Posted on 01/22/2008 1:19:28 PM PST by VegasBaby
Governor Mitt Romney On Fred Thompson Withdrawing His Candidacy
You can throw the term “cult” around all you want but it doesn’t make it so. And I’d take Romney’s Mormonism over Hoover and Nixon’s Quakerism any day of the week.
You said — “You can throw the term “cult” around all you want but it doesn’t make it so. And I’d take Romney’s Mormonism over Hoover and Nixon’s Quakerism any day of the week.”
It’s a standard definition of the Christian community and its theology. It’s not something made up by me. In short, it means any group that does not fit the core essence of Christianity from the basic, historic and foundational teachings and doctrines.
It’s no more sinister than that, and shouldn’t be mistaken (in its definition) for something akin to a “Jim Jones cult” (as some people use it, in a “secular sense”). It’s strictly a theological definition and construct within the Christian community, in order to know and identify which groups meet the core essence of Christianity and which groups do not.
And, of course, no matter what groups (themselves) “wish” to be “included” within the definition of “Christianity” — it is the Christian group, itself, which defines what it means to be “Christian” and what those teachings and doctrines are. It’s not some “outsider group” who gets to define that meaning. LOL!
That’s why I say you won’t find a single Christian seminary in the country which will ever include Mormon teachings and doctrines as matching anything of Christian teaching and theology and its doctrines. That’s pretty plain by a comparison of the one to the other (i.e., Mormon teachings to Christian teachings).
And that’s how it is called a cult...
Regards,
Star Traveler
Moderates want to compromise their way to socialism? I say jump in u sissies and get what yer askin for!
The following replies came forth: From: torchthemummy All-or-nothing means you generally end up with nothing - politically speaking.
From: USS Alaska A very mature approach. That's one of the things about democracy, even truly stupid people are allowed to vote. Use these to cut off your nose.
From: Young Scholar You're a childish person.
From: John D Why would anyone ask a moveon.org plant?
From: papasmurf ROFLMAO!
To all of which I reply: My approach may be temporarily damaging to myself but it is necessary to leave the battlefield to the enemy in order to regroup and re-arm our forces. I believe that after 4 years of Hillary! the "Republicans" who constantly push RINOs and Moderates on us will see the light and we will once again get control of congress, remember the Republican Revolution? By the end of her first term we, the entire country, especially those of us who WILL NOT SETTLE, and our party will seek out and find capable conservatives who are what they say they are.
Romney is NOT conservative, nor is Giuliani and I will vote for neither. McCrazy and Huckaliar aren't even worthy of consideration. None of these candidates will govern very different from Hillary. I won't be placated with promises of Judges any more, after all I have no confidence any of the remaining candidate WILL appoint conservative Judges. Possible courses of action are do nothing, sit it out, OR give a little push to Hillary for the long term good of conservatism....Revolt. And I may do just that. All of you who won't consider it at all, are part of the problem, GOP back-stabbing. That is exactly what it is, conservatives have been pushed aside. I don't know if I will be physically able to chalk a vote for a Clinton, but I will NOT support RINOs any more. Write in is possible. REVOLT! Conservatives, REVOLT! 4 years is much shorter than the long-slow slide to socialism we are currently on. That's the way I see it.
My apologies I intended to ping you all to 214.
Ack! 283
Write in (or Constitution Party or whatever) I can respect, since it shows the Republicans what they need to do to earn your vote. A vote for Hillary, however, tells the Republicans nothing—except, perhaps, that they should move left—and helps the Democrats accomplish who knows how many things that may never be reversed (even Reagan accomplished very little in the way of eliminating programs initiated by his liberal predecessors).
You are correct. The LDS church is a cult in the same sense that the Watchtower group is. The essentials of the faith cannot be compromised.
Not that I’m basing my political support or lack thereof on that. My problem with Romney is his Massachusetts liberalism.
“It is better to keep ones mouth shut and let others think you are stupid, than to open it and remove all doubt.”
Yes, I heartilly agree....you should stop posting because you don’t know or write the truth and you are going to look foolish in the long term for attempting to excuse Romney’s mormonism has insignificant.
Well, with as much help as the evangelicals have been this election, giving us the rise of the Huckster and all, I hope you’ll excuse me for not exactly counting on their judgement of what a true conservative is. Right now, I’m about ready to cause the next evangelical Huckabot I meet to have a severe need for new dentures.
You said — “Not that I’m basing my political support or lack thereof on that. My problem with Romney is his Massachusetts liberalism.”
Yes, I understand that, and that’s the case for many people, too. I know that. And, that’s fine for them. I don’t complain if they handle their politics that way.
I just wanted to make clear to people, in general, that the Mormon teaching and doctrines are *definitely* not the same as the basic, historic and foundational Christian doctrines — even though the Mormon Church has launched a long-term “PR campaign” trying to fool a lot of people into thinking that they are actually teaching Christianity.
They actually are not, and the members of that church know that, too — despite their protestations that they “are Christian”. They know that their teachings and doctrines don’t match basic, historic and foundational Christianity. They simply don’t want to admit it to the public.
However, you can very easily “get the clue” to that fact, when the Mormons go on to say that *they* have the “restored faith” (of the Christian church, supposedly) and that what Christians actually believe (today) is corrupted and “not the true Christianity”. Just by saying that, they’re pretty well admitting to the fact that they don’t teach the same doctrines as the Christian church. They go on to say that Christians of today are “teaching the doctrines of man” as opposed to their (supposedly) “pure doctrines” and their “modern-day prophets” who still give continuing “revelations” (authoritative revelations, supposedly) from God — while Christians say that the Bible is the full and complete Word of God (and that there are no further revelations for the Bible, as the canon of Scripture. The Mormons go on to bring forth their supposed “authoritative scriptures” (supposedly from a “prophet” — Joseph Smith) who is supposed to have received it from an angel.
It goes on and on and on — and the more the Mormons say (and “open their mouths”) the more they contradict the fact that they are *not teaching Christianity* but the radically different teachings and doctrines of their particular “brand of religion”.
They speak out of both sides of their mouths at the same time, saying “We are Christians” and then saying, “But, we have the ‘restored and true Gospel’, as the Christians of today, don’t”. LOL!
It’s amazing that they can say, “We’re really Christians” even though we teach something radically different and totally unrecognizable as Christianity. I mean, *don’t they get it*??!! It’s totally different. That’s why they’re classified as a “non-Christian cult group” — according to the definition of all current-day Christian groups.
They’re obviously not being honest with the whole thing.
AND, if they’re not being honest (obviously so...) about their teachings and doctrines, and Romney “buys into that dishonesty” in terms of his religion, then why do I want a President who cannot even be honest about his faith and beliefs (as it’s taught by the Mormon church) and still maintain that “they’re teaching Christian doctrines”. I simply don’t want a President who can’t be honest enough to admit that they’re not teaching basic, historic and foundational Christianity. PLUS, the fact that I don’t want a President who is not a Christian.
And so, yes, for those people who don’t want to go into the religious aspects of the matter of the Mormon Church being a “non-Christian cult group” — yes, there’s ample information about how liberal Romney is, enough so to make Hillary look like a conservative, next to him... LOL!
I saw someone who posted this link (here on Free Republic). It’s very interesting. It’s called “The Mitt Romney Deception”...
http://massresistance.org/docs/marriage/romney/record/
And then, someone else here posted another website which supposedly contradicted these things (as posted in the above website).
When I saw the address of that other website, I just about fell out of my chair, laughing my head off... LOL!
It was called something like “Evangelicals for Mitt” — the “translation” meaning — “Evangelicals for a non-Christian cult-group-member”... yeah..., like “really” — a bunch of so-called “Evangelicals” (think about *who* they are, in terms of their “name”) — are going to be *for* a “non-Christian cult-group-member”. That’s a real “you’ve got to be kidding” moment. That’s the *very opposite* of what Evangelicals stand for — and they are going to be “for” Romney.... Those “fools” (who put together that website) must think the “casual person on the street” is a downright idiot... LOL!
Regards,
Star Traveler
Keep repeating it enough, maybe someone will buy it. Not here. Not me.
You’re really sticking with the GOP establishment? We’ll have to part ways here. In the recent absence of true conservatism, my lurking libertarianism has reared it’s head, so I’m somewhat reluctantly supporting Ron Paul.
They’re the simple facts of the matter that *anyone* can verify — very easily — totally on their own, without too much problem.
The only person who is going to believe your denials of this fact (of the Mormons teaching something totally different from basic, historic and foundational Christianity) is the one who is too lazy to even look up the abundant information to that fact.
Anyone who puts forth the least amount of effort, getting the facts about this — will easily find out that you’re trying to fool everyone, just like a lot of Mormons do, in trying to maintain that they’re “teaching Christian doctrines” (while out of the other side of their mouths, they say they have “restored” the true teachings of Christianity, which they maintain is not being taught today... LOL... [can you say that something is black and yet, white, at the same time... ??]).
So, that’s okay, I already know the truth of the matter and I know that anyone else who is interested will know — on their own — too.
Regards,
Star Traveler
Ron Paul is not a “libertarian” he is a kook fringe candidate who has no hope of being elected. He has no business experience, and if you had followed the “investment” advice that he has peddled since the 1970’s you would be ahead less than the rate of inflation. Now if you had followed Romney’s lead, you would be a millionaire.
Now if you really want to be a millionaire by following Ron Paul’s advice, follow his foreign policy. The only problem is that the millions would be the dead bodies of our friends across the Globe.
Even if I am dead wrong in my assessment of his policies foreign and domestic, Ron Paul has no constituency in the Congress, the Executive or the Judicial branches from which to govern. Being President is about governing, and you cannot do that alone.
I Like It! I Like It!
Would definitely put Fla. in the Republican Column!
If they put up Clinton we should put up another Bush.
He advocates a formal war declaration rather than the Carroll Quigley inspired ‘nation building’ we have today. I agree. (I’m nervous about a wholesale, instant pullout from Iraq, admittedly- you have to extract with wisdom, and with victory.)
As for his economics, he advocates a return to Constitutional money and policy, spending less than you make, and a rejection of debt-based consumerism as an economic structure. I agree.
Abolishing: the Dept of Education- check.
the Dept of energy- check.
the Federal Reserve- check.
Social Security, by way of an opt-out- check.
Medicare, by way of same- check.
taxes on estates, capital gains, interest income, and dividends— check.
the income tax and the IRS- CHECK!!!!
EXTREMELY pro-life, EXTREMELY pro-2nd Amendment, Laizzes faire capitalism, government deregulation, anti-globalism, introducing gold and silver as competitive currencies with the dollar.
Since Hunter and Thompson are gone now, I just have way too much in common with Ron Paul to go with anyone else. If you want to go along with the latest Bush-like big government advocate, that’s your choice. I’ll stick to the same beliefs that I held 20 years ago.
But we can still be friends. :)
But as I say, no matter how many times you keep saying up is down, it doesn't make it so.
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.