This man is a TRUE Christian:
Posted on 07/01/2012 8:34:57 AM PDT by Colofornian
The presidential race of Mitt Romney and the success of the Broadway musical The Book of Mormon have generated new interest in Mormonism. Stephen Mansfield's book The Mormonizing of America provides a careful study of this growing religion. The Book Stop blog is posting excerpts from the first two chapters of this book.
The Mormons and the Media
Nowhere in American society does this create an occasion of people talking past each other as when it comes to the media pursuing a prominent Mormon.
Reporters naturally want to find something controversial about this visible person, so they ask about holy underwear. But the Mormon won’t answer this question directly. He’s offended by the phrase “holy underwear”—it is properly called a “Temple garment”—and he won’t talk about Temple rituals in any case because they are far too sacred. Besides, betraying Temple rituals is forbidden.
Then the media switches to polygamy. This too gets side-stepped because the Church forbade polygamy long before this prominent Mormon was born and only a small percentage of Saints have ever been in plural marriages to begin with. There’s nothing to write about here.
Reporters then raise the treatment of blacks. This may get some play because the Latter-day Saints did not “get a revelation” about blacks being priests and permitted in the Temple until 1978. Even the Supreme Court moved toward equality faster than the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints! So the media can stir these waters a bit, but the change came forty-five years ago and everybody has admitted the Church was wrong and even African American Mormons will criticize the media if it does not report fairly where the Church is today.
Then there is abortion and homosexuality, but more than half the country is with the Mormons on this so there is nothing new to spin. There is some fun to be had with the Mormon anti-birth-control position, but this is old and not all Mormons accept it and it will only bring Mormon women to the cameras in a rage. Better to leave this alone too.
It also doesn’t work to bring up specific matters of doctrine. Press a political candidate on whether Jesus will touch down in Jackson County, Missouri, when he returns and the man either answers incorrectly or says he doesn’t know. Ask if he intends to be a god one day and he says his faith doesn’t make this clear. Ask if he thinks he will rule over planets and he laughs and says that some members of his faith believe this.
The man cannot be pinned down, though, and this is because Mormon doctrine is dangerous territory. It is always a bit—squishy. There is no creed. There are few if any LDS theologians. The clergy isn’t theologically trained. The people are usually only taught what is “faith promoting” so there are huge gaps in what they know. And in Mormonism there is nothing like the Roman Catholic “Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith”—no official voice, no department clarifying theology and whipping dissidents back into line. So the candidate moves deftly around the icebergs that reporters try to put in his way.
Then there are always conspiracy theories to pose about how much Salt Lake City controls a leading politician or how much money the church spends trying to turn elections their way. But no one knows for sure and there is such a mind meld between the Church and its prominent members that there is hardly need for the Church to even try to exert control. These Mormons all think so alike that nothing ever has to be said.
And this is where it usually stops. Because the media only knows Mormonism by its odd extremities, it exhausts its list of interesting topics quickly. The reporting becomes vapid. Religion moves from center stage. The fact that a CEO or a politician or a cabinet member or some other influential member of society might be a Mormon is no longer deemed important.
Because the media is focused on externals. Because the sordid burns out quickly. Because no one has thought to ask a Mormon what it really means to be a Mormon.
Yet when the Saints are approached in the light by which they see themselves—as the only earthly heirs of the ancient priesthood of Aaron and Melchizedek—then a new list of questions begins to emerge.
“Sir, your Church is offended when it is called a ‘cult.’ But if your Church sees itself as the ‘only true Church,’ possessors of the only true priesthood on earth, then don’t Mormons see every other religion in the world as some kind of cult?”
“Sir, if you are a Melchizedek Priest, have you ever prayed for anyone to be healed? Have they been? Have you ever seen angels? Can you confer the gifts of the Holy Spirit? Can you confer them on me?”
“Sir, are there prophets who speak to you regularly? Do you prophesy to others? What will you do if someone you revere as a prophet gives you a revelation about what you should do in a public office? How can you refuse it? How can you be sure it is or isn’t the true word of God?”
“Sir, if your Church has been given the keys to the only true Aaronic and Melchizedek Priesthoods on earth, then what does this say about the Jews? Are they deceived about who they are? And does becoming a Mormon literally change a person’s blood so they become the seed of Abraham, as Joseph Smith taught? And who exactly will be in control of Jerusalem when Jesus Christ returns?”
These, then, are questions nearer the meaning of Mormonism that the Saints themselves hold dear and these get us closer to understanding how an LDS politician or CEO or educator understands both his public life as well as his life in this world.
What the Mormon view of Mormonism also tells us is how we have to approach the faith. There is no Mormon systematic theology or final theological voice. The text of Mormonism is Mormon history. In fact, there is a direct connection between each major phase of the Mormon past and what most every Mormon believes and practices today. But the story has to be told and its meaning understood.
This has not been easy for most Americans. Not only is religion of any kind seldom taught in our schools, but Mormon history is such an odd creature that it requires a certain openness, a willingness to take seriously—even for a moment— a story our Mormon friends believe was begun by angels, powered by prophecy, sustained by miracles, and made heroic by men destined to be divine. This history, though, is the main text of the faith that has now reached critical mass in the United States and it is well worth considering for this reason alone.
___________________________________________________
Excerpted from The Mormonizing of America by Stephen Mansfield, © 2012.
Published by Worthy Publishing, a division of Worthy Media, Inc., Brentwood, TN. www.worthypublishing.com. Used by permission. Tell us what you thought of this excerpt on Twitter: #Mormonizing @WorthyPub
You will be judged by what you type.
THIS is a neat trick though: nor am I any other religion, nor am I atheist
Then why did you post your picture?
O...
K...
Then quit calling folks names, like you did in grade school, and actually REFUTE something.
What's 'being done' is exposing MORMONism history.
If that aggravates individual MORMONs, blame me instead of their chosen religion.
Most people would rather be praised into Hell; than rebuked into Heaven.
real hate
perhaps you should do the proper thing and simply “repent” of bearing false witness vs. a few of your neighbors...
Since this thread is about mormonism, why are you so focused on Catholics? Why not just start a new thread.
Again, what hatred?
Is the Catholic Church the one true Church?
Doesn’t every religion feel they are THE one?
Will the Israelis and Jews that don’t accept Christ as God , go to hell with the LDsers?
This man is a TRUE Christian:
This man is a TRUE Christian:
“I know many Mormons and they are friendly,law abiding, good business people and not on welfare.”
The Sidon Canal project in Big Horn County was built by Mormons who came to Wyoming mostly from Southern Utah in 1900.
Some kind of a deal with the Governor of Wyoming and the colony of Mormons, who got land for their labor.
The ones up there now are in part from those ancestors. Powell, Lovell, Cowley, Byron, Frannie, Deaver, etc. Some in Cody. Maybe some places you know, better than me.
I have several generations buried at the cemetery in Cowley; Aunt, Uncle, grandparents, great grandparents, great-great grandparents (who crossed the plains). Cousins throughout the area.
Those Mormons in Wyoming, Utah, Idaho vote conservative in very high proportion, so making them out as enemies is not logical.
I wasn't trying to refute anything. Just point out the even more horrendous alternative (treasonous/Communist Obama).
Does the Catholic church accept the Eucharistic and Apostolic Succession of the Eastern Orthodox Church?
Yup!!!
Does the Catholic church feel the need to re-baptize Protestants who were baptized as Protestants? (Nope) So do they recognize Protestant baptisms in the (Singular) Name of the Father, Son, and Spirit? (Yup!)
So, just as the Father recognizes the Son as divine, yet there's only one God...
...just as the Son recognizes the Holy Spirit as divine, yet there's only one God...
...the Catholic church recognizes Eastern Orthodox Eucharistic and Apostolic Succession, yet there's only one Church...
...the Catholic church recognizes Protestant baptisms, and there's only one church!
Just as God is 3-in-1, so is the church 3-in-1.
Bottom-line: You tried...but no...the Mormon church doesn't recognize anything Protestant, Catholic, or Eastern Orthodox...they re-baptize all of us three...all of us are "apostates" to them...meaning that to Mormons, we're just like what we are to Muslims, infidels...
That means that Mormonism -- in how it relates to the Christian sects -- is closer to Islam than any segment of Christianity!
Your comparison utterly failed...
Read the following; then believe it or don't - your choice...
John 3:18 (niv)
Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son.
You know, often when Satan the Accuser makes an accusation, he's oft' quite specific.
Can't you at least rise to the station of Satan when you accuse, and be specific? Or are you just going to rely upon generic rumblings, innuendo, and such...and continue to hint and hem and haw via some shotgun-like libelous and slanderous remark?
BlueMoose, as you raised kids, and needed to discipline one of them, did you ever try to dish out discipline for one of them minus telling them what they did?
If you did that, would that have been fair to them? Would they have wonder how they offended you?
You've gone out on a ledge this time, BM, and I won't let this one go: You've signaled to the world that I've lied and bore false witness vs. a few neighbors.
You now need to be very specific now in pinpointing exactly how -- in what way -- I bore false witness. If you can't be quite specific in your accusation, then may I suggest you yourself consider repenting over generically accusing me of lying?
If I do not get a response, I will repeat this post.
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.