a... black skin curse

Post by deacon blues » Sun Jan 19, 2020 9:13 am

Book of Mormon racism is like the dog poop that gets on my lawn from time to time. If I don't remove it it's just going to keep stinking, and every so often somebody's going to step in it. :roll:
God is Love. God is Truth

User avatar
alas
Posts: 1603
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 2:10 pm

Re: Church says it was an "error" that their Come Follow Me manual called the black skin curse a... black skin curse

Post by alas » Sun Jan 19, 2020 10:00 am

moksha wrote:
Sat Jan 18, 2020 11:40 pm
Palerider wrote:
Sat Jan 18, 2020 8:57 pm
The church is so thorough in proofreading its publications, I'm wondering if this isn't a hatchet job from within where someone at the last moment, just before they went to press, made this change in the text in order to embarrass the church. Forcing the old doctrine into the light.
Old but unrepudiated doctrine. The Church needs to apologize for its past racial policy and let the members know in no uncertain terms that they were wrong. Maintaining a stiff-necked and unrepentant posture is no way to heal. Being too arrogant to say sorry does not mesh with the claim that they are servants of the Lord.
This. If they would just make a big public announcement that we are sorry for early doctrine that got into the church because it was started at a time when many people including early church leaders, and that it was false doctrine when Nephi wrote it down and it was false doctrine when Joseph Smith translated it. It was false doctrine when Brigham Young made doctrine that kept blacks out of temples and kept priesthood from them. But by not stating that it was wrong and not what God wanted, they allow people to keep believing it and when people keep believing it, you get BYU professor Randy Botts teaching it and you get idiot writers who include it in new curriculum and idiot editors who still believe it that let it pass. You get people on discussion blogs who insist it WAS what God wanted because blacks were really fence sitter in the preexistence but that now all those who were fence sitters have been born, so God changed the policy. The church thinks it can repent but wants to get out of most of the steps to true repentance. Think about what the church taught you in primary. There are specific steps and one of them is to confess to the person you hurt. Not just to God and your bishop, but the person you harmed. Then you have to try to do what ever restitution you can do. In the church’s case that would be actively teaching that the old doctrine was wrong and actively teaching why it was changed. You don’t just quietly change what happens and pretend it never did happen. Denying that your mistake happened is denying you ever did wrong, which is exactly what the church is doing. They are denying they ever did wrong. Which is not repentance and it mucks up changing. It mucks up changing which is exactly what you see happening. The church tried to change direction and only told one foot which way they were walking and now can’t figure out why they are tripping over their own feet.

User avatar
jfro18
Posts: 1553
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2018 8:41 pm

Re: Church says it was an "error" that their Come Follow Me manual called the black skin curse a... black skin curse

Post by jfro18 » Sun Jan 19, 2020 10:45 am

alas wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 10:00 am
You get people on discussion blogs who insist it WAS what God wanted because blacks were really fence sitter in the preexistence but that now all those who were fence sitters have been born, so God changed the policy.
I was shocked when I found out last year that my brother in law actually believes that blacks, handicapped people, etc were less valiant in the preexistence.

I did not think that was a real think in the year 2019... but it is... and I can never unsee that post from my BIL (who doesn't know I saw it).

User avatar
RubinHighlander
Posts: 1668
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2016 7:20 am
Location: Behind the Zion Curtain

Re: Church says it was an "error" that their Come Follow Me manual called the black skin curse a... black skin curse

Post by RubinHighlander » Sun Jan 19, 2020 12:54 pm

The manuals “should have been shredded when this egregious error was found prior to international distribution,” said Jerri Harwell, associate professor in Salt Lake Community College’s English, linguistics and writing studies department. “The money that would have been lost on this is nothing compared to one day’s interest on $100 billion in [the church’s] reserves.”
While you are at it, you should have shredded the entire BOM when they changed it's actual content on the "White and delight some" scripture!

The paint on the floor of this church, that surrounds its corner of history and dogma, doesn't seem to be dry enough to walk on anytime soon. More popcorn please!
“Sir,' I said to the universe, 'I exist.' 'That,' said the universe, 'creates no sense of obligation in me whatsoever.”
--Douglas Adams

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YzmYP3PbfXE

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests