Posted on 05/10/2010 8:16:49 PM PDT by delacoert
Is the Mormon God the Christian God?
The most important question to be asked when evaluating Robinsons arguments for recognizing Mormonism as Christian is, Is the God of Mormonism the God of Christianity? If the Mormon God is not the Christian God then there can be no thought of understanding Mormonism as Christian.
Robinson readily admits that much of what Mormonism teaches about God cannot be found in the Bible. He insists, however, that this does not mean that the Mormon God is not the biblical God, only that LDS modern revelation has explicated some areas concerning God on which the Bible is silent.28 Concerning Gods corporeality he declares, I do maintain that the Bible makes no unambiguous statement about the materiality or immateriality of the Father, and that we may therefore think of him either as having a body or as not having a body without contradicting the Bible.29 In other words, the Mormon understanding of God is extra-biblical, but not un-biblical. He also admits freely that Mormonism has a different concept of God than orthodox Christianity because orthodox Christianity has a doctrine of God that is the product of an influx of Hellenistic thought corrupting and distorting the biblical picture of God.
To those who insist that a corporeal God is not consistent with 1 Timothy 1:17, which states, among other things, that God is invisible, he responds that aoratos does not mean invisible, but simply unseen. The upshot of this understanding of aoratos is that one is left with a god who plays hide and seek.
The fact that LDS teach that God has a body,30 does not prevent the Mormon God from being omnipresent, according to Robinson, because Gods omnipresence is spiritual, not physical, in nature.31 To those who insist on understanding John 4:24 as teaching the incorporeality of God he replies that the text should be translated God is Spirit, not God is a Spirit. Latter-day Saints do not dispute this passage at all, unless it is interpreted as limiting God to being merely a spirit.32 This limited understanding of God as merely spirit comes from Greek philosophy rather than the biblical witness, according to Robinson. In rejecting Greek metaphysics, he writes, God is spirit, but he is also element; both aspects of existence are included and encompassed within his glorious being. That he is either one does not limit the fact that he is also the otherand infinitely more.33
Robinsons argument seems rather disingenuous to those familiar with Mormonism. He is employing the language gap of which he complains in his introductory remarks34 to take advantage of the evangelical Christian belief that there is an ontological difference between spirit and matter. For example, Robinson argues that Mormonisms God can be omnipresent because his omnipresence is spiritual, not physical. According to Mormon scripture, however, spirit actually is material: There is no such thing as immaterial matter. All spirit is matter, but it is more fine or pure, and can only be discerned by purer eyes; We cannot see it; but when our bodies are purified we shall see that it is all matter (Doctrine & Covenants 131:78). It is hard to imagine Robinson is unaware that the Book of Mormon teaches that the spiritual aspect of Gods existence is coextensive with that of his physical aspect. In a supposed preincarnate appearance, Christ says, Behold, this body, which ye now behold, is the body of my spirit; and man have I created after the body of my spirit; and even as I appear unto thee to be in the spirit will I appear unto my people in the flesh (Ether 3:16). Mormon scriptures render Robinsons argument here very non-official (and perhaps even unorthodox by LDS standards).
Another serious defect in Robinsons interpretation of John 4:24 is that in its context this passage involves a discussion of where one ought to worship God, and thus, a question of where one can find God. Jesus responds that the location of worship does not matter. The reason that location is not an issue is because God is not limited to being present in any one location. The reason why God is not limited to one place or another is precisely because God is Spirit, not because God is a material being who is spiritually present (materially present in a finer sort of fashion) in all places.
Yet another argument that Robinson uses to deny that John 4:24 contradicts the LDS concept of God having a body is that since Jesus was God, and he had a body, there is no warrant for thinking that God must necessarily be immaterial. In this argument Robinson: (1) blurs the Trinitarian distinctions between Father, Son, and Spirit; (2) ignores the fact that Christs incarnation took place in time/space, and the incarnation body was not essential to his nature as Deity; and (3) ignores the fact that in the incarnation Christ was not omnipresent.
A question related to the corporeality of God is whether or not God was a man prior to becoming God? Robinson affirms that the teaching that God is an exalted man is a linchpin of LDS theology.35 Yet he says this should not be taken to mean that God is not infinite and eternal.36 This, however, contradicts what Joseph Smith, Jr. declared in the King Follett funeral sermon, which Robinson allows has normative force in LDS theology, concerning the nature of God. Smith states: We have imagined and supposed that God was God from all eternity. I will refute that idea and take away the veil, so that you may see.37 Thus it is apparent that the Mormon founder, through whom all LDS priesthood and prophetic authority is derived, thought that God was not eternally God. That Smith also believed that God was capable of progressing, and thus not infinite, is evident when he puts the following words in the mouth of Jesus:
My Father worked out his kingdom with fear and trembling, and I must do the same; and when I get my kingdom, I shall present it to My Father, so that He may obtain Kingdom upon Kingdom, and it will exalt Him in glory. He will then take a higher exaltation, and I will take His place, and thereby become exalted myself.38
Should one be perplexed as to how Robinson can claim to stand in continuity with Smith and at the same time teach radically different things about God, one must consider the LDS meaning of eternity. Latter-day Saints teach that there is an endless series of eternities. Robinson touches ever so briefly on this point when he writes, In regard to the possibility that God was once a man in some prior eternity before the beginning of this one, ... (italics added).39 Consistent with this (re)definition of eternity is his statement: I firmly believe God did exist as God before all ages (from the beginning), but that still does not say anything about before the beginning.40 Certainly my understanding of eternity is different from that of the average Evangelical, but it is not without ancient precedent, nor is it internally inconsistent.41 It is also apparent that Robinsons understanding of time is not biblical. The God of the Bible created all things (John 1:3). A God who did not create time, but instead is himself subject to time, is not the biblical God.
Not only is the Mormon God not eternally God (in the normal sense of the word), he is not the only God. Although Robinson argues that Mormonism is not polytheistic,42 Joseph Smith disagrees. Again, in the same sermon that Robinson allows has normative force, although it is not technically canonical, Smith declares: ... you have got to learn how to be Gods yourselves, and to be kings and priests to God, the same as all Gods have done before you .... The head God called together the Gods and sat in grand council to bring forth the world. The grand councilors sat at the head in yonder heavens and contemplated the creation of the worlds which were created at that time.43
There is yet another area of LDS Theology that is troubling to orthodox Christians in LDS Theology, God has a wife. In Achieving a Celestial Marriage one reads: Our Heavenly Father and mother live in an exalted state because they achieved a celestial marriage. As we achieve a like marriage we shall become as they are and begin the creation of worlds for our own spirit children.44 From this quotation one can readily see that Gods becoming a God was dependent not only upon his being married but also upon his having the right kind of marriage.
Robinson struggles valiantly to present the God of Mormonism as infinite, eternal, and one of a kind. Yet when one understands the meaning of his terms, the Mormon God is clearly understood to be finite, temporal, and one of many. The similarities are thus more semantic than actual. This cannot be reconciled with the Christian understanding of God.
An Analysis of LDS Scholar Stephen E. Robinsons Arguments for Accepting Mormonism as Christian1 By Robert B. Stewart Copyright © 2002 Robert B. StewartMaterial Issues Is the Mormon God the Christian God? The most important question to be asked when evaluating Robinsons arguments for recognizing Mormonism as Christian is, Is the God of Mormonism the God of Christianity? If the Mormon God is not the Christian God then there can be no thought of understanding Mormonism as Christian.
Robinson readily admits that much of what Mormonism teaches about God cannot be found in the Bible. He insists, however, that this does not mean that the Mormon God is not the biblical God, only that LDS modern revelation has explicated some areas concerning God on which the Bible is silent.28 Concerning Gods corporeality he declares, I do maintain that the Bible makes no unambiguous statement about the materiality or immateriality of the Father, and that we may therefore think of him either as having a body or as not having a body without contradicting the Bible.29 In other words, the Mormon understanding of God is extra-biblical, but not un-biblical. He also admits freely that Mormonism has a different concept of God than orthodox Christianity because orthodox Christianity has a doctrine of God that is the product of an influx of Hellenistic thought corrupting and distorting the biblical picture of God.
To those who insist that a corporeal God is not consistent with 1 Timothy 1:17, which states, among other things, that God is invisible, he responds that aoratos does not mean invisible, but simply unseen. The upshot of this understanding of aoratos is that one is left with a god who plays hide and seek.
The fact that LDS teach that God has a body,30 does not prevent the Mormon God from being omnipresent, according to Robinson, because Gods omnipresence is spiritual, not physical, in nature.31 To those who insist on understanding John 4:24 as teaching the incorporeality of God he replies that the text should be translated God is Spirit, not God is a Spirit. Latter-day Saints do not dispute this passage at all, unless it is interpreted as limiting God to being merely a spirit.32 This limited understanding of God as merely spirit comes from Greek philosophy rather than the biblical witness, according to Robinson. In rejecting Greek metaphysics, he writes, God is spirit, but he is also element; both aspects of existence are included and encompassed within his glorious being. That he is either one does not limit the fact that he is also the otherand infinitely more.33
Robinsons argument seems rather disingenuous to those familiar with Mormonism. He is employing the language gap of which he complains in his introductory remarks34 to take advantage of the evangelical Christian belief that there is an ontological difference between spirit and matter. For example, Robinson argues that Mormonisms God can be omnipresent because his omnipresence is spiritual, not physical. According to Mormon scripture, however, spirit actually is material: There is no such thing as immaterial matter. All spirit is matter, but it is more fine or pure, and can only be discerned by purer eyes; We cannot see it; but when our bodies are purified we shall see that it is all matter (Doctrine & Covenants 131:78). It is hard to imagine Robinson is unaware that the Book of Mormon teaches that the spiritual aspect of Gods existence is coextensive with that of his physical aspect. In a supposed preincarnate appearance, Christ says, Behold, this body, which ye now behold, is the body of my spirit; and man have I created after the body of my spirit; and even as I appear unto thee to be in the spirit will I appear unto my people in the flesh (Ether 3:16). Mormon scriptures render Robinsons argument here very non-official (and perhaps even unorthodox by LDS standards).
Another serious defect in Robinsons interpretation of John 4:24 is that in its context this passage involves a discussion of where one ought to worship God, and thus, a question of where one can find God. Jesus responds that the location of worship does not matter. The reason that location is not an issue is because God is not limited to being present in any one location. The reason why God is not limited to one place or another is precisely because God is Spirit, not because God is a material being who is spiritually present (materially present in a finer sort of fashion) in all places.
Yet another argument that Robinson uses to deny that John 4:24 contradicts the LDS concept of God having a body is that since Jesus was God, and he had a body, there is no warrant for thinking that God must necessarily be immaterial. In this argument Robinson: (1) blurs the Trinitarian distinctions between Father, Son, and Spirit; (2) ignores the fact that Christs incarnation took place in time/space, and the incarnation body was not essential to his nature as Deity; and (3) ignores the fact that in the incarnation Christ was not omnipresent.
A question related to the corporeality of God is whether or not God was a man prior to becoming God? Robinson affirms that the teaching that God is an exalted man is a linchpin of LDS theology.35 Yet he says this should not be taken to mean that God is not infinite and eternal.36 This, however, contradicts what Joseph Smith, Jr. declared in the King Follett funeral sermon, which Robinson allows has normative force in LDS theology, concerning the nature of God. Smith states: We have imagined and supposed that God was God from all eternity. I will refute that idea and take away the veil, so that you may see.37 Thus it is apparent that the Mormon founder, through whom all LDS priesthood and prophetic authority is derived, thought that God was not eternally God. That Smith also believed that God was capable of progressing, and thus not infinite, is evident when he puts the following words in the mouth of Jesus: My Father worked out his kingdom with fear and trembling, and I must do the same; and when I get my kingdom, I shall present it to My Father, so that He may obtain Kingdom upon Kingdom, and it will exalt Him in glory. He will then take a higher exaltation, and I will take His place, and thereby become exalted myself.38 Should one be perplexed as to how Robinson can claim to stand in continuity with Smith and at the same time teach radically different things about God, one must consider the LDS meaning of eternity. Latter-day Saints teach that there is an endless series of eternities. Robinson touches ever so briefly on this point when he writes, In regard to the possibility that God was once a man in some prior eternity before the beginning of this one, ... (italics added).39 Consistent with this (re)definition of eternity is his statement: I firmly believe God did exist as God before all ages (from the beginning), but that still does not say anything about before the beginning.40 Certainly my understanding of eternity is different from that of the average Evangelical, but it is not without ancient precedent, nor is it internally inconsistent.41 It is also apparent that Robinsons understanding of time is not biblical. The God of the Bible created all things (John 1:3). A God who did not create time, but instead is himself subject to time, is not the biblical God.
Not only is the Mormon God not eternally God (in the normal sense of the word), he is not the only God. Although Robinson argues that Mormonism is not polytheistic,42 Joseph Smith disagrees. Again, in the same sermon that Robinson allows has normative force, although it is not technically canonical, Smith declares: ... you have got to learn how to be Gods yourselves, and to be kings and priests to God, the same as all Gods have done before you .... The head God called together the Gods and sat in grand council to bring forth the world. The grand councilors sat at the head in yonder heavens and contemplated the creation of the worlds which were created at that time.43
There is yet another area of LDS Theology that is troubling to orthodox Christians in LDS Theology, God has a wife. In Achieving a Celestial Marriage one reads: Our Heavenly Father and mother live in an exalted state because they achieved a celestial marriage. As we achieve a like marriage we shall become as they are and begin the creation of worlds for our own spirit children.44 From this quotation one can readily see that Gods becoming a God was dependent not only upon his being married but also upon his having the right kind of marriage.
Robinson struggles valiantly to present the God of Mormonism as infinite, eternal, and one of a kind. Yet when one understands the meaning of his terms, the Mormon God is clearly understood to be finite, temporal, and one of many. The similarities are thus more semantic than actual. This cannot be reconciled with the Christian understanding of God.
Notes 28 Craig L. Blomberg and Stephen E. Robinson, How Wide the Divide?: A Mormon & an Evangelical in Conversation (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1997), hereafter HWTD?, 86.
29 Ibid, 79.
30 Doctrine and Covenants, 130:22 (hereafter D & C).
31 HWTD? , 88-89. If one is to make sense of LDS statements that God is omnipresent, one must know what LDS mean when they say omnipresent. In A Study of the Articles of Faith, (published by the church), one reads: There is no part of creation, however remote, into which God cannot penetrate; through the medium of the Spirit the Godhead is in direct communication with all things at all times. It has been said, therefore, that God is everywhere present; but this does not mean that the actual person of any one member of the Godhead can be physically present in more than one place at one time. The senses of each of the Trinity are of infinite power; His mind is of unlimited capacity; His powers of transferring Himself from place to place are infinite; plainly, however, His person cannot be in more than one place at any one time. Admitting the personality of God, we are compelled to accept the fact of His materiality; indeed, an immaterial being, under which meaningless name some have sought to designate the condition of God, cannot exist, for the very expression is a contradiction in terms. If God possesses a form, that form is of necessity of definite proportions and therefore of limited extension in space. James E. Talmage, A Study of the Articles of Faith: Being a Consideration of the Principal Doctrines of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Salt Lake City: The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1961), 42-43. The particular copy from which the writer quotes was a gift of the First Presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to Fleming Library at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary. The writer assumes that this means the book at least provides a fairly accurate statement as to what LDS theology actually is.
32 AMC?, 79.
33 Ibid., 81.
34 HWTD?., 13-14.
35 HWTD?, 91. He stresses, however, that more important, more in evidence, more often preached, more often studied, explained and pondered by the Latter-day Saints are the more central doctrines of the gospel of Christ. Ibid. To his credit, Robinson does not seem uncertain about the place of this concept in Mormon theology, as Gordon Hinckley, the current LDS president, did when asked whether God was once a man in an interview for Time magazine: I dont know that we teach it. I dont know that we emphasize it ... I understand the philosophical background behind it, but I dont know a lot about it, and I dont think others know a lot about it. David Van Biema, Time 150, no. 5, August 4, 1997: 56.
36 HWTD?, 78.
37 Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith (TPJS), 345. Robinson seems to want to have it both ways. He agrees with what Smith teaches in the King Follett sermon when it serves his purposes (God was once a man) while disagreeing with Smith on other topics (Gods finiteness and non-eternality) taught in the same sermon.
38 Ibid, 34748.
39 HWTD?, 89.
40 Robinson ignores the fact that the beginning of John 1:1 is not the same as the beginning of Genesis 1:1. Genesis refers to a moment/place in time/space when God created this world. John, however, contemplates the eternity out of which God, by Christ, created time, space and matter, as is proved by verse 3. God was God, Christ the Word was God, without the existence of space, time and matterbefore, as it were, Robinsons beginning.
41 Ibid., 90. The precedent he appeals to is first century Judaism: First -century Jews understood eternity to consist of successive ages or eonsall within the parameters of the beginning and the end. Ibid. He does not support this statement with a reference. The qualification all within the beginning and the end seems to speak of one beginning and one end encapsulating successive eons. Apparently this is not how Robinson understands the statement. This only serves to make the point that the crucial issue is meaning, not terminology. Concerning the internal consistency of Mormonisms eternity see Francis Beckwith and Stephen E. Parrish, The Mormon Concept of God: A Philosophical Analysis (Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen, 1991) for a discussion of the logical (in)consistency of the Mormon concept of Gods relationship to time.
42 HWTD?, 132.
43 TPJS, 345, 349. In a separate sermon, preached two months later, Smith declares: In the very beginning the Bible shows there is a plurality of Gods beyond the power of refutation. . . . The heads of the Gods appointed one God for us; and when you take [that] view of the subject, it sets one free to see all the beauty, holiness and perfection of the Gods. (brackets in original) Ibid., 372. It is apparent from this quotation that the God of this earth is not even the highest of the Gods; he cannot be referred to as the almighty in an ultimate sense. James White shows that Robinson disagrees on this point with his BYU colleague, Eugene England, Brigham Young University Studies 29 no. 3, 33, cited in James R. White, Is the Mormon My Brother?: Discerning the Differences Between Christianity and Mormonism (Minneapolis: Bethany House, 1997), 182.
44 Achieving a Celestial Marriage, (Salt Lake City: Corporation of the President of The Church Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1976), 1.
MORMON
ATTITUDES OF SUPERIORITY
1. Im Superior; I have a special gift of the holy Ghost -- you dont! 2. Im Superior; I have Gods true priesthood power -- you dont! 3. Im Superior; I can go in Gods secret Temple -- you cant! 4. Im Superior; Ive been Endowed with special Gifts and Knowledge -- youre just normal! 5. Im Superior; Ill have my family with me in heaven -- youll be with strangers! 6. Im Superior; Im becoming a God -- you arent! 7. Im Superior; My women know their place as servants of man and yours dont. 8. Im Superior; YOUR creeds are wrong because they come from man - mine comes from God (you can find each one printed in our Scriptures). 9. Im Superior; I dont HAVE a creed - Ive got 13 Articles of Faith. 10. I'm Superior; I have 4 "Bibles"-- the standard works (5 if you count the JST) -- you've only got one: in as far as it is translated correctly. 11. Im Superior; I can lie with impunity about such things as church membership, church growth, church doctrine, church history, church influence, etc. -- You cant. 12. Im Superior; I am right (everybody knows) when I say 'evangelical' Christians are lunatics -- -- Youre a hideous narrow-minded bigot, who is persecuting me by practicing discrimination by saying I'm not a Christian. 13. I'm Superior; I have a testimony about a prophet -- you don't. 14. I'm Superior; I have a Scripture-producing Amos 3:7 prophet -- you don't 15. Im Superior; I have a Living Prophet who talks to god every day -- you have a dim-witted hireling of Satan who only talks to himself. 16. I'm Superior; I have my calling & election made sure -- you don't. 17. Im Superior; I have magic underwear to protect me from the bogey man -- you dont. 18. Im Superior; I have secret clasps and grips to give the angel so I get admitted to the celestial kingdom -- you dont ;so you cant. 19. I'm Superior; I know secret handshake codes for afterlife entrances-- you don't. 20. Im Superior; I will see Joseph Smith setting on the right hand of GOD, when I get to Mormon heaven, and he will recognize me and judge me favorably -- Youre on your own; when you get to wherever youre going! 21. Im Superior; Im going to hie to Kolob -- youre going to who knows where. 22. Im Superior; I get to have a harem and act like a celestial stud for time and all eternity -- you dont. 23. Im Superior; I have sun stones, moon stones, sky stones, cloud stones, Saturn stones, and the evil eye of Osirus guarding my temple -- all you have is a stupid cross. 24. Im Superior; My church has billions in assets stashed away -- yours has taken a stupid vow of poverty. 25. I'm Superior; Last - we have the power to keep a whole race out of our priesthood if we wanted to reinsert our 148-year legacy (we ARE still keeping an entire GENDER at bay!) Revision 46.1
Semi-Official creed of the EXclusive club of Freeper Flying Inmans.
All rights liable to be abused. |
NO one would want you as their DEFENSE attorney!
Another Pentacostal girl stole my boyfriend!
The Official Scriptures of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints © 2006 Intellectual Reserve, Inc. All rights reserved. Rights and use information. Privacy policy. |
Hey!!
OUR church is delievering 600 temporary housing kits* to HAITI!!!
Just what is YOURS doing; HUH???!!
* (some cement, some 24's and some metal roofing.)
MormonDude was SO incensed he forgot to sign his screed!
THX1138
“So I think your answer is correct. Your God is definitely different from mine.”
Absolutely true! Truest thing you’ve ever written here, in
my opinion.
Mormonism’s god:
... used to be a man!
... is just one of trillions of other mormonite gods!
... not all powerful (omnipotent) - just another god in the mormon pantheon of gods.
... changeable
... unable to save eternally
... mormon god guilty of attempted identity theft of the real god - trying to use His name and sacred message.
The real God of Christianity:
... ALWAYS God. ALWAYS will be God. He won’t change.
... THE ONLY God. Just ONE.
... Omnipotent, omnipresent, loving, just, eternal, unchangeable, HOLY.
... Able to save eternally and provided a way.
... The Real Deal.
It is rare on these threads that I see such an open
admission of who the mormon god really is and why
he (and mrs. god) fall so short from the HOLY God
of the Bible.
NO, Mormons worship a false god if they buy into Joseph Smiths nonsense.
Yours is mean, small, petty, condemning and puny.
_______________________________________________
After all it was our Jesus who threw Lucifer, the little brother of the mormon jesus, out of Heaven...
How more more mean, small, petty, condemning and puny can ya get than that ???
Yours is mean, small, petty, condemning and puny.
____________________________________________________
But Sandy its not my Jesus that is keeping you out of the mormon after life just because you are a female...
Thats your mormon jesus that is doing that...
Which mormon god?
The mormons aren't 'Christian' and Joe Smith new nothing about religion. He received the worst fake prophet award after he was shot escaping from Jail.
According to the Mormon scriptures (Doctrine and Covenants, Abraham 3) our galaxy, if not all galaxies, is posited to contain countless planets either already, or soon to be, inhabited by human-type life. The greatest of these planets is Kolob.
Kolob is said to be the greatest of the planets because it is "nearest unto the throne of God." But, it is also "the greatest of all the Kokau-beam that thou hast seen" ... "which signifies stars or all the great lights which were in the firmament of heaven." Moreover, at least two stars and possibly fifteen or more stars and planets, the Moon, the Earth, and the Sun receive their light from Kolob. Kolob also is said to be surrounded by many great stars which are near unto it (Abraham 3:2). According to this same passage (Abraham 3) the greater the planet the longer its rotational period. Kolob, the greatest, has a day equal to 1000 years.
“after he was shot escaping from Jail”
Joseph Smith and his brother were murdered in cold blood. But thanks for letting us know where you stand in the anti Mormon parade.
“But Sandy its not my Jesus that is keeping you out of the mormon after life just because you are a female...”
Wow! You are God Almighty. You know exactly what will happen to me in the after life. Silly me; I thought God Himself and the Savior were in charge of the after life.
How did your ‘first prophet’ of Mormonism get a pistol in a jail cell? And when he used it by shoving his hand out the door of the jail, to shoot two men —on the outside of the jail cell— oh, never mind, Saundra, it is clear you will twist the Historical facts to suit the image of your sexual degenerate ‘first prophet of Mormonism’.
Sandy it is your LDS that teaches woman having no standing without being called by their husbands.
Joseph Smith and his brother were murdered in cold blood
_______________________________________________
Joey Smith probably shot his own brother...
In cold blood ???
Well Joey Smith also murdered two other men...in cold blood so yes...
Joey Smith had guns smuggled in to him in jail...
He intended to murder some unsuspecting men in cold blood...
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.