Evangelicals Against Mitt

The American Spectator ^ | 1/3/2008 | Carrie Sheffield

[tantiboh]

Mitt Romney is facing an unexpected challenge in Iowa from rival Mike Huckabee, who has enjoyed a groundswell of support from religious voters, particularly evangelical Christians wary of the clean-cut former Massachusetts governor because of his Mormon religion.

The common worry among evangelicals is that if Romney were to capture the White House, his presidency would give legitimacy to a religion they believe is a cult. Since the LDS church places heavy emphasis on proselytizing -- there are 53,000 LDS missionaries worldwide -- many mainstream Christians are afraid that Mormon recruiting efforts would increase and that LDS membership rolls would swell.

...

THE ONLY PROBLEM with those fears is that they don't add up. Evangelicals may be surprised to learn that the growth of church membership in Massachusetts slowed substantially during Romney's tenure as governor. In fact, one could make the absurdly simplistic argument that Romney was bad for Mormonism.

...

ONE WAY TO GAUGE what might happen under a President Romney would be to look at what happened during the period of the 2002 Olympic Winter Games. Held in Salt Lake City, they were dubbed the "Mormon Olympics."

...

Despite all the increased attention, worldwide the Church grew only slightly, and in fact in the year leading up to the games the total number of congregations fell. Overall, from 2000 to 2004, there was a 10.9 percent increase in memberships and a 3.6 percent increase in congregations.

...

The LDS church is likely to continue its current modest-but-impressive growth whether or not Romney wins the White House. Perhaps the only real worry for evangelicals is that, if elected, the former Massachusetts governor will demonstrate to Americans that Mormons don't have horns.

Carrie Sheffield, a member of the LDS Church, is a writer living in Washington, D.C.

[Invincibly Ignorant]

Thank you very much!

You're disappointed?

[Elsie]

What country are you from, and is it's government socialist in nature?

Same as you and yes, it's getting more that way with every election.

[Elsie]

It's called Logic, you might want to learn how to use it some time...

It called GUESSING, and you would be wise to admit it.

[Elsie]

"There is nothing figurative about his paternity; he was begotten, conceived and born in the normal and natural course of events, for he is the Son of God, and that designation means what it says "

--(Mormon Doctrine,742;emphasis added).

 

MORE emphasis added!

[Elsie]

I submit that if you try hard enough you can make the Bible say anything by taking scriptures out of context and applying interpretations to them.

I see where you've learned this.. from your Founder and subsequent leaders!

 

---

 

 

 

THE BOOK OF JACOB
THE BROTHER OF NEPHI

CHAPTER 2

 

  24 Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord.
  25 Wherefore, thus saith the Lord, I have led this people forth out of the land of Jerusalem, by the power of mine arm, that I might raise up unto me a righteous branch from the fruit of the loins of Joseph.
  26 Wherefore, I the Lord God will not suffer that this people shall do like unto them of old.
  27 Wherefore, my brethren, hear me, and hearken to the word of the Lord: For there shall not any man among you have save it be one wife; and concubines he shall have none;
  28 For I, the Lord God, delight in the chastity of women. And whoredoms are an abomination before me; thus saith the Lord of Hosts.
  29 Wherefore, this people shall keep my commandments, saith the Lord of Hosts, or cursed be the land for their sakes.
  30 For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things.
  31 For behold, I, the Lord, have seen the sorrow, and heard the mourning of the daughters of my people in the land of Jerusalem, yea, and in all the lands of my people, because of the wickedness and abominations of their husbands.
  32 And I will not suffer, saith the Lord of Hosts, that the cries of the fair daughters of this people, which I have led out of the land of Jerusalem, shall come up unto me against the men of my people, saith the Lord of Hosts.

 

---

Or even HERE:

---

 

 1 Timothy 3:2-3
 2.  Now the overseer must be above reproach, the husband of but one wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach,
 3.  not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money.

 

 

1 Timothy 3:12
   A deacon must be the husband of but one wife and must manage his children and his household well.

 

 

 Titus 1:6
   An elder must be blameless, the husband of but one wife, a man whose children believe and are not open to the charge of being wild and disobedient.

[Elsie]

Without those plates, all else is idle speculation and not evidence.

Phooey on the BoM and evidence; for we DO have the 'evidence' of all the OTHER stuff that the leaders of Mormonism have spewed from their lips over the years!

THAT is what's so damning to today's True Believers as they try to distance themselves from these easily proven FACTS!

[Elsie]

You are interpreting their words.

You are RIGHT!!

We are interpreting them to mean EXACTLY what they say!

If you folks claim they don't mean EXACTLY what they say; you are placing yourselves in the place of the Prophet; not a position you were appointed to.

[Elsie]

Christ is not the Son of the Holy Ghost, but of the Father. (Doctrines of Salvation, vol. 1, pp. 18-20.)

Of course!

The HG has no physical body, thus no penis, thus unABLE to get Mary pregnant; in your theology.

The BIBLE says:

Luke 1:28-39
 28.  The angel went to her and said, "Greetings, you who are highly favored! The Lord is with you."
 29.  Mary was greatly troubled at his words and wondered what kind of greeting this might be.
 30.  But the angel said to her, "Do not be afraid, Mary, you have found favor with God.
 31.  You will be with child and give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus.
 32.  He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David,
 33.  and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever; his kingdom will never end."
 34.  "How will this be," Mary asked the angel, "since I am a virgin?"
 35.  The angel answered, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called  the Son of God.
 36.  Even Elizabeth your relative is going to have a child in her old age, and she who was said to be barren is in her sixth month.
 37.  For nothing is impossible with God."
 38.  "I am the Lord's servant," Mary answered. "May it be to me as you have said." Then the angel left her.

 

 

[Elsie]

You are interpreting their words.

"There is nothing figurative about his paternity; he was begotten, conceived and born in the normal and natural course of events, for he is the Son of God, and that designation means what it says "
--(Mormon Doctrine,742;emphasis added).

[Invincibly Ignorant]

I agree. I also think that it creates a sense of purpose in their lives to create an enemy. Many people are happiest when they are fighting. They are like the bully's on the playground and just like the bully's they are always stunned and terrified when someone fights back : )

Such is life on the my religion is better than your religion threads.

[MHGinTN]

The fractured syllogism was addressed in post #704 of this very thread. Your irrationality hasn’t changed since then I see.

[MHGinTN]

Here's a link so you don't have to strain.

[DelphiUser]

I Said: There are many tests to know if a messenger is of God.

U Said: Then I guess you agree with Smith's tests then huh.

I'll take advice from a man I have prayed about and recieved confirmation Saw God over a pajam clad serial poster on the Internet any day. there are levels of credibility, you IIRC have nver even testified of Jesus here, why on earth would I believe you about him? (First John 4:2-3 says you are not of Jesus becasue of that)

I Said: Messengers from Satan can not apear as an answer to a prayer of Faith, they can just appear however.

U Said: Unless the object of one's faith is false to begin with.

What a sad small world you inhabit if this is a valid argument to you.

I Said: Satan is revealed often as the Devil. (your end of time 2 Thes is about the antichrist)

I Said: I submit that if you try hard enough you can make the Bible say anything by taking scriptures out of context and applying interpretations to them.

U Said: Wow, only one scripture out of the batch you disagree with.

I picked the one assumption upon which all your other interpetations rested, I guess I needed to point out to you that removing that one card causes your whole house to colapse, but then I'm sure the Lurkers got it.

U Said: But then your premise is that you are praying to the true god - but which one? You have so many.

Then so do the Trinitarians wiht their changed Gospel condemned by Paul, sitting in judgement upon us as if they are God, wait ahat did 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4 say again?

3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.

So anyone who tries to usurp God's place (judgement) is a son of perdition, interesting.

My Testimony from my page at FR.

I know that my redeemer lives. I know that though I will grow old(er) and die, I will in my Flesh stand before him to be judged. I testify that Jesus Christ is my redeemer, My Judge, My God. I know that only through his grace can I be saved. I know this with every fiber of my being. I have put the Promise contained in the Book of Mormon at Moroni 10:4 and Prayed to God about the Book of Mormon and was told that it was true and that Jesus was my savior and walked in the flesh on the earth. I am far from perfect. Any in my page here, or in my posts or anywhere else, are my mistakes, attribute not to God my faults for mine are many and he is perfect. Blame me if you must blame anyone for the imperfections of my works, but know this, I tried to do a Good work, My failings are my own, and not my masters.

Last of all, I testify to you that Jesus lives! The bonds of death and hell cannot prevail against him nor against any who he calls his in the last day, my hope is to be among them and to have him wash me clean that I may enter in and dwell with him forever.

In the name of Jesus Christ, Amen.

[DelphiUser]

My view of the teachings of Mormonism regarding the virgin birth, is that the LDS Church teaches that no one knows exactly how God caused the impregnation of Mary. Perhaps something like artificial insemination or implanting an embryo or something of that nature could be assumed as well as some other transmission between God and Mary, perhaps sexual in nature......

...but no one knows, this is all purely speculation.

I thought I'd get something like that, Grin.

Now I will ask straight out, do Mormons teach tat Mary was a virgin when Jesus was born, yes or No.

You've been to primary, had all the Sunday schools lessons, you know what we teach here, is it so hard to say something good about us even when it's the truth?

So, I'm asking you straight up, do we Mormons teach the Virgin birth or don't we, yes or no.

[DelphiUser]

Le Grande Said: My question is why do you waste your time attacking the Mormon faith?

Elsie Said Because it's false.

ROTFLOL! Didn't you just accuse me of Circular logic a few posts ago?

Pot, behold thine own posterior (your spinning so fast).

[DelphiUser]

Sorry to break it to you, but the record doesn't lie.

As my Father once told me "Figures don't lie, but Liars do Figures.

The quotations are probably true quotations, (I'm not going to check them all.) But your use of them is a lie. All these men you are quoting if they were General Authorities of the LDS church have borne testimony to the virgin birth.

Your general authorities have taught and promoligated this teaching. Young, Pratt, Kimball and lots others are documented in their teaching of this. It is logical extension of mormon doctrine since "The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man's" (Doctrine and Covenants, sec. 130:22).

Your logic can best be illustrated by a joke (if you know what I mean...

A couple go on vacation to a fishing resort in northern Minnesota. The husband likes to fish at the crack of dawn. The wife likes to read. One morning the husband returns after several hours of fishing and decides to take a nap. Although not familiar with the lake, the wife decides to take the boat out. She motors out a short distance, anchors, and continues to read her book. Along comes a ranger in his boat. He pulls up alongside the woman and says,"Good morning Ma'am. What are you doing?" "Reading a book," she replies, (thinking "isn't that obvious?") "You're in a restricted fishing area," he informs her. "I'm sorry officer, but I'm not fishing, I'm reading." "Yes, but you have all the equipment. I'll have to take you in and write you up." "If you do that, I'll have to charge you with sexual assault," says the woman. "But I haven't even touched you," says the policeman. "That's true, but you have all the equipment."

Your argument that We teach that God had sex with Mary boils down to "you believe that God has all the Equipment". One word, Lame!

[DelphiUser]

I think you need Tortdog and Lady Lawyer to give you lessons.

Great Pining them to this post, Guys, who is right here, do I need to prove my innocence, or Does the prosecutor have to prove me guilty? Also, is the default verdict not guilty?

What was shown to you, and the jury, was the fact you didn't put any evidence on the table.

Actually, I put quite a bit of evidence on the "Table" it's not my fault you did not even look at it.

It's known as 'Innocent UNTIL proven GUILTY' in the trade.

I know you think you are being fair, but your post said "Yet another failure by the defense to show proof."

The defense doesn't have to show "proof" the Prosecution shows proof. The defense tries to mitigate, or negate the proof shown by the defense.

In a court of Law, (My understanding) even if the defense does nothing, if the Prosecutor does not convince the Jury the defendant is found innocent. It's known as not proving your case.

JFTR, I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn last night....

[Invincibly Ignorant]

That was billiant. lol.

[DelphiUser]

I Said: You are interpreting their words.

I Said: You are RIGHT!!

We are interpreting them to mean EXACTLY what they say!

If you folks claim they don't mean EXACTLY what they say; you are placing yourselves in the place of the Prophet; not a position you were appointed to.

Stop! I'm getting a side ache from laughing so much, The really funny part is you don't know how funny you are being!

[tortdog]

>but I did stay at a Holiday Inn last night....

What is that all about? Various people keep posting it.