Correct, and using what you said the question would be...
"Can someone who has failed to believe in the Gospel be the President of the Church?"
And the answer is obvious, BUT that is not the intent of the question is it? The question is using a racial divide:
"Can someone who is non White become President of the Church?"
Thus it is a racial issue / question.
Yes. I think you are right. So I guess my position would be:
* the person would likely have to be from the tribe of Ephraim
* race is irrelevant
* culture is irrelevant
Why? Because of the mode of adoption. It really doesn't matter. I'm from Benjamin, so I'm not too worried about it...
QUOTE (Tortdog) |
...the person would likely have to be from the tribe of Ephraim |
I thought others opined that Lamanites came from one of two tribes, thus it seems right on point, I.e., if a person DID believe that Lamanites are based on ancestry as opposed to beliefs then that cuts right to the chase of Ephraim vs. Manasseh. Guess I'm not following you.
Edited: tortdog on 11th Sep, 2007 - 5:51pm
My issue was with the term Lamanite in the context of race (which is what the question is based on) NOT which Tribe can become President of the Church - that is another issue, another question and another Thread, because it is a separate debate.
The Lord could call anyone that he wanted to be prophet, as there is no proscription against a "non-white" becoming an apostle or prophet.
The churches membership is becoming more diverse and I do not doubt that the leadership will also become more diverse as time goes by.
QUOTE |
Regardless of intent I believe that labels in Church has got to stop. |
dbackers:
QUOTE |
The churches membership is becoming more diverse and I do not doubt that the leadership will also become more diverse as time goes by. |