Mormons Aren't Christians (Columnist also calls Luther a heretic)

Dallas Morning News ^ | 12/16/07 | Rod Dreher

[Mobile Vulgus]

Mormons aren't Christians ...

... and other thoughts on religion and politics sure to get your blood boiling

Herewith, my views on religion and the politics of the present moment, with something to offend just about everyone:

1. Mormons aren't Christians. I don't mean that as a criticism, only as a descriptive phrase. When Mormons claim Jesus Christ as their savior, there's no reason to doubt their sincerity and good will, or even to deny that they are in some way followers of Christ. Yet Mormonism rejects foundational doctrines of traditional Christian orthodoxy, such that it is impossible to reconcile with normative Christianity.

2. Anyway, the Latter-day Saints church teaches that all other Christian churches are apostate. A heretic is someone who rejects one or more doctrines of religion, but an apostate is someone who has rejected the religion entirely. How is it, exactly, that you can get mad when people you regard as apostates consider you to be ... apostate? How does that work?

3. Theologically, this is a big deal. But politically, so what? Mormons vote like Southern Baptists and come down on the same side of most issues of public morality like conservative Christians do. If you're a socially conservative lawmaker, wouldn't you rather have a Mormon in your legislative foxhole than a Kennedy-style cafeteria Catholic or progressive mainline Protestant? I'm no Romney fan, but is there really no meaningful political difference between Good-Mormon Mitt and Bad-Catholic Rudy, to say nothing of Liberal-Protestant Hillary?

4. There are plenty of good reasons for conservative Christians not to vote for Mr. Romney, but his religious beliefs are not among them. Do Christians want to be in the position of rejecting a candidate whose political views and moral values they agree with, solely because they don't like his religion?

[Theo]

That’s an important point.

[Soliton]

Almost none of what ie taught about Mary in the Catholic church comes from the bible. Much of it became dogma since 1854, some in 1950.

[Tolkien]

I'm not voting for Romney because he is a flip flopper. I had enough of that for the last 8 years.

But do not even begin to equate Christianity with Mormonism. I have debated Mormons and JW's for years and they all do the same thing.

They all un-deify Jesus Christ and they all have the individual do works to earn their way into heaven, in direct opposition to the gospel!

[Elsie]

 

You obviously haven’t a clue what you are on about. The issue of Mormonism being Christian or not is not a gamesaying like what YOU did. It is based on theological arguments. Are you versed on the arguments? If not, then you and others like you, CLEARLY have NO basis on which to opine.

 

 

For ANYTHING to trump the existing bible we have, it HAS to pass THIS test:

 

 

Galatians 1:7-10
 7.  Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert (restore?) the gospel of Christ.
 8.  But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
 9.  As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

 

 

2 Corinthians 11:14-15
 14.  And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light.
 15.  It is not surprising, then, if his servants masquerade as servants of righteousness. Their end will be what their actions deserve.

 

http://scriptures.lds.org/en/js_h/1/19#19
  17 It no sooner appeared than I found myself delivered from the enemy which held me bound. When the light rested upon me I saw two Personages, whose brightness and glory defy all description, standing above me in the air. One of them spake unto me, calling me by name and said, pointing to the other—This is My Beloved Son. Hear Him!
  18 My object in going to inquire of the Lord was to know which of all the sects was right, that I might know which to join. No sooner, therefore, did I get possession of myself, so as to be able to speak, than I asked the Personages who stood above me in the light, which of all the sects was right (for at this time it had never entered into my heart that all were wrong)—and which I should join.
  19 I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt; that: “they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof.”
  20 He again forbade me to join with any of them; and many other things did he say unto me, which I cannot write at this time. When I came to myself again, I found myself lying on my back, looking up into heaven. When the light had departed, I had no strength; but soon recovering in some degree, I went home. And as I leaned up to the fireplace, mother inquired what the matter was. I replied, “Never mind, all is well—I am well enough off.” I then said to my mother, “I have learned for myself that Presbyterianism is not true.”  

 

If one believes the Bible is correct, then, by that Standard, Mormonism fails the test.

 

 

 

 

If, however, you are convinced that the Bible is either in error, been corrupted or mis-interpreted, then you are free to believe whatever you wish.

 

Be warned though, that this same Bible indicates that no matter how fervently you believe in Something; that does not make it True.

 

 

 

You obviously haven’t a clue what you are on about. The issue of Mormonism being Christian or not is not a gamesaying like what YOU did. It is based on theological arguments. Are you versed on the arguments? If not, then you and others like you, CLEARLY have NO basis on which to opine.

 

[Elsie]

Time to play, my-God-is-better-than-your-God.

Kinda true; for one side says, "Your GOD is NOT my GOD!"; while the other says, "Oh yes He is!"

[Elsie]

You can already feel election night...massive blue blinking lights going on and off...with only seven states voting for the Republicans. It’ll be a pitiful scene that most of us will hate for years.

"Put NOT your trust in horses and chariots..."

[Elsie]

LOL Seems like I've hit a nerve or something.

Ha!

You THINK you've got us on something; but you really don't, little man!

Just WAIT until a representative from the COUNCIL of GODS gets hold of YOU!

You'll wish them that you could trade places with Dustin Hoffman in The Marathon Man!

--MormonDude(Gettin' thru to you guys is like pullin' teeth!)

[Elsie]

I thought that if you weren’t speaking negatively about someone that it was OK to not ping them. In the future I will ping them no matter. Thanks.

For one; I just LOVE to see my name, uh... SCREENname in print!!

(Just don't confuse me with that Elsiejay person)

[Elsie]

Talked to the shepherd today?

Gobs of us talk, but very few listen...

[OESY]

There are plenty of good reasons for conservative Christians not to vote for Mr. Romney, but his religious beliefs are not among them. Do Christians want to be in the position of rejecting a candidate whose political views and moral values they agree with, solely because they don't like his religion?

* * *

Romney Gets An Impressive Endorsement

Mitt Romney has picked up his second impressiveconservative endorsement in a week. This time, Judge Robert Bork has thrown his support to the former Massachusetts governor, following on the heels of the National Review endorsement. Mike Allen at The Politico, another Cerritos guy kicking around in politics, thinks this carried considerable street cred among conservatives, and he’s right.

Bork had these comments to accompany his endorsement:

Joining Romney for President, Judge Bork said, “Throughout my career, I have had the honor of serving under several Presidents and am proud to make today’s endorsement. No other candidate will do more to advance the conservative judicial movement than Governor Mitt Romney. He knows firsthand how the judicial branch can profoundly affect the future course of a state and a nation. I greatly admired his leadership in Massachusetts in the way that he responded to the activist court’s ruling legalizing same-sex ‘marriage.’ His leadership on the issue has served as a model to the nation on how to respect all of our citizens while respecting the rule of law at the same time.”
Judge Bork continued, “Our next President may be called upon to make more than one Supreme Court nomination, and Governor Romney is committed to nominating judges who take their oath of office seriously and respect the rule of law in our nation. I also support Governor Romney because of his character, his integrity and his stands on the major issues facing the United States.”

Many of us thought that Rudy Giuliani put together a terrific team of endorsements early in the race. Ted Olson may be the crown jewel in Rudy’s support team among conservatives. Olson’s membership provided a guarantee that any Giuliani nominations would follow the Scalia mold rather than the Souter example, or even Anthony Kennedy.

Having a Bork endorsement pulls Romney into at least an equivalence. Clearly, this implies that Bork will take an advisory role in that process, or at least that the Romney administration would consider his reaction to any nominees. Bork has at least as much trust as Olson does in this regard, and given his unfair treatment at the hands of the Senate Judiciary Committee during his own confirmation process, perhaps significantly more.

Obviously, no one will get the Ronald Reagan or Barry Goldwater endorsement in this cycle unless Shirley MacLaine agrees to channel them. A Robert Bork endorsement may be as close as anyone gets in 2008’s primaries.

— Ed Morrissey, December 15, 2007, http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/016324.php

.

[Elsie]

You just gave me a good reason not to be Christian then.

(I doubt if it'll hold up in court.)

[najida]

Drat.... ;)

[xzins]

Mormons are not Christians.

Neither are Baptists, Methodists, Presbyterians, Catholics, Episcopalians, etc., etc.

Only real believers in the real Jesus Christ proclaimed in the real scripture are Christians.

By Grace alone, through faith alone, in Jesus Christ alone.

[Old Mountain man]

ROFLOL!!!!!

AND AGAIN

ROFLOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[greyfoxx39]

You seem to have omitted the other half - that he believes if he doesn't seek her out and reunite with her, he won't gain exaltation either. They go as a team or not at all. Hardly makes women inferior.

Oh...but....you have omitted this little caveat: "Latter-day Saint men can presently be married to only one living woman at a time. However, from an eternal perspective, men may be sealed to more than one wife while women may only be sealed to one husband. In other words, men may have more than one wife in heaven.

What is the Purpose of Plural Marriage?

by W. John Walsh

Latter-day Saint men can presently be married to only one living woman at a time.  However, from an eternal perspective, men may be to more than one wife while women may only be sealed to one husband.  In other words, men may have more than one wife in heaven.  Why is this the case?  The primary reason for the practice of plural marriage is to raise up righteous seed unto God.  It is not for sexual gratification.   The Book of Mormon states:

"For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people [to practice plural marriage]; otherwise they shall [have only one wife.] (Jacob 2:30)

The bearing and raising of children is the center of LDS life from both a mortal and eternal perspective.  The Doctrine and Covenants teaches:

"....for [a man's wives] are given unto him to multiply and replenish the earth, according to my commandment, and to fulfill the promise which was given by my Father before the foundation of the world, and for their exaltation in the eternal worlds, that they may bear the souls of men; for herein is the work of my Father continued, that he may be glorified." (D&C 132:63; See )

Obviously, a greater number of children leads to greater opportunities to help others along the path to eternal life.  In speaking to LDS women against limiting their posterity by the use of birth control, President Spencer W. Kimball said:

"Come home, wives, to your children, born and unborn. Wrap the motherly cloak about you and, unembarrassed, help in a major role to create bodies for the immortal souls who anxiously wait." (See )

Unfortunately, the number of righteous women always outnumbers the number of righteous men, even in the .  President Brigham Young noted:

"If we could make every man upon the earth get him a wife, live righteously and serve God, we would not be under the necessity, perhaps, of taking more than one wife. But they will not do this; the people of God, therefore, have been commanded to take more wives." (Journal of Discourses, Vol.16, p.166 - p.167)

From a mortal perspective, this means that when a man is limited to only one wife, some women will have the choice of marrying a worldly, carnal man or remaining unwed.  If men were eternally limited to only one wife each, some women would never have the opportunity for .

Plural marriage remedies these penalties by enabling every woman the opportunity to have a righteous husband, enjoy the blessings of motherhood, and fill the measure of her creation.  The extraordinary sacrifices necessary upon all the participants in the practice of plural marriage also help to instill greater Christlike love within their characters.  Since we are talking about an eternal perspective, issues like mortal medical and fertility problems do not concern us. In eternity, we shall have perfect bodies with no disabilities.

MORE at

Link

[Aquinasfan]

Almost none of what ie taught about Mary in the Catholic church comes from the bible. Much of it became dogma since 1854, some in 1950.

Again, where in the Bible does it say that Christian doctrines not explicitly mentioned in the Bible are false? This notion of yours isn't found in the Bible. Ironically, you're promoting to a man-made tradition yourself.

Now, Catholics may be forgiven for considering Mary the "Queen of Heaven" given Revelation 12:1 (A great and wondrous sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet and a crown of twelve stars on her head) and the exalted status of the Queen Mother (the "Gebirah") of the House of David as described in Scripture, and the fact that Jesus is the eternal king of the House of David (Revelation 3:7).

As Queen of the House of David, Bathsheba bows to the king.

1 Kings 1:31

Then Bathsheba bowed low with her face to the ground and, kneeling before the king, said, "May my lord King David live forever!"

As the mother of the king, or the Queen Mother, the king of the House of David (Solomon) bows to her.

1 Kings 2:18-20

So Bathsheba went to king Solomon, to speak to him on behalf of Adonijah. And the king rose to meet her, and bowed down to her; then he sat on his throne, and had a seat brought for the king's mother, and she sat on his right

Mary is the Queen Mother of the eternal King of the House of David, Jesus (Rev 3:7), and her exalted heavenly status is reflected in Revelation 12:1.

It's worth noting what the Church Fathers, who lived much closer in time to Jesus than Luther, said about Mary.

[Frumanchu]

now you are getting silly. The Jesus of the KJV Bible, which is Cannon of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (Mormons).

Canon along with other works by self-proclaimed prophets such as Joseph Smith and Brigham Young. But don't take my word for it when I say you and I believe in a different Jesus...

"In bearing testimony of Jesus Christ, President Hinckley spoke of those outside the Church who say Latter-day Saints 'do not believe in the traditional Christ.' 'No, I don't. The traditional Christ of whom they speak is not the Christ of whom I speak. For the Christ of whom I speak has been revealed in this the Dispensation of the Fullness of Times. He together with His Father, appeared to the boy Joseph Smith in the year 1820, and when Joseph left the grove that day, he knew more of the nature of God than all the learned ministers of the gospel of the ages.'" (LDS Church News Week ending June 20, 1998, p.7 )

It's the same Jesus, we just interpret the Bible differently, you will now probably go off on the tangent of telling me what I believe... Have fun.

[Little Bill]

Kind of stretching the references in some cases but on the whole, not bad.

[maine-iac7]

Religion is individual. If your personal religion is based on the teachings of Christ, you are a Christian. No human has the wisdom to say otherwise.

I wonder if I can get that on a bumper sticker?

Or at least find for continuous reposting...This is profound in it's simplicity. So are the words of our Lord, Jesus the Christ.

I have a book, wonderfully illustrated with old-type "Illuminations" that is JUST and ONLY Jesus' words. I believe He spoke plainly and wonderfully and does not need all the layers or interpretations that twist and turn His words inside out...the better to fit man-made dogma.

I believe Him when He says: “No one approaches the Father but through me”

I believe Him over man.

I am also a Mormon.

It is not up to any one of you "omnipotent" frothers-at-the-mouth out there to decide if on not I, or any other child of God is, or is not, a Christian.

As Soliton said:

Religion is individual. If your personal religion is based on the teachings of Christ, you are a Christian. No human has the wisdom to say otherwise.

[greyfoxx39]

But WHY should you be 'trusted'?

Post the data that proves that L.C. is male!

(snort!) DU thinks you are male! ROTFL!