Hey, if we can use the Book of Mormon movie as a source, it opens up a goldmine for the critics.

You being mentally IGNORANT of all aspects of Mormonism, both the literal skin color AND the spiritual skin color, doesn't make Mormonism a "cult", it makes YOU the cult..... a cult of ignorance and bigotry.

What you don't understand is that you never actually knew mormonism, and you forgot much of what you once did know. Now you lie and misrepresent Mormonism as if IT was YOUR perverted and ignorant view of it.

Sorry, Mormonism never was YOUR view of it..... It's always been separate from your stupidity!

It's not a "source"..... It's an example of a point.

Sad you people choose to mock the source rather than getting the actual point.

Did they look "darker" or not???
Since they did, clearly it's a good example of exactly what the Book of Mormon speaks of, and clearly shows your anti-mormon perversions of the book is nothing but that, perversion and LIES.

I never saw that movie. I was sick that day. Did the director change the lighting or something? How did he make their skin "look" darker without changing the skin color?

OFFICIAL DECLARATION

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

From the Book of Abraham of the Pearl of Great Price, scripture of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and endorsed by professors at Brigham Young University who claim knowledge of Egyptology:

Figure 6
"Olimlah, a slave belonging to the prince"



The Church of Jesus Christ proclaims to all the world that the black person in Facsimile No. 3 is not an Egyptian god but a slave called Olimlah as revealed by divine revelation from the prophet Joseph Smith. Modern Egyptologists are wrong and the Egyptian writing does not refer to Anubis. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints along with the professors at Brigham Young University are in direct defiance of modern Egyptology and continue to hold to its racist errors as created by their founding prophet. Thomas S. Monson is responsible for maintaining these lies and teaching members of the church that the god of Egypt is a slave. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has committed blasphemy against the Egyptian religion and has slandered one of its gods. Where is the apology? Where is the willingness to make ammends?

Mormons are racist! Mormon scripture is wrong. Joseph Smith lied and faked his understanding of Egyptology. Thomas S. Monson continues to cover the lie. How embarrassing for the Mormons! Shameful! Mormons are becoming a people known for lying. Before too long the word lie and Mormon will go hand in hand.

Paul O

I never saw the movie. But the ACTUAL Book of Mormon says their skin was made dark.

I'd like to bear my testimony that I know the black person in Facsimile No. 3 is not a god, his name is Olimlah, a slave in Egypt. How do I know? I'm an Egyptologist with a degree. I'm one of the finest school teachers to walk the grounds of BYU. Take it from me.

Johnny Gee-boy
PhD of Joe's Explanations

don't forget LDS.org!

"Laman and Lemuel’s followers called themselves Lamanites. They became a dark-skinned people. God cursed them because of their wickedness."

Those damn "anti-mormon's" running that site....

I'm Dan, and I'm a Mormon. I believe the official Explanations of Facsimile No. 3 of the divinely inspired Book of Abraham. I believe the little black guy therein is only a slave. I know Joseph Smith told the truth and that modern Egyptology along with all the evidence in the land of Egypt is wrong.

Dan P
School teacher with a Degree in something?

That's right, their countenance's became dark.....
Watch the video and get a clue. It's symbolism.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQFev9IX-70

Let me make it even more clear.
When you read scripture and it says their "garments" became white, dark, etc. do you REALLY think they are talking about CLOTHING????

Yet, you morons would want us to believe that "skins" in the Book of Mormon is actually referring to skin color, and not skins as in garments and skins or garments as in actually "countenances".

I'm Kerry! I'm a Mormon who believes in the revelations of Facsimile No. 3 of my Mormon scriptures. True that!

I sure love looking at those white and delightsome ladies in Facsimile No. 3 even though the prophet said they are boys and professor Nibley said they were just dressing up in lady clothes for an Egyptian drag show. I have a testimony of Hugh Nibley, my Lord and Savior.

Kerry-boy(girl)
Banana smoker

LOL. Skin = countenance. Horse = tapir. Context is key. It's part of reading comprehension. Don't call people morons for interpreting the text as it is written. If the verse says "they were naked, save it were a skin which was girded about their loins," then skin is referring to an animal skin used for clothing. When the verse says, "And their curse was taken from them, and their skin became white like unto the Nephites." Then it means their skin. Unless you think it means their loincloth changed colors, lol. If their countenance changed, it would have said countenance, since that word did exist.

I said a while back that bcspace is the kind of guy who will tell you black is white and white is black if he thinks it will defend the church. What is delusional is he might think people actually buy into what he says. LOL

WHITE AND DELIGHTSOME -- MORMON STYLE





DARK AND SLAVERY -- MORMON STYLE



The revelations of the Book of Abraham as given to the world in Facsimile No. 3 are an embarrassment to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Everyone knows they aren't true. Everyone knows Joseph Smith had a boner when he came up with that crap. And what does pretended prophet Tommy-boy Monson have to say about the black slave? Not a damn thing. He's a coward of a man. He's fat and well fed, all bills paid! Go Tommy boy! Prophesy Tommy! Prophesy!

Paul O

Well, when you can think of a doctrinal statement that says the ban came about because someone had black skin, let me know. I'll bet you can't find one among the speculative statements.

I finally put bcspace on my ignore list because I got sick of his deception. There comes a point when one cannot put up with it any longer. It became apparent to me that he was altogether dealing in deception and it got a bit old.

I wouldn't believe a word he says. Not a single word. I chalk bcspace up as simply another one of holy-Joe's Explanations of Facsimile No. 3 -- totally out in left field.

Paul O

Troll. We both know the ban was based on race. The leaders of the church get most things wrong, and they thought black people were descendants of Cain and were not to be given the priesthood, or are you not aware of OD2. Are you really this stupid to think anyone believes what you are saying. Keep tolling away.

I think he is more then just delusional, but willing to lie here if he thinks it's defending the church in some way.

No kidding.

And I totally get where Infymus is coming from, too.

I grew up seeing many sincere decent people broken on the wheel of the priesthood ban: excommunicated, disfellowshipped, shunned. Careers and lives ruined.

That's why these things can still make me angry.

Themis, this is a unique and ironic case where the term "whitewashing" functions literally and not figuratively.

These are bold lies told against history and against the lives of many decent people who lived in anguish because of these clearly racist practices.

I think it is best to not even engage with such disingenuousness. Such craven justifications do not deserve the respect of response.

It's quite telling that none of you can come up with any kind of quote or reference. You mentioned OD 2. Please quote the part of OD 2 that says the ban came about because of race.