| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 12/07/2008 11:35:59 AM PST by Admin Moderator, reason:
Enough already. |
Posted on 12/03/2008 8:59:31 AM PST by Publius804
An Ugly Attack on Mormons
The easiest targets for an organized campaign against religious freedom of conscience.
By Jonah Goldberg
Did you catch the political ad in which two Jews ring the doorbell of a nice working-class family? They barge in and rifle through the wife’s purse and then the man’s wallet for any cash. Cackling, they smash the daughter’s piggy bank and pinch every penny. “We need it for the Wall Street bailout!” they exclaim.
No? Maybe you saw the one with the two swarthy Muslims who knock on the door of a nice Jewish family and then blow themselves up?
No? Well, then surely you saw the TV ad in which two smarmy Mormon missionaries knock on the door of an attractive lesbian couple. “Hi, we’re from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints!” says the blond one with a toothy smile. “We’re here to take away your rights.” The Mormon zealots yank the couple’s wedding rings from their fingers and then tear up their marriage license.
As the thugs leave, one says to the other, “That was too easy.” His smirking comrade replies, “Yeah, what should we ban next?” The voice-over implores viewers: “Say no to a church taking over your government.”
Obviously, the first two ads are fictional because no one would dare run such anti-Semitic or anti-Muslim attacks.
The third ad, however, was real. It was broadcast throughout California on Election Day as part of the effort to rally opposition to Proposition 8, the initiative that successfully repealed the right to same-sex marriage in the state.
What was the reaction to the ad? Widespread condemnation? Scorn? Rebuke? Tepid criticism?
Nope.
The Los Angeles Times, a principled opponent of Proposition 8, ran an editorial lamenting that the “hard-hitting commercial” was too little, too late.
(Excerpt) Read more at article.nationalreview.com ...
Fproy!!??
Is that YOU?
Here's a hint: NEW THREAD. State your case.
Second - you avoided dealing with the accusation.
Dang!
Someone who believes that their Living Prophet® speaks for God wonders how OTHERS do?
Amazing!
NIV 1 Peter 4:11
If anyone speaks, he should do it as one speaking the very words of God. If anyone serves, he should do it with the strength God provides, so that in all things God may be praised through Jesus Christ. To him be the glory and the power for ever and ever. Amen.
KJV 1 Peter 4:11
If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God; if any man minister, let him do it as of the ability which God giveth: that God in all things may be glorified through Jesus Christ, to whom be praise and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.
KJV Philippians 2:5
Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:
I guess all the BIBLE verses that have been posted mean NOTHING to you.
I claim the OMM defense.
BElieve.
HMMmmm...
Did you dispute the fact that past LDS leaders WROTE such things?
That’s what I’m talking about Elsie. Do you detect a twinge of hatred in that chant?
Yes.
I’m glad you went back to the topic of the op and the ad that was placed by the pro-gay marriage group.
Because here’s the part that really gets to me...
” The voice-over implores viewers: “Say no to a church taking over your government.””
So what are they really saying here?
What did the mormons do that would cause a description of “taking over” the government.
Because they placed ads?
Because their members voted a certain way?
And when they advise to say “no” - is that their way of saying mormons should be deprived of 1st ammendment rights?
I have seen the term Lucifer mentioned in Isaiah 14:12 interpreted both as an obscure king of Babylon (from several sources in addition to the article you posted), and as the Devil.
The well respected Wycliffe Commentary takes what I believe to be the most widely accepted interpretation when it states:
Lucifer. The Roman name for the morning star (Heb. helel, "the bright one"), which speedily disappears before the far greater splendor of the sun. This title is addressed to the king of Babylon, not so much as a specific human individual (like Belshazzar, for example), but as a representative or embodiment of Satan, who is regarded as the power behind the king's throne. The titanic pride and ambition expressed in verses 13,14 are out of place on any lips but Satan's.
John MacArthur takes a similar position in his commentary:
Jesus' use of Satan's fall (Luke 10:18; cf. Rev. 12:8-10) has led many to see more than a reference to the king of Babylon. Just as the Lord addressed Satan in His words to the serpent (Gen. 3:14,15), this inspired dirge speaks to the king of Babylon and to the devil who energized him. See Ezek. 28:12-17 for similar language to the king of Tyre and Satan behind him.
This also appears to be the interpretation used in 1842 when Joseph Smith added the pay lay ale chant to the Masonic rites as part of the Mormon Temple Ceremony. In fact, my brief search could reveal no reference to the "king of Babylon" theory older than the 20th century. (Perhaps you can find an earlier instance).
In any case, the following are not in dispute:
In my mind, a more interesting question concerns Smith's motivation for including the pay lay ale chant. Again, we are left with two alternatives:
As you may recall from my earlier post, citing LDS sources, Smith supposedly instructed his followers to chant in a charismatic language which he called Adamic (so-named because it was purportedly used in the Garden of Eden). And recall from the same LDS sources, the term pale lay ale supposedly means, Oh God, hear the words of my mouth.
Ever hear of “hate the sin, love the sinner”? I hate the sin of homosexuality. Period.
Our role isn't to glorify ourselves and make us look good as future gods. Grace empowers us to good works. Faith is the root; works are the fruit. Works are a by-product of our relationship with Heavenly Father & the Son – they are not the source of it!
You said "persecuted"...calling you out on your hyperbole and prevarications is not "persecution". Whine on.
“Ever hear of “hate the sin, love the sinner”?”
No need to be condescending - of course I have.
You know what else I hate?
Vulgarity. Violence. Temper tantrums.Hatred.
Untold millions of Christians fight FOR the Church of God. Many fight AGAINST the Church of Joseph Smith. The mormon claim to being THE "Church of God" is as specious as their claim to be "Christian".
But continue on with this declaration to be the "Church of God"....It makes SO many friends for you among Christians.
Can we be that far away from such a battle here? I think not. And unless we band together, this is a battle we may lose.
catholic adoption agencies have already lost.
No Elsie, the rest of the time they’re just malinformed & disingenuous as stated.
Condescending??...I quote YOUR comment to me!
"Go ahead and have pity for the “f you!” crowd along with all their hatred, profanity, and vulgarity."
The government has YET to take away the right of citizens to be profane and vulgar, much to the dismay of some.
I simply don't understand the mind-set that believed the gay community would just quietly fade away and accept defeat. OR that they should! I abhor censorship of free speech...it has been attempted against my FRiends and myself many times on FR. As to "hatred"....I mentioned before some of the virulent hatred posted against gays here. I suppose you would censor THAT, too?
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.