Posted on 11/20/2006 8:24:45 AM PST by areafiftyone
Mitt Romney (R) begins the 2008 campaign season in fourth place among those seeking the GOP Presidential nomination, trailing Rudy Giuliani, John McCain, and Condoleezza Rice. While many Republican insiders believe the Massachusetts Governor could become an attractive candidate to the party's social conservatives, a Rasmussen Reports survey finds that Romney's faith may initially be more of a hindrance than a help.
Forty-three percent (43%) of American voters say they would never even consider voting for a Mormon Presidential candidate. Only 38% say they would consider casting such a vote while 19% are not sure. Half (53%) of all Evangelical Christians say that they would not consider voting for a Mormon candidate.
Overall, 29% of Likely Voters have a favorable opinion of Romney while 30% hold an unfavorable view. Most of those opinions are less than firmly held. Ten percent (10%) hold a very favorable opinion while 11% have a very unfavorable assessment. Among the 41% with no opinion of Romney, just 27% say they would consider voting for a Mormon.
It is possible, of course, that these perceptions might change as Romney becomes better known and his faith is considered in the context of his campaign. Currently, just 19% of Likely Voters are able to identify Romney as the Mormon candidate from a list of six potential Presidential candidates.
The response to a theoretical Mormon candidate is far less negative than the response to a Muslim candidate or an atheist. Sixty-one percent (61%) of Likely Voters say they would never consider voting for a Muslim Presidential candidate. Sixty percent (60%) say the same about an atheist.
The Rasmussen Reports survey found that 35% say that a candidate's faith and religious beliefs are very important in their voting decision. Another 27% say faith and religious beliefs are somewhat important. Ninety-two percent (92%) of Evangelical Christian voters consider a candidate's faith and beliefs important.
On the partisan front, 78% of Republicans say that a candidate's faith is an important consideration, a view shared by 55% of Democrats. However, there is also a significant divide on this topic within the Democratic Party. Among minority Democrats, 71% consider faith and religious beliefs an important consideration for voting. Just 44% of white Democrats agree.
The national telephone survey of 1,000 Likely Voters was conducted by Rasmussen Reports November 16-17, 2006. The margin of sampling error for the survey is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence.
Do Mormons believe in God?
Definitely
Is their understanding of the nature of God substantially different from mainsteam Protestantism or Catholicism?
Yes, but the concept that the Godhead consists of 3 separate and distinct beings, while a minority belief, is certainly not unknown in both ancient and modern Christianity (see..Jimmy Swaggert)
Do Mormons believe that they can become Gods?
Certainly. And they are not at all shy about telling you about it, either. It is not a doctrine shrouded in mystery or one of which they are ashamed. But, most Mormons understand that you don't lead with that doctrine when teaching because it is usually misunderstood. So most prefer to talk about it only with those that have some basis in the restored Gospel.
Do Mormons believe that non-Mormons all go to hell?
No, not at all. In fact Mormons don't even believe in hell in the traditional sense. Mormons believe that nearly all people will recieve a certain degree of glory in the hearafter, in direct proportion to their goodness and obedience to the Lord. Those who most perfectly follow God's commandments will recieve the highest degree of glory, which includes the concept of "Eternal Progression". Those who are less valient will receive lesser glories.
All in all, the restored Gospel is the MOST hopeful, most optomistic gospel on earth.
And why we may believe others are wrong in their beliefs, we are great supporters of freedom of conscience and freedom of belief, and are eager to support government that allows the greatest degree of freedom avaialable to the children of men.
The Mormons in this regard are harmless. We may regard their views as eccentric, but not damaging. If there is a Mormon president, it would unlikely be a tragedy so long as he kept the Constitution in mind.
Regards, Ivan
YES...and BTW...Mormons are the only religion that considers the Constitution to be a SACRED document, on par with the Bible or the Book of Mormon.
I don't get the impression that Paul is making fun of the practice of baptism for the dead. The whole passage is concerned with belief in the resurrection of the dead and Paul's insistence that it is a reality--he refers to the baptism of the dead as an additional reason to believe in the resurrection of the dead.
>>O, pray tell. Why stop there. According to Joseph Smith
>>himself, even the KJV doesn't set anything in stone.
>>That's why he "translated" yet another version, w/out
>>even knowing Hebrew or Greek!
Prophets can translate without "Learning the language" that's why it's called a gift of the spirit. I myself experienced the Gift of tongues by learning Chinese on my mission
>>So, why doesn't the LDS church advertise the "IV" (j.smith "inspired" version) on TV?
Because the RLDS church ended up with the Copy right and it's called the JST just for your information.
>>Why do LDS constantly add the disclaimer, "in so far as correctly translated" when >>they have the supposed "correct translation" from J. smith himself?
Because everyone sees though their own eyes, ever talk to witnesses? They all saw something different. There are many translations of the Bible out there. Ever read some of the more modern “Translations“? “Jesus said, hey dude, lets go over to Galilee…” (Throws up quietly into waste can)
MORMONS THINK YOU ARE GOING TO HELL. THEY SAY YOU AREN'T A CHRISTIAN.
DOES THAT UPSET YOU?
I think this is the key post of this whole "debate." In this day and age, why should anyone's religious beliefs upset another person? Mormons expressly claim the right to worship according to the dictates of their conscience and they afford that same privilege to others.
Why would what I believe in my heart UPSET another person? It's like someone getting upset over my favorite color or what my favorite food is! If I believe in Jehovah or Vishnu or Allah, what does it matter to anyone? It's a personal belief.
Now, I accept that any religion will do some degree of proselyting because their adepts sincerely believe they are offering me something desireable. That's fine with me. I can investigate it and accept or reject it as I will. The problem comes from the intolerant bigots who feel that they do God service by burning the homes of Mormons (like they did in the 1840s in Missouri and Illinois) or restricting my freedoms to believe as I wish based on some Taliban-like sense of piety.
If a Baptist tells me I'll go to Hell for not believing his way, I just wish him a nice day and I press on. If he would do likewise, things would work out fine. Yet, they can't leave us Mormons alone. It's an obsession with them.
LDS do NOT add the disclaimer "as far as it is translated correctly"....it is in the original Wentworthe Letter. Joseph Smith added the proviso.
Leave it to LDS theology to teach opposite what Christ said: "wide is the road to destruction; narrow is the way to life." "Destruction" has now been redefined as "eternal life" (just a "lesser glory").
Leave it to the reps of the one below to change the Detour Sign from "All Roads Washed Out: Only One Way to go" (John 14:6) to one that counters Hebrews 9:27: "There's many glories, many degrees of glory, multiple ways of getting there--even accepting the gospel post-death, provided somebody's been baptized in your behalf--and most of you won't be effected by the 'all-roads-washed-out' reality" 'cause it all depends on your valience, your worthiness, and ALL you can do (Book of Mormon, 2 Nephi, teaches that grace only kicks in AFTER ALL YOU CAN DO).
This is kinda like the Mormon doctrine that Adam & Eve's fall was an "upward fall." Rape, mass murder, wars, incest, abuse, exploitation, oppression...etc. all has been redefined by LDS theologians as a fortunate set of circumstances...as man's "upward progression & exaltation" would not have been possible had Adam & Eve not fallen.
J.N.D. Kelly, Early Christian Creeds, quotes a number of creeds from well before 325 which include "I believe in the Holy Spirit" among the clauses--the evidence comes from writers such as Justin Martyr, Tertullian, Hippolytus of Rome, and Origen (that is, second and third centuries).
Now you're totally screwing up Scriptural exegesis.
First of all, the apostle Paul, who trumps your prophet, specifically says that "anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God" (1 Cor. 14:2). That is just the opposite of Bible prophesy, which is geared for men and not God.
Secondly, speaking in tongues is for self-edification (1 Cor. 14:4a).
Thirdly, Paul distinguishes between prophesy and speaking in tongues throughout most of 1 Cor. 14, culminating that prophesy trumps speaking in tongues (1 Cor. 14:5) and that tongues is for unbelievers--not believers (1 Cor. 14:22).
Lastly speaking in tongues doesn't do anyone any good, Paul says starkly (see 1 Cor. 14:6, 13, 18-19, 27-28) unless there's an interpreter. Who was Joseph Smith's interpreter?
The problem of the Mormons was the problem of the Corinthians--a problem that forced Paul to ask them: "Did the word of God originate with you? Or are you the only people it has reached?" (1 Cor. 14:36). The problem is that latter-day saints have assumed a less noble position than the Bereans: "Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true." (Acts 17:11) The Bereans judged the latter revelation by the previous revelation, not the other way around.
So what? Do you think every book Amazon or Books a Million offers is one they published themselves, copyright & all? My understanding is that it's not hard for LDS folks to get a copy of this "version" right? Why doesn't the LDS church scoop up copies Joseph's alleged Bible translation from the RLDS and offer it if it's such a sacred document?
Why would any Joseph Smith-family jumpstarted religion (the RLDS) want to hoard the supposed "Word of God?"
The real reason for not circulating this too widely is that it's embarrassing for Mormons on several fronts:
(1) Many of the changes are extremely minor and are not relevant to significant doctrinal distinctions.
(2) The changes rarely bolster peculiar LDS doctrines.
(3) By leaving many key Bible passages alone, Joe Smith seemed to be giving a "thumbs up" to Biblical doctrines that conflict w/LDS doctrine.
So your saying that the web source I linked was created by Mormons? That's a laugh. I linked it because I used their definition as source so therefor was citing a source as opposed to plagerism.
You didn't even bother going to the site did you? You just thought that since I am not an anti-mormon that the site must be a pro-mormon site written by Mormons, with a definition of Christian written specifically for Mormons. You could not be more wrong.
Conversely to your statement however any schmuck can also put whatever they want up on the internet. Difference is though if it is anti-mormon you are more inclined to believe it. That is anti-mormon bias and bigotry, and bigotry is unChristian like.
Now to answer your statement about I could "devoutly, thoughtfully, seriously, and prayerfully" call myself a Christian and simultaneously worship the tulips in my backyard.
No it doesn't work that way. You are worshiping tulips and not Christ. You are not a Christian. You are a tulip worshipper. Heathen.
Try this one if you like Biblical versus so much...John 11:25-26. "WHOEVER believes in me". Not "Christians except those people out in Utah called Mormons who claim they are Christian but aren't really because the Catholic religion says they aren't". WHOEVER. Funny how that works. That's a contridiction to your quote I know.
The Bible has plenty of those contridictions, which is why no denomination agrees with the other on everything and why even inside denominations there is not always agreement.
How can denominations that cannot even agree with each other or themselves make a judgement on an entire religion, that worships Christ, that they are not Christian? They cannot. No matter which definition is applied some Christian religion will be left out of Christendom.
According to Christ "He who believes in me will live, even though he dies" does not make the distinction of which denomination you are a part of, as long as you believe in Christ and the atonement.
Mormons believe in Jesus Christ, they believe in the atonement. The same Jesus Christ and atonement you believe in. The details may not be the same, and that is all it is, details. Details that are different even in other denominations that you do consider Christian.
Like it or not Mormons are most definitely a Christian religion by any logical definition of Christian.
I know. I'm not advocating it, just saying I believe it could well happen.
I'm sure the press will do all they can to get out the message that Romney is a Mormon.
>>So, anybody could claim to be a "Mormon," develop a "tolerance" Web site, put it on the site,
>> and it'd be so, eh?
No, because Mormons have a strict membership requirement that is enforced by the church, which is here and now.
Christianity is NOT for you to decide. It is for Christ to decide. News flash, you are not Jesus Christ. Stop acting as if you get to decide who is Christian and who is not. I am comfortable with my acceptance as a Christian by He who gave his all for me, you do not come into the picture, except when you slander that which you obviously do not understand.
>>Yeah, good idea, let's go to Christ himself:
Always a good idea.
>>At that time if anyone says to you, 'Look, here is the Christ!' or 'There he is!' Do not
>>believe it. For false Christs and false prophets will appear...See, I have told you ahead
>>of time." (Matthrew 24:23-25)
No one is saying this, except you. I am a Mormon, I am not Jesus Christ, I have never been Jesus, I do not play him on TV.
Going to Christ with a question is ALWAYS a good idea.
>>No, Christ said just the opposite as what you claim: He said the "wheat" and "tares"
He also said the he would separate them at the doors, not in the field. Who are you to judge me, and mine?
>>I don't think my self-label or what some tolerance Web
>>site might label me is going to carry much eternal
>>weight in God's eyes.
Nor will your opinion for that matter.
You obviously have issues with Mormons, let’s be honest now, why do you get on every thread about Mormons and bash us? Can you be honest? Were you stood up for the prom by a Mormon or what?
Never said that. Don't put words in my mouth. Of course, it's not a Mormon site. So what? Some liberal Web site doesn't make it authoritative. Nor would I assign it to be some broker of faith orthodoxy.
Listen, Jesus Christ cannot be both an elder spirit brother of Lucipher (which makes Lucipher, BTW, an elder spirit brother of every human, too)--which is the LDS view--and be Lucipher's Creator, which is the Biblical viewpoint based upon John 1, Colossians 1, Hebrews 1. He can't be both!!! It's a different Jesus (2 Cor. 11:3-4).
Likewise, Jesus can't be a mere organizer of matter that's been there for eternity (LDS view) vs. Being the one who created everything out of nothing (Heb. 11:3; John 1; Col. 1; Heb. 1).
Jesus can't be the one you can't pray to (LDS doctrine, which says we pray to Father thru Jesus) vs. being the One we pray to, which even the Book of Mormon supports (surprisingly!).
I can go on and on. At some point, we're talking about two different Jesuses. And that point, 2 Cor. 11:3-4 kicks in!!!
Try this one if you like Biblical versus so much...John 11:25-26. "WHOEVER believes in me". Not "Christians except those people out in Utah called Mormons who claim they are Christian but aren't really because the Catholic religion says they aren't". WHOEVER. Funny how that works. That's a contridiction to your quote I know.
Hey, bottom line on this objection of yours is that every one who calls himself Christian and is not a Mormon isn't necessarily a Christian, either. Not all Methodists are Christian. Not all Presbyterians are Christian. Not all Catholics...etc.
How can denominations that cannot even agree with each other or themselves make a judgement on an entire religion, that worships Christ, that they are not Christian? They cannot. No matter which definition is applied some Christian religion will be left out of Christendom.
Alright, now you are getting ridiculous. The Christian faith is a monotheistic faith. One God! That's it. We not only believe in one God, we don't believe a pantheon of gods exist.
Ask any Mormon. They will tell you they believe in one Godhead. But ask them to define that. They will tell you that Godhead is three separate gods, Father, Jesus, and Holy Ghost...and that many more gods exist than them (they just don't exercise faith in those gods. By definition, that is a polytheistic belief system.
Christianity, by definition, cannot be both a monotheistic and a polytheistic religion.
Those numbers would change drastically if he won the nomination.
It doesn't bode well for his candidacy now though.
Go to Matthew 24 (I cited this passage earlier). Jesus says many false christs will arise in the latter days. Are you telling me that anyone who believes in those christs along with the atonement will be saved? I mean, they'll believe in "a" christ, too. Don't you think there is a different betwen "a" Christ and "the" Christ? Or will any Christ do?
No, but the United State and Mormons ALMOST came to blows during President Pierce's administration...During the territorial period, from 1850 to 1895, Utah's governors were appointed by the president of the United States. With the exception of Brigham Young, all the governors were outsiders and non-Mormons. Often referred to as carpetbaggers, most had practiced law and pursued political office before arriving in Utah. A patronage appointment, the governorship of Utah was a difficult and geographically remote assignment, and some of those willing to accept posts in the western territories were of marginal ability and character. President Franklin Pierce decided he should make someone else governor of Utah. The man he chose, however, did not want the job. Instead, he urged the president to let Brigham Young remain. President Pierce agreed. Acting on rumors that the Mormons were rebelling against federal authority, President James Buchanan replaced Brigham Young as governor in 1857. Buchanan sent a 2,500-man military force to accompany the new governor Alfred Cumming to the territory, starting the Utah War... click here
Personally, I believe Brigham Young should have been arrested, tried for treason, sedition, bigamy and adultery, and hung!
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.