Posted on 04/22/2009 12:10:00 PM PDT by Colofornian
As the author points out, LDS' "scripture" specifically says "Presbyterian is untrue" -- something you don't find in reverse among revelations claimed by Christianity.
Harry Reid holds more power than Mitt Romney and yet his Mormonism has never been reported as a matter of public concern.
Its a lot easier to defend his Mormonism than his whacked out politics.
See, the problem was he asked which Protestant denomination was true. ;^D
(You haven't read any of FastCoyote's posts on some of these threads, then...he's from Nevada & could fill you in)
I just think it is a man crush thing with Hugh. Lawyers in love. Republican Metro’s. Policy wonks who can do socialism better. I imagine when together they giggle a lot.
Hugh Hewitt’s show sucks. But he’s a good guy.
Harry is a way better politician. That’s what happens when you relize politics is hardball and no place for faint-hearts, lollygaggers, hair combers and RINO nancy boys. Bwarny Fwank had more political stones than Mitt.
This may come as a shock, but Catholics think Baptists, Mormons, Lutherns and everyone else has it wrong. Lutherns think Baptists, Catholics, Mormons and everyone else has it wrong too. Why would the LDS faith be any different?
Why would ANY denomination say, “Well, we think we have everything right, and those (insert opposing denomination here) also have it right .... but gosh, please give us your tithing”. Episcapalians think key concepts in Christianity are ignored or wrongly interpreted by Protestants, and visa versa. The LDS believe that the bible is missing key components that were taught by Christ and practiced in the early church - but have been dropped or removed over time.
Mitt is running as a Conservative Republican. You can either vote for him, or you can chose not to. What does his faith have to do with anything? If anything, his faith is HARDER to follow than most others (no drinking, smoking, cheating, attend your meetings, pay 10% tithing, ect). Of all the ‘conservative’ candidates last election, he was the only one with one wife.
LOL...
Sounds about right.
Man crush...
A lot. This isn't a Mormon country. Mitt has said his Mormanism is integral, inseparable for him. So, he either compartimalizes his faith and is a total secular administrative manager, or he pulls from his minority faith and leads with a steady Mormon view. This fundamental conflict could, as I feel it does, explain Mitts inability to take and execute strong positions. It would of been better, and more honest of him if he went full out as Mormon President. He would of been honest, unconflicted. He's 60 now, too old to still have flip flopping struggle of who he is publicly.
It is not right to say doctrine doesn't matter at all. Take Islam, for instance. It would be dangerously naive to assume, as American civil religion does, that all religions are pretty much the same. It's true that most religions share core ethical teachings, but orthodox Islam also teaches unambiguously that there is to be no separation of religion and state, that non-Muslims are to live subservient under law to Muslims, and in some sects that Allah commands a jihad or "holy war" be waged against non-Muslim "infidels". To the extent that a Muslim wishes to preside over our pluralist liberal democracy, he will have had to break radically from his faith's fundamentals.
Liberals who insist that religion has no place at all in American politics have to account for the Christian roots of many social reforms. Consider for example the abolitionism and the civil rights movement. When faced with the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., and other black clergymen explicitly appealing to Christian scripture against Jim Crow, Southern segregationists groused that religion had no business in politics. You can't praise religion's role in political discourse only when it advances causes of which you approve or is practiced by constituencies blacks, say, that vote Democratic.
If God doesn't exist, then by what standard do we decide right from wrong? If a society recognizes no independent, transcendent guardian of the moral order, will it not, over time, lose its self-discipline and decline into barbarism? The eminent sociologist Philip Rieff, who was not a believer, said that man would either live in fear of God or would be condemned to live in fear of the evil in himself.
Mitt, himself, has placed his Mormon faith under scrutiny. In his famous speech on Mormonism, Mitt said that a person should not be rejected . . . because of his faith. His supporters say it is akin to rejecting a Barack Obama because he is black. But Obama was born black; Romney is a Mormon because he accepts the beliefs of the Mormon faith. This permits us, therefore, to make inferences about his judgment and character, good or bad.
Mitt has promised to fully obey Mormon teachings without hesitation and without question.
In his February 26, 1980 speech at BYU titled Fourteen Fundamentals in Following the Prophet, LDS President Ezra Taft Benson maintained the Mormon Church President spoke with inerrant authority on "any matter, temporal or spiritual " and was "not required to have any particular earthly training or credentials to speak on any subject or act on any matter at any time."Mitt either intended to honor his promises to follow another man's instructions, or he lied. In the case of the former, we are entitled to know where these directives lead, and in the alternative, we should be concerned about Mitt's honesty.As a Temple Mormon, Mormon Bishop and Stake President, Mitt has sworn among other things, he recognizes the President of the LDS Church as a "prophet, seer and revelator," and will "obey the rules, laws, and commandments of the gospel" as proclaimed by Mormon Prophets.
Mitt made these solemn vows with the understanding they effect "time and all eternity."
For these reasons, among others, I assert Mitt’s beliefs are indeed a legitimate issue for determining his qualifications for elected public office.
Only because those pesky Feds put an end to polygamy.....
: )
TO criticize Romney, one should look at his politics and history, not his religion.
This author seems to say that no Christian should ever vote for any Mormon. I reject that.
>> This may come as a shock, but Catholics think Baptists, Mormons, Lutherns and everyone else has it wrong. Lutherns think Baptists, Catholics, Mormons and everyone else has it wrong too. Why would the LDS faith be any different?
I think you may be surprised. There is a difference between doctrinal distinctions (which exist in multitude between the various Christian denominations), and saying a religion or denomination is “wrong”.
As a Baptist, we acknowledge that we are not the sole path to Salvation. We believe that there are doctrinal differences between our denomination and that of Methodism, Lutheranism, and even Catholicism ... but that these differences are debatable, and certainly do not make other denominations “wrong” in the larger sense (i.e. “wrong” with regard to the path to Salvation).
It appears that LDS is referring to Christianity as “wrong” in the same respect as we would refer to Muslims or Hindus — not as we would refer to other Christian denominations.
SnakeDoc
Of all the ‘conservative’ candidates last election, he was the only one with one wife.
_______________________________________
The rest practiced polygamy ????
Let’s look at your statement realistically...
“Of all the liberal candidates for the Republican ticket last election, (Romney) was the only one with one wife.”
For now...
But in the case of a recinding of the 1890 ordinance from Woodfuff...
Or Romney’s final trip to the mormon “celestial kingdom” (top bunk)..
Whichever comes first...
He will have a multitude of “wives”...
or so Romney believes...
I am in several ecumenical groups/organizations where I work with fellow Methodist, Baptist, Lutherans, Episcopalians and Catholics, where we all share the same exact message of salvation with others.
We quibble and argue over the centuries on liturgical procedures and such, but in the end the Body of Christ is just that.
The LDS doesn't see it that way...
And why isn't Reid more of a concern to official Mormondom? I registered concerns on several FREEPER posts about the Reid-BYU connection when BYU invited him as an October 2007 speaker before the entire student body & faculty. Reid took the opportunity to slam Evangelicals. Reid gets warm reception at BYU
Oh, and what was that warm BYU Fall '07 response to Reid by 4,000 of BYU's faculty and students?
According to that FREEP-posted article: At the end of his speech, Reid earned a standing ovation from a small percentage of the crowd and applause from the rest.
My response then -- including my response to Reid's blasting of Evangelical Christians was:
I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all awrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt...
Joseph says this "revelation" took place around 1820...well before any Mormons set foot in Missouri or Nauvoo.
So we have Harry Reid, 2007, at a BYU-sanctioned event: "They [Evangelical Christians] are the most anti-Christian people I can imagine, the people from the Christian far right." vs. Joseph Smith, 1820ish: "...all their creeds [of Christian sects] were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt."
Smith and Brigham Young weren't exactly spinning in their graves upon Reid continuing the Mormon acrimonious tradition of open bigotry, hostility, villification, and misjudgment.
If Mormons want to continue to this day of calling Evangelicals anti-christs, much to the standing ovation and applause of its student body and faculty, so be it. We can't stop Mormons from maligning Christians; but I would appeal to Mormons to stop maligning God's Word by saying that all Christian creeds are an "abomination" (a modern-day word for that would be "putrid").
His DemonicRat Faith takes preference over his upbringing faith!
I think Hugh's highly intelligent -- just lacking discernment on this issue. And one show by Hugh highly praising Romney's intelligence was in my opinion accurate. I think Romney is quite intelligent; just discernment-challenged. So it's one intelligent man finding commonality with another.
By I think our coalition-building needs to go beyond common intelligence -- and at times beyond shared values. I think we can build bridges with LDS on most issues -- but not all.
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.