Romney says he's religious, but won't discuss Mormon doctrine

Gov. Mitt Romney says he would be willing to talk about his Mormon religion in broad terms should he run for president but would shy away from debating specific beliefs.

"I think initially some people would say, `Gosh, I don't know much about your faith. Tell me about it.' And I'd probably outline the fundamentals: I'm a religious person, I believe that Jesus Christ is my savior," Romney said during an appearance on PBS's "The Charlie Rose Show." "But then as you get into the details of doctrines, I'd probably say, 'Look, time out.'"

Among other things, Mormons believed in polygamy until 1890 and banned blacks from the priesthood until 1978. They also maintain temples open only to members where rites such as vicarious baptisms for the dead are performed.

Romney also reiterated on the show, which aired Monday, that he believes the question of whether to outlaw abortion should be left up to individual states. It was a nuanced view that allows him to maintain his anti-abortion views while leaving intact Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court ruling allowing abortion.

Man your post is long. Not sure I could adequately reply to it.

You are correct in citing some Doctrinal Differences between members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints and other Christians. We are Christian who believe in the Savior but have some differences with some of teh Post Apostolic Creeds. A good book that explains the differences between Mormons and other Christians is written by a Mormon and Evangelical.

How Wide the Divide?: A Mormon & an Evangelical in Conversation by Craig L. Blomberg, Stephen E. Robinson.

Description: Mormons and Evangelicals don't often get along very well. They often set about trying to convert one another, considering the faith the other holds as defective in some critical way. Unfortunately, much of what they say about one another simply isn't true. False stereotypes on both sides prevent genuine communication. Having discovered this sad state of affairs, Craig Blomberg, a commited Evangelical scholar, and Stephen Robinson, a commited Mormon scholar, set out to listen to one another and to ferret out the agreements and disagreements between them. In the conversation that develops, you will read what each believes about key theological issues- (1) the nature and bounds of Scripture, (2) the nature of God and Deification, (3) the person of Christ and the Trinity, and (4) the essentials of salvation-and see how they interact with one another. What they agree on may suprise you. In the end, however, you can judge for yourself just how wide the divide between them is.

This book helped me understand where some of my Evangelical friends were coming from better. I recommend it to any one really interested in this type of debate here on this thread.

I don't claim any external or archeiological evidence for my belief in teh Book of Mormon. Any member who tries to "prove" it by archeology IMO misses the point about it as Holy Writ. I believe in the Bible in the same way. A few years ago "scientists" claimed to have discovered archeological remains of the Ark on Mt. Ararat. Whether the boat was the ark or not would be interesting to me but one way or the other if it was or wasn't it wouldn't affect my religious bleief and faith in the story of Noah and that it literally happened.

If you turn to archeology your faith might be shaken by such "recent scientific discoveries" as the book of Judas. If Judas really did feel guilty wouldn't it make sens his family or he had the rationalized version of events? ie Jesus made me do it. But anyway whether Judas wrote something or not doesn't matter to my faith in the Bible as the word of God.

I don't have the time to adequately respond to the article you posted. So I will breifly respond to a few points.

It is apparent that when young Joseph was plagiarizing the Bible that he did not look very closely at the book of Hebrews.

The Book of Mormon porphets who wrote the Book of Mormon claimed to have the writings of the prophets up until the time of Isaiah. They had the creation story and copies of the scriptures.

You wrote about some of Joseph's prophecies remaining unfulfilled.

Many Prophecies are "if... then..." Like Moses being told to go to the Promised land. The Israelites were unfaithful so they did not get to the promised land. Some are "Repent.. or be destroyed" If the group or person doesn't repent they will be destroyed. But if they do repent they are not. Neither outcome invalidates the original prophecy. This is what I believe about Joseph Smith's prophecies. Some were conditional some were not. if it didn't come true it was obviously conditional. Or another option I suppose is that we don't always fully understand the prophecy. Like when the Lord told his Apostles he would come again (in the second coming). Some thought they would be around to see it. He corrected them saying it would be later. Some of Isaiah's prophesies refer to Christ's first coming and some his Second Coming. Some of his prophecies are types of both. The people in his day didn't fully understand them. I don't claim to know the meaning of all of Joseph Smith's prophecies. I do claim that I beleive he was a prophet.

My post is getting long. Hope I could answer some of what you posted.

By the way any relation to William Wallace of "Braveheart"? I had ancestors in the Battle of Bannokburn where Robert the Bruce won Scotland her Indpendance. Its the last Battle scene in Braveheart. (Will didn't make it to that battle) Technically i'm not a Scottish Clan member. Apparently many of the Peasents in Scotland didn't actually belong to one of the clans. We lived closest to Clan Ranald MacDonald. But were sorry broke blokes. Plus I have more English ancestry than Scottish. Who knows maybe some of my English blood was on the losing end of the stick that day.

Anyway sorry for the off subject William Wallace is one of my heros. Kudos for the screen name.

I am Mormon and don't know much about the Mason's rituals. George Washington and many of the Founding Fathers were Masons including most of the signers of the Declaration of Independance.

As for Jospeh Smith being a Mason he did attend their meetings. When he was killed some beleive his last statement was to Masons in the mob who killed him.

God reveals things to his prophets in many different ways. To Moses he spoke in the burning Bush. Later he appeared in a pillar of Fire. Another example is in In Exodus 33: 11 And the LORD spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend•.

Here is an interesting one though. He uses Jethro's wisdom to guide the prophet. In other words he utilized the knowledge of a man already on Earth. God could have appeared to Moses and said "do it this way" But he chose to let Jethro do a normal Father in law advice type thing.

Exodus 18:13-27 And it came to pass on the morrow, that Moses sat to judge• the people: and the people stood by Moses from the morning unto the evening. 14 And when Moses’ father in law saw all that he did to the people, he said, What is this thing that thou doest to the people? why sittest thou thyself alone, and all the people stand by thee from morning unto even? 15 And Moses said unto his father in law, Because the people come unto me to enquire• of God: 16 When they have a matter•, they come unto me; and I judge between one and another, and I do make them know the statutes of God, and his laws. 17 And Moses’ father in law said unto him, The thing that thou doest is not good. 18 Thou wilt surely wear away, both thou, and this people that is with thee: for this thing is too• heavy for thee; thou art not able to perform it thyself alone. 19 Hearken now unto my voice, I will give thee counsel, and God shall be with thee: Be• thou for the people to God-ward•, that thou mayest bring the causes unto God: 20 And thou shalt teach• them ordinances• and claws, and shalt shew them the way• wherein they must ewalk, and the work that they must do. 21 Moreover thou shalt provide out of all the people able• men, such as fear• God, men• of truth, hating covetousness•; and place such over them, to be rulers of thousands, and rulers of hundreds•, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens: 22 And let them judge the people at all seasons: and it shall be, that every great matter they shall bring unto thee, but every small matter they shall judge: so shall it be easier for thyself, and they shall bear the bburden with thee. 23 If thou shalt do this thing, and God command thee so, then thou shalt be able to endure, and all this people shall also go to their place in peace. 24 So Moses hearkened to the voice of his father in law, and did all that he had said. 25 And Moses chose able men out of all Israel, and made them aheads over the people, rulers of thousands, rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens. 26 And they judged the people at all seasons: the hard causes they brought unto Moses, but every small matter they judged themselves. 27 ¶ And Moses let his father in law depart; and he went his way into his own land.

Moses was acting as Judge for the Israelites. He was wearing himself out waiting on the people all day long to hear their complaints. His father in Law Jethro looked at the situation and being a wise man said, hey Moses you can't do this. Go talk to God about it and if he says its OK appoint people to help you. Moses approached God and God had him appoint rulers over the people.

Anyway what's the point I am getting at in this? God uses different means to teach his Prophet. in the case of Jospeh Smith and the Masons. (again I am not a Mason) AS I understand it Mason's claim they have been organized since the building of the temple of Solomon and their rituals relate to the ordinances conducted in the Temple of Solomon. In the Latter days Temple worship was lost. There were temples in the time of the OT and Jesus but none today. So in order to reinstitute his Temples, God could have sent an angel to reveal the Temple ordinances and covenants to Joseph Smith. However if there was a form of the ordinance on the earth he could also have said Go look over here for a type of what I want to reveal to you. Some of the details are different but here's the general thing.

If it is true that Masons have been practicing since the time of teh Temple Solomon, that Joseph Smith has something similar to the Temple of Solomon in modern temples would strengthen his position IMO.

You are misquoting Jacob 2 in the Book of Mormon to prove your point that polygamy is not condoned by Mormons own scripture.

The parts you quoted are correct but you left out verse 30 Where the Lord gives the one reason he would command it of his people.

Jacob 2:30 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.

In other words normally the Lord does not condone polygamy, unless he commands it. The Lord normally says "thou shalt not kill" but in the OT he commanded it plenty of times. In other words Thou Shalt not kill unless I expressly command you to do it.

Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints practiced polygamy because they believe they were commanded to by God. When God told them to discontinue the practice they did.

You may disagree with polygamy or disagree that God told Mormons to practice it and I will respect your difference of belief over the issue. Every Christian is entitled to worship Jesus in the best way they know how and believe. But to misquote the Book of Mormon misrepresents our belief on the matter.

Colorcountry, Here is a post I wrote in an earlier thread about the Journal of Dsicourses. (I post again in a second about the substance of what you posted)

The Journal of Discourses is not Doctrine or accepted Canon of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. A little history of the JD shows why. (simplified and summarized by me)

A member of the Church attended various meetings and conferences of the Church, in his own version of shorthand he copied down the sermons. Some of the talks he did not write at the time but up to a few weeks later as he best remembered them. He did this over a period of approximately 25 years. He decided that all this material should be published. So he did publish the material privately for which he recieved money (profits). To do so he had to reconstruct what he meant by his shorthand from the past 25 years. This man was not called by the church or held any position as recorder or historian. What he wrote is very valuable material for historians and people interested in the what early apostles and prophest "probably" said. It does provide a great window into some early sermons of early church leaders it is clearly not accepted as Canon of the Church.

I have personally had non Mormons tell me that I believe the "Adam-God Theory" and "Blood Atonement" by using quotes from the Journal of Discourses. They are both false principles. (Though I agree with the idea that a murderer's blood should be spilt. It just doesn't have any effect on his consequence in the afterlife.

God is unchangeable. What he commands us changes from time to time though. That in no way affects his Divinity. The Law of Moses is a simple illustration of this. He commanded the Law of Sacrifice of Animals. When Jesus came the Law was fulfilled in Him. he no longer required the Sacrificing of Animals. God didn't change but what he commanded us to do did. He has tuaght us Thou Shalt not kill. But then he commanded the Israelites to kill the Cananites. It doesn;t mean God is contradictory. But that he is Condescending to Man in their situation.

Mormons believe it was the same with polygamy. He normally does not require it. but he specifically required it for a time. Then he discontinued it.

I have heard various reasons why put forward in discussions with other Mormons about why polygamy was practiced and why it was then discontinued. Some of the explanations sounded better than others. But they were all just that, explanations. I don't claim to know why God commanded it. I have some interesting ideas. But for me it is a matter of faith. I have Faith in God that he commanded it at that time. Most Mormons that try to explain exactly why are usually just giving conjecture.

Ok, for real this time I will try to get at the substance of the quotes you gave. (Without the more sly the JD are not recognized doctrine argument). But of course as you may have noted something that happens when you debate with Mormons they can't claim to speak for the Church. (Just as the Pope can talk for the whole Catholic church as compared to a lay member). If you really want the true answer you'll have to hear it from the current prophet. But we both know that isn't going to happen at least not on a personal basis.

So anyway, I would guess the quotes are accurate. So how would one explain that he Prophets and Apostles talk with such "finality" on the subject about something which later changes?

(See post #224 How God reveals his will to Moses through Jethro.)

Prophets who are mortals don't understand everything. When God revealed polygamy the prophets understood it as doctrine that would stand forever. They did not forsee every detail that would unfold in the Federal war with the Mormons out west. they tried their best to follow the commandment. When the Govt. siezed all the property of the Church and gave them an ultimatum to give up polygamy in accordance with the newly passed law of the Land the Church had two choices. Follow the law, which was also a commandment, or continue polygamy and cease to exist as a Church for all intents and purposes. (Thanks Feds). The prophet took the dilemma to God. God said that he recognized the sacrifice of the Saints and no longer required polygamy.

God gave Adam and Eve the command in Genesis to not partake of the fruit and also to multiply and replenish the Earth. They couldn't do both at once.

You could say the same thing about the Commandment to not kill unless of course God commands you to do it as he did with the Israelites and Cananites.

Now as for polygamy existing in Heaven. You may find it hard to corner a Mormon about it but yes Mormons believe that Polygamy can exist in Heaven. Some Mormons get worried about the Public Relations factor but both you and I know this is pretty much what is beleived about the matter. My Father is sealed to my mother. They married years ago in the Salt Lake Temple. She passed away. My father has since remarried my step mom and been sealed in the Temple to her. When he dies he will be sealed (married) to both women.

This view that plural marraige can exist in Heaven helps explain some of the quotes you listed.

Now in no way am I advocating Polygamy. If it is practiced today in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints the offender is excommunicated.

It would be like me today trying to kill Cananites. Even though God commanded it at one time would not justify me doing it today. Thou Shalt not kill is still in effect for me unless God specifically commands otherwise.

(Though I am very pleased to hear on another thread about Zarqawi's fate)

One of my favorite Bible scriptures is in Acts 7:55-56. (Mostly because Saul was there holding the coats of those that stoned the disciple Stephen. He later repented and converted and became Paul. Hey, if a lawyer who condemend the early Saints to death can be Redeemed by Jesus then maybe I have a chance.)

But anyway It helps illustrate my belief about the nature of the Godhead. The Son of Man is standing on the right hand of God.

Acts 7:55-60 55 But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus• standing on the fright• hand of God, 56 And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened•, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God. 57 Then they cried out with a loud voice, and stopped their ears, and ran upon him with one accord, 58 And cast him out of the city, and stoned him: and the witnesses laid down their clothes• at a young• man’s feet, whose name was Saul. 59 And they stoned Stephen, calling• upon God•, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit. 60 And he kneeled down, and cried• with a loud voice, Lord•, lay not this sin to their charge•. And when he had said this, he fell asleep.

Similarly when Jesus is baptised he prays to His Father. We believe Jesus is literally praying to his Father.

Of course the Bible and Book of Mormon have numerous scriptures that say God and Jesus are one. A good one to explain what this oneness means is when Jesus offers the great intercessory prayer in John 17.

John 17:11,20-26 11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the aworld, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be bone, as we are. 20 Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe• on me through their word; 21 That they all may be one•; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be cone• in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. 22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be aone•, even as we are bone•: 23 I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast bloved them, as thou hast loved me. 24 Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world. 25 O righteous Father, the world hath not known thee: but I have known thee, and these have known that thou hast sent me. 26 And I have declared unto them thy name, and will declare it: that the love wherewith thou hast loved me may be in them, and I in them.

Through Jesus Christ his apostles could be one "as we are" we being he and God.

Now I understand that most Christians believe the Trinity differently. That is fine by me. But I think the this position is a legitimate one to also take. The Bible and Book of Mormon scriptures are good but it can still some down to what Joseph Smith saw as you cited. Did Joseph Smith see God and Jesus standing on His right hand or not? I beleive he did.

Sometimes non Mormons try to insinuate that because Jesus is literally seperate from God this diminishes his perfectness or "Godliness". In other words they try to say the Jesus Christ Mormons belive in is not Divine. This misrepresents my Faith. Jesus is the Son of God, the Savior the Messiah who is perfect. He is literally Perfect. Jesus in being the only begotten of God in no way dimishes God or the omnipotence of God nor the mission of the perfect Messiah.

My doctrinal understanding of the Nature of God and Jesus' realtionship is based on faith that they appeared to Joseph Smith.

Joseph Smith himself did not understand the distinction until they appeared to him. His family was familiar with the "typical" Christian teachings of the 1800's about the Trinity. Yet he could not deny what he saw.

So either Jospeh Smith is a liar or a prophet (or somewhere in between, I suppose). I beleive he is a true prophet. I respect your belief if you feel differently about the matter.

Okay, for real this time. The Journal of Discourses was considered doctrine by the LDS. Here is the text of a letter from the First Presidency of the Church: (note - nothing here is said about errors)

Great Salt Lake City, Utah Territory, June 1, 1853,

Elder Samuel W. Richards, and the Saints abroad.

Dear Brethren-It is well known to many of you, that Elder George D. Watt, by our counsel, spent much time in the midst of poverty and hardships to acquire the art of reporting in Phonography, which he has faithfully and fully accomplished; and he has been reporting the public Sermons, Discourses, Lectures, &c., delivered by the Presidency, the Twelve, and others in this city, for nearly two years, almost without fee or reward. Elder Watt now proposes to publish a Journal of these Reports, in England, for the benefit of the Saints at large, and to obtain means to enable him to sustain his highly useful position of Reporter. You will perceive at once that this will be a work of mutual benefit, and we cheerfully and warmly request your co-operation in the purchase and sale of the above-named Journal, and wish all the profits arising therefrom to be under control of Elder Watt.

Brigham Young, Heber C. Kimball, Willard Richards,

First Presidency of

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

And there is this....

Brigham Young also said that when his sermons were corrected, they were scripture (Journal of Discourses, vol. 13, p.95). He did nothing to correct or amend this statement over the ensuing 25 years before his death in 1877. Much to the contrary, on June 18, 1873 the Deseret News printed another of his sermons in which he stated:

"How much unbelief exists in the minds of the Latter-day Saints in regard to one particular doctrine which I have revealed to them, and which God revealed to me...namely that Adam is our Father and God...Our Father Adam is the man who stands at the gate and holds the keys to everlasting life and salvation to all his children who have or ever will come upon the earth" (Brigham Young, Deseret News, June 18, 1873).

President Young felt strongly about criticism he received from others in the LDS Church, notably Orson Pratt, about this doctrine: "Now, let all who may hear these doctrines, pause before they make light of them, or treat them with indifference, for they will prove their salvation or damnation" (Journal of Discourses, vol.1, p.50-51).

F.D. Richards, a prominent Mormon confirms this was doctrine: "Concerning the doctrine that Adam is our Father and God...the prophet and Apostle Brigham has declared it, and that is the word of the Lord" (Millenial Star, August 26, 1854, vol.16, p.534).

Hosea Stout confirms this: "Another meeting this evening. President B. Young taught that Adam was the Father of Jesus and the Only God to us" (Diary of Hosea Stout, April 9, 1852, vol. 2, p.435).

Other leaders taught it, including George Q. Cannon: "Jesus Christ is Jehovah...Adam is his Father and our God" (Diary of Abraham H. Cannon, June 23, 1889, vol.11, p.39).

Mormon A.F. McDonald commented: "The doctrine preached by [President] Young for a few years back wherein he says that Adam is our God---the God we worship--- most of the people believe it...if the President makes a statement it is not our prerogative to dispute it...when I first heard the doctrine of Adam being our Father and God, I was favorably impressed---enjoyed and hailed it as a new Revelation" (Minutes of the School of Prophets, Provo, UT, 1868-1871, p.38-39).

Mormon Edward W. Tullidge wrote: "Adam is our Father and God. He is the God of the Earth. So says Brigham Young" and "When Brigham Young proclaimed to the nations that Adam was our Father and God, and Eve, his partner, the Mother of a world---both in a mortal and celestial sense---he made the most important revelation ever oracled to the race since the days of Adam himself" (The Women of Mormondom, p.79,179,196-197, 1877).

John Nuttal records: "Prest Young was filled with the spirit of God & revelation & said...Father Adam's oldest son (Jesus the Savior) who is the heir of the family is Father Adam's first begotten in the spirit world" (Wednesday Feb. 7, 1877, Journal of John Nuttal, vol.1, p.18-21).

Most recent Mormon leaders deny that Brigham Young taught this doctrine, claim it was erroneously transcribed, or denounce it as false. However, because Young's statements can be extremely well documented, this undermines the credibility of one or both parties. Who is wrong, the Prophet then or the Prophet now....your salvation depends upon your answer....think very carefully?

Render unto Ceaser. Jesus understood submitting to governments of the day. it is partly why he told the Saints that if a soldier required them to go with them a mile (to carry their armor as the law required) that they should go with them twain. Some of the Jews of the time were upset that he didn't come to politically overthrow the governemnt.

When the Church was in contradiction to the Law of the Land the Lord told them to follow the law of the Land.

Celestal Marraige can be polygamous if it was entered into when it was required of by God. Otherwise it is not. I am married in the Temple which if I am faithful will be someday a "Celestial" marraige. but I have only one wife. If I had another I would be excommunicated from the Church.

You are correct that Emma did have some difficulty with it. There is a bigraphy written about her that discusses the matter. I can't remember the name though. But did she submit to the Lord in the matter? (Sariah in the Bible had the same conundrum). I think she did. After Joseph Smith was murdered she stayed in Nauvoo and did not emigrate to Utah. Some take this as a sign she lost faith. My personal take on it was this, Mobs had killed some of her children and kicked her out of her home at gunpoint on more than one occasion. She loved Joseph. When he was murdered she didn't have the heart to go on. I won't be the judge of her. I haven't had to sacrifice my children and spouse.

You are not giving the full quote. You claim that the Joseph Smith prophecy was not conditional. Yet you show a clip of only half a sentence to support your statement.

Your cut shows only..

"that the Son of Man will not come in the heavens till I am 85 years old, 48 years hence or about 1890."

and ask

J Smith didn't live to be 85 did he?

Here is the quote "unclipped" from his diary.

My son, if thou livest til thou art 85 years of age, thou shalt see the face of the son of man.--I was left to draw my own conclusions concerning this & I took the liberty to conclude that if I did live til that time he would make his appearance.--but I do not say whether he will make his appearance or I shall go where he is.--

And also from a Sermon delivered at the General Conference of the Church at Nauvoo, Ill. on Saturday April 6, 1843 Source Franklin D. Richards

"Joseph said when he was asking to know of the time of Christs second Coming he obtained for answer my son if thou shalt live untill thou art Eighty five year old thou shalt see the son of man on Earth. Joseph was born in Sharon Windsor County Vermont Dec 23 1805. He is therefore now 37 years old last Dec which leaves 48 years yet to transpire untill the tim [time] of Promise that Joseph should see Christ.

It is an If or conditional prophecy. He was killed by a mob and martyred for his beliefs.

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.