Posted on 08/08/2007 8:00:00 AM PDT by greyfoxx39
I'd like Christmas all year long too. As soon as a member of my church starts making headlines every day and news articles about him/her are posted on FR, ad infinitum, I'll consider your request...or is it a demand?
I take it you would not vote for someone who believed in those things. Am I correct?
I totally think it is your perogative to judge each candidate on any criteria you see fit.
The specific problem that Romney has, is that his religious belief are quite out of the mainstream (unlike all those you just mentioned). The majority of US voters are not that well aquainted with Mormonism, and so they would like him to reassure them that his beliefs are in line with theirs.....it isn’t that Mormon beliefs are not any more “strange” to people, but this is a Christian nation, with Christian voters...and if Romney wants those votes, he may, perhaps should and will, address the voter’s concerns.
That’s the issue.
Matthew 7:3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brothers eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
Either he's not intelligent enough to realize he's a member of a cult which is profoundly UN-Christian, or
He's fully aware of it. And like the Great Huckster Joseph Smith, he follows in his footsteps and is himself just another dishonest man.
Romney, IMHO, is either a fool or a fraud.
And neither a fool nor a fraud should govern over us.
SAURON
There is no rejoinder that can be made to the points you raised.
At least, no honest rejoinder.
SAURON <>
As soon as I run for President of the United States I will.
It was in six days, not seven.
Cordially,
Some questions I have about the other candidates running in 2008 (and JFK in 1960). Have any of them ever been in a leadership position that’s the equivalent of being a Stake President in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?
A Stake President (SP) is the highest local church official overseeing about 6-10 congregations and 2500-5000 members. A SP is called to their position in the church by the church’s top council of 3 men called the First Presidency. A SP interviews each person for worthiness who is going to serve as a Bishop, on the High Council, be a full-time missionary, get married in the temple, apply for admission to a church school, attend the temple for the first time or get ordained to the Melchizedek Priesthood. A Stake President oversees all church disciplinary councils in their Stake. Members of the church address them with respect by their title of President. Throughout their Stake the members treat them with as much respect and spiritual dignity as the devout Catholics do towards the Bishop of their Diosces.
As far as I know, Harry Reid has never been a Stake President. Neither has Gordon Smith, Orrin Hatch, the Udall cousins in Colorado & New Mexico or John Doolittle.
My point is that its different for a religious leader running for political office who has had thousands of followers than it is for a lay member who hasn’t had such a ministry. People want to understand their background better. And questions about their religious background will come up. For example, 20 years ago we saw Pat Robertson run for President and he got alot of questions/heat. So is President Romney
Ho boy, now you’ve done it! One of the Mormon platoon of Romney operatives will now have to post how Jesus has been framed the same way, either a fraud of a fool. Do you suppose they think there’s something supernatural about the Mittster or his candidacy?
Thanks for the encouraging comments TA. Even though I may not subcribe 100% to your faith or theirs, I think we all do a service to this forum when we shine the light on the cockroaches whose sole purpose seems to be to demean others or distort what they beleive. Once we get enough of us on this forum to play whack-a-mole, maybe they’ll crawl back into the woodwork where they belong. Pls feel free to ping me if you see such opportunities in the future.
you run across someone who has been all through this stuff on FR RF in 03-04. I have cover many of these things and you are just posting repacking of the same old canards!:)
If I get time I will do a few more!
2) How many members know about the Kinderhook plates controversy that was introduced by the writings of William Clayton (scribe to Joseph Smith) that were transcribed and included in the 7-volume HISTORY OF THE CHURCH series? Church leaders and scholars used to defend it until non-destructive testing was done on one of the plates that was discovered in Chicago several years ago. Now its widely accepted to be a total hoax. However the LDS scholars try to excuse it by saying that Clayton must have gotten it wrong. Hmmmmm that’s totally wrong when taken in-context. Clayton was a very reliable scribe who could’ve just easily gotten wrong several of the D&C Sections. If Clayton was so clueless then why keep singing “Come, Come Ye Saints” so reverently?
****
Since no actual translation was ever forthcoming, and since there is no actual evidence for a translation being made, most believing LDS conclude that it is safe to assume that no translation actually occurred.
There is one more observation. The plates were first brought to Nauvoo on 29 April 1843. Clayton’s journal entry is for 1 May 1843 and Charlotte Haven’s letter is dated 2 May 1843. On Wednesday (3 May) or Thursday (4 May) the Times and Seasons noted: “We are informed however, that he purposes returning them for translation; if so, we may be able yet to furnish our readers with it” The indication here is that no translation had yet occurred. It seems reasonable to me that what we get in Clayton’s journal is largely the product of the rumor mill; hearsay, and not what actually transpired. (Actually, we know that his description of the plates discovery is entirely erroneous, leaving us to speculate on the issue of translation).
As a last comment, Clayton was certainly with Joseph much of the day on 1 May, but, not “all day,” and certainly there were other things occurring. Among other things, Joseph’s marriage to Lucy Walker at which Clayton officiated.
http://www.fairlds.org/Misc/How_Do_We_Explain_Early_Comments_about_the_Kinderhook_Plates.html
And that was exactly my point. Don't worry, I don't intend to go into any threads about other religions or candidates who are members of a specific religion to trash a specific religion, its doctrines, or its founders and leaders. As you say, it is not a Christian behavior.
You may not see it this way but when you call those who follow “The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints” and the Servants of Jesus Christ who were called by Jesus Christ to restored His Church as also being either as a fool or a fraud.
I cheerfully welcome to be counted among them!
For I know this is the TRUE Church of Jesus Christ!
And all of your whatever you think you are doing will not make a dent!
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.