Posted on 12/23/2007 3:11:55 PM PST by Zakeet
Pre-eminent Mormon scholar argues Romney's answer is not at all a contradiction
Presidential candidate Mitt Romney says in a videotaped interview that he doesn't know that God has spoken to anyone since the time of Moses.
The comment appears to conflict with his Mormon faith that believes God spoke to founder Joseph Smith and other church prophets subsequently.
In the interview with Boston's WCVB, a reporter asks Romney several questions about his faith in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, including how his faith would impact him if he is elected.
"Should God speak to you, and ask you to do something that might be in conflict with your duties as president, or should He speak to your prophet who would speak to you, how would you make that decision, how would you handle that?" reporter Natalie Jacobson asks.
Romney laughs and then replies, "Well, I don't recall God speaking to me. I, I don't recall God speaking to anyone since, uh, Moses and the [burning] bush, or perhaps some others, but, but I don't have that frequent of communication."
The interview aired on the Boston station on Dec. 9 and was offered to the 28 other stations nationwide owned by Hearst-Argyle company.
Mormons believe in modern revelation and that the church's prophet communicates with God, a belief at odds with other mainstream Christian faiths. The faith was founded by Smith, who said he had spoken to God and that an angel led him to gold plates that became the Book of Mormon.
The LDS Church, through a spokesman, declined comment.
(Excerpt) Read more at sltrib.com ...
Other Salt Lake City media picking up on Romney's statement conflicting with Mormon doctrine include: ABC 4 and KUTV.
Due to length limitations for excerpts, you will have to read the article to see how Mitt's comments are not really in conflict with LDS doctrine.
How's a body suppose to know what Mitt Romney's platform is if the Mormon nonsense is spewed daily by the media???
I-slam and the LDS faith have the same basic problem, i.e. belief in prophets and prophecy in our age of the world. In real life, the last real prophet died somewhere around 2500 years ago. The first paragraph of the book of Hebrews describes prophets as a thing of the distant past at the time of Christ.
Given the rather intense addition of Christian Church theological questions to the original Mormon movement, wouldn't be surprising at all to have some Mormons still debating those points.
Or, maybe Mitt is a secret Morrisite or something. Might ask him.
1:2 in these last days he has spoken to us in a son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he created the world."
And your church? Who won the fights ~ those who said prophets were NOT PROHIBITED by this piece of Scripture, or that people were NO LONGER ALLOWED to listen to them?
There are, of course, other arguments about this clause.
Then there's the Apostolic Charismatic Church of the First Born and they take the 12th Chapter of Hebrews to demand that you not visit doctors!
If the LDS Church leadership was going to direct the politics of members, Mitt Romney and Harry Reid would have always voted pro-life.
THE ARTICLE:"That gives him wiggle room," Shipps [the Mormon scholar that the author cites] says. "That's wiggle room all over the place."
ROTFLOL
"wiggle room"
...
Big booming voice, “Kent, this is God.”
I read that headline as LSD, not lds.
hahaha.
;)
You posted a statement filled with more wisdom and truth than I have heard in several weeks.
LDS is not strictly anti-abortion.
Romney laughs and then replies, "I'll hitch up my magical underpants and do what Mr. Smith tells me, by gum!"
I’m not a Mormon, so count me as not giving a rat’s @ss.
My great grandfather once said there was a sign at the local barber shop that read:
"No Discussion of Religion or Politics permitted!"
The local pastor went for a haircut and saw it. He gave his sermon that week about how there wasn't any difference.
What you vote for, you believe. What you vote for is the essence of what you value - and what your heart tells you is truth.
Politics is the "religion" to the Democrats.
If you doubt that - you are not paying attention.
What Romney believes is essential to his candidacy. For what a man believes is without a doubt a window into how he will act.
Don't believe me?
Who cares? He’s not a preacher.
Jesus was an enlightened soul that transended the EGO and walked the earth over 2000 years ago.
The Gospels were written 60+ years after Jesus walked the earth. Not likely that others were able to recall the “words spoken” at such a late date.
Just wondering.
You haven't seen nothin' yet. (Just wait til further into '08 if Mitt becomes the nominee; the MSM will be chompin' @ the bit with saturated coverage)
Is this comment about Politics or Religion? Pick one and stick to it please. (And I guess some might say that if you were to choose "religion" they'd recommend putting it in the "Religion" thread)
Hopefully, the American people are jaded enough not to trust the main stream media on anything.
LDS is not strictly anti-abortion. [mcjordansc]
Mcjordansc is correct. The LDS official statements on abortion are generally pro-life...the problem is that is poc-marked with all kinds of gaps like mouse-tunneled cheese.
There's "life of the mother"; there's a "competent" medical doc which could include either a part-time abortionist; or since, 90% of abortions are done in free-standing abortion clinics who knows if that = Mr. or Mrs. abortionist; plus if a woman prays about it & her "personal revelation" concludes that the Mormon god has said "yes" then he becomes an accomplice to pre-born murder...& I could go on for more "exceptions."
OK, all it takes is for the MSM to "reach" 15-20% or even less than that and that could be enough...especially either the most seasoned voters (who are more MSM trained)--as they are the most faithful voters...or the youngest category of voters (29 & under)--at they can be easily influenced...they just may not be as in tune to what the MSM is saying as is older age groups.
Allow me to address your query, for you are operating on assertions now known to be in error because of extensive work done by credible Historians like Gary Habermas. Because of the Oral Tradition in Judaism, the ability to memorize at first hearing an entire speech was taught to children, and more specifically to young men who would be the 'record keepers' for the Rabbis they studied under. These 'scribes' served as a check for the memorized sayings and events of the Rabbi. Jesus was in the Rabbinical office when He walked and taught His disciples and performed the miracles witness to the Divinity within Him. Oral accounting of events and speeches was much more efficient and accurate than in our day, because in that day memorization was like learning to throw a ball or catch in our day ... proficiency was highly valued and was even important in business dealings!
Matthew was a tax collector and thus an able wirter of more than Hebrew, likely fluent also in Aramaic, Latin, and Greek. All of the Gospels were written by eyewitnesses or dictated to a writer by an eyewitness. Luke's Gospel to Theophilus was written after Luke undertook an extensive and detailed study of the events and sayings of Jesus and he likely had Mark and Matthew's accounts to which he could refer even at that date, within fifty years of the Resurrection! The oft cited Gospel of Thomas was rejected by the early Church Council at Nicea because it was written too late to have been an account dictated from the eyewitness! All of the included documents in the Canon were written prior to 100 AD.
If we take 30 AD to be the year of the Crucufuxion, Paul met Jesus on the road to Damascus in 33 AD and went to speak with the disciples (Peter and James) within three years following his conversion, then again approx 15 years later (Peter, James, and John the beloved disciple), to check and make sure he was well within the growth and message of the Chruch and to bring an offering for the poor in Jerusalem.
The first written accounts were more likley penned within five to fifteen years of the Resurrection, and the doctrines and teachings of Jesus were circulating orally from within 40 days of the Resurrection, beginning at Pentecost in Jerusalem. The letters written by Paul were penned within ten years after the Resurrection and no more than thirty years after the Resurrection. Christian Church Fathers writing at the turn of 100 AD referenced the letters of Paul in more than 100 places! Given the means of ciculating these writings and the preciousness of these offerings, it is apparent that 60+ years is a gross exaggeration in span. Here is a quote from a Josh McDowell article:
William F. Albright, who in his day was the world's foremost biblical archaeologist, said: "We can already say emphatically that there is no longer any solid basis for dating any book of the New Testament after about A.D. 80, two full generations before the date between 130 and 150 given by the more radical New Testament critics of today."
Here are two links you might enjoy during the holiday celebrating the most important birth in HUman History:
Habermas on Council of Nicea and the canon established at Nicea: http://www.garyhabermas.com/video/refut_new_cont_theor_jes_b-6.wmv
http://www.garyhabermas.com/video/refut_new_cont_theor_jes_b-7.wmv
Do a google on Gary Habermas and enjoy the presentations on video available at his website.
“If the LDS Church leadership was going to direct the politics of members, Mitt Romney and Harry Reid would have always voted pro-life.”
Romney himself in this video says that the church is not pro-life, at about 4 minutes in.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i0rcAByKUFM&mode=related&search=
Much todo about nothing. It must be primary season! It has to be tough on the MSM if this is all they have to talk about. They won't want Mitt as president simply because it will further kill their ratings! 8 more years of Clinton on the other hand... :-)
Mitt’s critics seem to be of two minds, first they say he will take his orders from Salt Lake, then he’s criticized for not following the beliefs of his church!
“or perhaps some others,”
Wiggle room? Oh man, this really beats all! God speaks to Mormons unless he doesn’t speak to Mormons!
This is good enough for at least a year of dissection owhat the word is is.
The reporter’s question is a critical one - either Mitt is a flat out apostate, or he believes the church Prophets get revelations that can influence the presidency.
Either way he is a potential loose cannon.
But I know the drill, Mitt is a God and everyone who opposes him is a bigot, meany, and just icky.
[s this campaign about Politics or Religion? ]
They are obviously both the same. I mean, if it is a political issue whether Hillary looks like a horse rode hard and put up wet, and it is political that Romney ‘looks presidential’, then I guarantee it is political to ask whether Mitt is taking prophecy from God.
“”
Nope, he is a Bishop AND a Stake President (also a priestly situation). Huckabee has the same problems for that matter.
Time for everyone to wake up from their PC sleep.
Huh?
Hang on.... It’s gvetting faster.
I think Mitt's sick of the petty "gotcha" games played by the MSM, and this answer reflects his disgust.
Hey maybe some day you MHGinTN, will get the message one does not need another natural man version when the Power of the Holy Ghost is always available to direct the Lord’s Church through the Lord’s annoited servants!
One thing about a Mormon president... you can forget anything Romney might have ever said or done about gun legislation in Mass., the Mormons in Utah would never tolerate any such. Utah has more firepower than many nations.
His birth-daddy, Billy Blythe, was a member of the Apostolic Charismatic Church of the First Born. They've been having a war with the Mormons for nearly two centuries ~ sometimes it gets heated.
David Koresh (remember the Waco thing) had a Grandma Hollob who belonged to the Tulsa branch of the Apostolic Charismatic Church of the First Born.
They've had wars among themselves.
Small world.
Thanks for the PING
BTTT
bmflr
.
.
.
According to Intrade, the winner of the December 12th GOP debate was... Duncan Hunter.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1938773/posts
“the Power of the Holy Ghost is always available to direct the Lord’s Church through the Lord’s annoited servants!”
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
You are saying that the power of the Holy Ghost/Spirit is “always available” for ANY born again/saved Christian man or woman who asks for it, arent you?
That is they are saved by the shed blood of Jesus and they believe in the power of the Holy Spirit and ask Jesus for it.....
“you can forget anything Romney might have ever said or done about gun legislation in Mass., the Mormons in Utah would never tolerate any such. Utah has more firepower than many nations.”
In 1991 they ranked down at 15 among states in guns per household, but after 16 plus years of concealed carry laws and reduced restrictions in formerly restricted states, my guess would be that they would rank even lower now.
“Jesus was an enlightened soul that transended the EGO and walked the earth over 2000 years ago.”
Jesus is the Son of God, Lord and Savior, soon coming King, the Alpha and Omega, the beginnning and the end, Begotten not made, born of a virgin, the Word of God the Great Shepherd, the door of the sheepfold, the light, the I AM, our redeemer, Lord of Lords and King of Kings, Truth, The Prince of Peace, The Peace that passes understanding, The head of the Church, Immanuel, Wonderful counselor, etc
Hmmmmmmmmmmmm
Nothing about an enlightening soul (that?) transender the EGO or anything else...
It just so happens I was perusing the lds.org Newsroom site just a little while ago. I noticed this statement in an article there:
____________________ http://www.newsroom.lds.org/ldsnewsroom/eng/commentary/peace-on-earth-goodwill-to-all-men-not-just-those-who-share-my-beliefs
The article was initially available at:
Since the whole newsroom seems to have gone <poof> the only active link is an archive of the article available at: http://mormonholybooks.blogspot.com/2007/12/peace-on-earth-goodwill-to-all-men-not.html
John 3:14-21
But what about the Holy Ghost????
I thought the recent LDS.org statement on what they mean when they say Christian was problematic enough.
I have been looking for a clear official LDS statement of what they mean when they say Christian for a while now.
I really did just run across it today, and had made note of it for future reference when I read your post.
It was also so strange (coincidentally) that after just having saved the link to the article from the LDS Newsroom, the article and the whole newsroom section at LDS.org disappeared.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
