Yes, Romney needs to answer questions about his religion

Salt Lake Tribune ^ | August 7, 2007 | Dick Polman

[restornu]

He is coming up next

[Pan_Yans Wife]

No, I don’t believe it is “ubelieveable” to you. There is a distinction.

I know that Christ’s message in the NT is complete, that nothing ever should be added to the Bible, that no other prophet is necessary, when Christ’s work was sufficient to save the world. I do not agree with ADDING to the message of Christ that was given to the world 2000 years ago. Because I know in my heart that his work on the cross was so sufficient, his message so direct, that he never would have found it necessary to amend it. He hasn’t returned YET, and wishing that he has doesn’t change what he told the disciples about his return. The world is still waiting on Christ’s return, and he will, as promised.

Strong feelings? Strong feelings have nothing to do with my faith. I believe in the truth that Jesus spoke. It is my reliance on this truth that lets me know that no “feeling” is necessary. I don’t need to “feel” something to believe it. My mind is sufficient to recognize the truth when I see it.

[meandog]

Now I don’t want to paintbrush every Mormon that way, because I work with quite a few who are very decent. But I know some that have “gone off the reservation” and the results are often not pretty because of the peculiar structure of their church and beliefs. The Amish are great people too. Do you think a true Amish farmer would make a great president?

No, because Amish do not believe in military service...neither do Jehova Witnesses, nor Mitt Romney for that matter. I concur with your note about LDS agressive "mission" style of seeking converts and about the strangeness of some of their beliefs to mainline Christians...but I stand by my statement that I find most decent, hard-working and God-fearing folk who are honest and trustworthy (apparently, Howard Hughes felt the same way about Mormons because that is all that he would hire for his inner circle)

[Pan_Yans Wife]

Jesus’ message is so perfect, that it NEVER needs restoration from the likes of men. God is so powerful that he has been able to protect his Word (remember Jesus is also the WORD). God does not need men to add to his completed message. That any man would have to audacity to claim his message is necessary, is lunacy. God is able to protect his Bible from the deceitful in the world.

[LanPB01]

“Take the article, replace ‘Mormon’ with ‘Evangelical’, replace the miracles that happened in early LDS history with the miracles in the New Testement, and see how it sits with you then.”

There seems to be large number of people who are blissfully ignorant of how ridiculous some of their faith sounds when looked at from an objective point of view, but they have no problem pointing out what they see as ludicrous beliefs in other faiths.

[Rameumptom]

>>Mormon theology is so screwy

Someone could easily take some of Thomas Aquinas' writings or sermons and take a quote out of context or cut it up and make it look pretty weird too. They could then take this one misconstrued or outof context quote and make it seem that it was the only or main thing Thomas Aquinas said. Then they could try to generalize that one little snippet to mean all Catholics believe the misconstrued version of what he actually said and brand all Catholics as "weirdos".

I do like your tagline, I agree "Sola Scripture" is found nowhere in the Bible. It's kind of like Orthodox, Trinity or homuosis (one-substance) are foundnowhere in the Bible.

[Rameumptom]

homuosis = homouosis

[Canticle_of_Deborah]

I think Mormon-bashers have provided the rope with which the Left will hang many religious conservative candidates.

This is true. Now I am no Rudy supporter, but they are starting in on him as well. He's an easy target since he is pro choice and anti gun, but what if Rudy had a good values system, pro life, anti gun, was an acceptable candidate in every way except his current marital status which self excommunicates him from the Catholic Church? What then?

It complicates matters. It's essential to know a candidate's beliefs and values, but when the media starts asking questions like has the candidate ever had premarital sex or demands a public confession of personal sins they've gone too far.

[DelphiUser]

I am sorry for intruding, but your post was just too good to pass up on.

I suppose my point is that Mormonism is a fairly recent man-made religion,

So when Moses claimed he had an experience with God on a mountain it was a man made religion?

founded upon text pirated from the Old Testament,

If it was all "Text pirated from the old testament" why would you have a problem with the teachings?

I am quite sure I can find books in any Christian religion that "Pirate from the Old Testament"... and even the New Testament.

and dictated by Joseph Smith, who could neither read nor write,

This is where it gets good, and I have to admit, I laughed when I read this, so Joseph can't read (according to you) yet he dictates scriptures from the bible to others to write them down? ROTFLOL, Sorry, where were we?

Oh, and I guess we can just ignore all the stuff he wrote, like letters, maps, blueprints and etc, he was illiterate, donchaknow.

to gullible underlings to be read and accepted as gospel, apparently, by persons such as yourself.

Wow, dismissive and insulting in one paragraph, you must be proud (just studying your technique here, don't get mad or anything)

(And `Ether’ is Esther, misspelled.)

This was the finishing touch, you obviously have no idea what you are talking about, Ether is a man, Ester is a woman, if you don't know the difference... We wouldn't be surprised. LOL.

Please keep posting, FR can use the comic relief.

My lunch is over, unfortunately, but best of luck to you peddling that Mormon `snake-oil’.

Best of luck to you also peddling what ever this was, it was amusing, one suggestions though, don't give up your day job.

[Colofornian]

Is your church true? Then what of every other church that disagrees with your church?

First of all, I don't have the arrogance to label EVERY SINGLE CREED of EVERY OTHER CHURCH as being "an abomination before God" as the founder of a certain church does!!! Nor would I have the gall to say leaders of all other churches are "corrupt" as the founder of a certain church does!!!

Religious folks call other folks out on the carpet all the time on various creeds, but show me anybody besides JS who says ALL Christian creeds of every Christian denomination are abominable. (I don't think even many of the LDS critics would say that every creed that LDS or JWs, etc. believe is an abomination before God; yet LDS endorsed Joe's position by saying it was pure "Scripture" and put in the Pearl of Great Price).

If every other church is not a true as your church, are you not then describing them as apostates in an all-encompassing carte-blanche way?

No. Believers with muddled viewpoints on a whole host of doctrinal and socio-political and church structural issues exist across the board. "Muddled" and distorted positions, tho, is not the same as saying they are "apostates" who have "left the faith" or are out of relationship with the true God/Jesus Christ.

If you don't like that the LDS Church believes that it is the true church, and that others only possess a portion of the truth, then don't read it.

You need to go back & read the passage in 3 Nephi that says there's only 2 churches: The church of the Lamb, and the church of the devil. While you can say that the Bible essentially says the same thing (Timothy talks about "doctrines of demons"), the Mormon spin on this is that what is outside the LDS church is, simply put, the church of the devil. I say that only because your "nice spin" on describing non-Mormons is that they only "possess a portion of the truth." But that's not the way the BoM slices it (the BoM says we're the church of the devil); it's also not the way the Pearl of Great Price Mormon Scripture slices it (ALL creeds are abominable...not just SOME of them); and it's not the way LDS prophets for dozens of decades have described the historic Christian church.

As for not reading LDS' take on the historic Christian church, that's like saying that if I don't like what my neighbors are pouring into the ground--that which seeps into my groundwater & then goes into my well--then I should simply "not drink it." I should instead just buy bottled water, eh? If LDS scriptures, LDS teachers, LDS candidates, LDS missionaries, LDS commercials, LDS publications, etc. are all poisoning the cultural waters into believing that the historic Christian church is an abomination before God with every creed, and that we boast corrupt leaders, then we all have an obligation to confront that claim, do we not?

The only people posting the few particular quotes or passages wherein Prophets and other leaders of the LDS Church describe the lack of truth in other religions are the people attacking the LDS Church.

So now quoting LDS scriptures constitutes an "attack?" (Doesn't that say something to you about the veracity--or lack thereof--of such "scriptures"). Do you yourself doubt the "truthfulness" of such claims?

I've been here for 10 years and I've seen no Mormon enter a religious thread about another religion and state that particular religion is wrong or untrue. Yet, the opposite is not true.

I've been here a number of years and I can't tell you how many times I've seen a Mormon post the official Mormon Web site--including this thread--where you can go & find not only the "scriptures" I've cited, but a number of references about the 100% apostasy & restoration. That Web site is chock full of contentions that we're all apostates. This is not just some fringe LDS belief, but is in fact, the keystone, the foundation of all it believes. The difference is that if you talk to Christians from historic denominations, they will tell you that the foundation of their faith IS NOT that Mormons or JWs are apostates; yet you can't say the same thing about Mormons!!! Me & all the others being "apostates" is at the heart of your faith; I cannot say the same in reverse about you.

Besides, LDS sends out hundreds of thousands of missionaries every year--missionaries instructed to teach as one of the top 3 or 4 doctrines--the doctrine of the complete apostasy and restoration. Go into various Wal-Mart stores & see prime shelfing space devoted to an LDS book on a complete Christian apostasy.

Some people take it upon themselves to enter every thread that has even the remotest mention of the LDS Church or its members to declare the church untrue, a cult, and a bunch of other nonsense.

I can't speak for those folks...just check my summer record & you'll see I've left most of these forums alone. You fail to recognize, however, that these comments are only indicative of a MSM reality to come if Mitt is the primary winner. In fact, the whirlwind you will see then is NOTHING to be compared to what you have seen here. (And if folks can't handle straight fastballs here, what will they do with MSM curveballs in '08?)

Is that really appropriate for a conservative political forum?

Yes. It's called "free expression." It's called "the political process." (I think you would get more traction if folks like you started calling for more balance in this area vs. some folks' call to totally censor this discussion).

Is that really wise knowing that the vast majority of Mormons in this country are conservative Republicans who support the very same conservative goals that you supposedly do? Is the mission of the conservative forum to provide an arena for constant religion bashing or is there an overriding goal to support conservative candidates and causes?

Aside from the constant LDS-sourced refrain that any LDS historical quotation or hard question automatically goes under the "bashing" tally mark, I think you raise some good questions here (and you represent many others who are asking the same questions, both LDS and non-LDS alike).

Certainly, the apostle Paul said on sticky questions that while all things are permissible for the Christian, not all things are beneficial. And so, as you aptly point out, FREEPERS need to weigh the pros and cons of the benefits of focusing on these areas because, like you say, we share a fair number of socio-political values. I do like the way you put that question, "Is there an overriding goal to support conservative candidates and causes?" because I do think it fits in the original purposes of the founders of this forum. That's where I might be an advocate that on some matters I wish some increased balances were in place.

But you have to remember this: The exact same motivation that leads every LDS missionary door to door is what is often operative here. Just as the average LDS missionary has to "tear down" other beliefs (teach the doctrine of 100% apostasy) in order to allow the entry of the doctrine of the restoration, likewise many folks need to "tear down" the false structures of Joseph Smith in order to open the door for true understandings.

Now you contend this is not the forum to do that. And I understand what you're saying. But until someone starts answering in meaningful ways the hard questions, questions like: exactly how is a candidate who believes that I'm an apostate, that believes what I believe is abominable to God, who believes that I belong to the church of the devil, how is that suppose to inspire me to vote for him? Until I can get a meaningful response, I will keep asking that question. Because just like your questions are representative of many others, so are mine.

[cynwoody]

Yes, those Mormon bigots who thing everyone else’s religion is an abomination are quite a problem.

Roman Catholic church only true church, says Vatican

[fproy2222]

or showed religious intolerance toward other churches by describing them as apostates in an all-encompassing, carte-blanche way...

Is your church true? Then what of every other church that disagrees with your church? If every other church is not a true as your church, are you not then describing them as apostates in an all-encompassing carte-blanche way?

............................

AMEN

ps
Same to the religion of no church being right.

[cynwoody]

The harm is that a Mormon fanatic would run the nation for the benefit of the LDS and take his cues from Salt Lake City.

Would have happened in Massachusetts, but didn't.

[Greg F]

That’s a sad and shameful quote from Massoud you have as a tagline.

[DelphiUser]

He is as innocent as O.J.

You are as honest and forthcoming as O.J.

Every time you try this grifter bit you get the door shut on some portion of your anatomy because it's only been proven in your mind, everyone else looks at the evidence and sees that there isn't any.

[Goreknowshowtocheat]

This is hillarious. There have been LDS members in every office in the land except President. And now, it is an issue? Please.

[Osage Orange]

Please, go back and read the tread...up to that point.

If you are still laughing....give me a holler.

[meandog]

Now you want to do away with free will you have no idea what people who may not serve in the Mirlitary do in other ways to help their followman and I am not talking about electioin trail. Everyone on this planet has a different calling some are police or firefighters, soldier, and some are doctors, teachers etc each has a gift and a calling to do. Who made you an arbiter of who should do what?

When I went to boot camp in the Navy (way back in the 60s) I recall there were six or seven LDS members in my company--I recall it, because I knew nothing about the church then (I was 18 and from Georgia) and was curious about their religion. Three of the recruits had just come from a missions (of the rest, I suppose they joined because, like me, they didn't want to be drafted into the Army and sent to Vietnam) As it turned but some of us went to 'Nam anyway, one was me and another was a young man who ended up a Navy corpsman. I know this because approximately five years ago I saw and traced his name out from the Vietnam Memorial Wall in Washington (meaning he was killed in action). Now, I don't know about you, but I feel that Mitt's story is pretty sketchy when he comes to explaining his and his sons' non-service to our country. He is the same exact age that I am and I know that he would have faced the draft (like the other Mormons in my recruit company) had he not been deferred because of religious mission duty (heck, Muhammad Ali got stripped of his heavyweight title because he tried to claim a religious deferment). So, in my book, Mitt is pretty much a Mutt and just a tad better that the ultimate slickster--Bill Clinton!

[curiosity]

I think Mormon-bashers have provided the rope with which the Left will hang many religious conservative candidates.

You hit the nail on the head.

[Canticle_of_Deborah]

Mitt was #300 on the draft list for Vietnam. They only got as far as #198. He wasn’t called. He stated this on Hannity’s Sunday show a couple of months ago.

Mitt’s sons aren’t running for office. I might add that there are plenty of male Freepers on this site who never served in the military. Are they unfit for public office?