Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Is Mitt Romney’s love for America a Mormon thing?
The Washington Post ^ | May 11, 2012 | Michelle Boorstein,

Posted on 05/13/2012 6:30:04 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife

When it comes to American exceptionalism, Mitt Romney is going all in.

His book “No Apology: The Case for American Greatness” is a love song to the idea that this country merits “the protection of Providence” and has a singular “calling” to be a beacon for freedom. A major theme for him on the campaign trail is the nation’s divine destiny, a heritage Romney said has made him “stand a little taller, a little straighter” when overseas.

But what Romney doesn’t say is that, for followers of his made-in-America religion, Mormonism, exceptionalism isn’t political metaphor. It’s theology.

The faith’s sacred text, the Book of Mormon, describes the United States as “a land of promise . . . a land which is choice above all other lands.” It describes Jesus coming down from heaven, to America, and teaching to people there. Joseph Smith, Mormonism’s founder and prophet, quotes God as saying that he established the U.S. Constitution. Mormons’ Garden of Eden is in Missouri. Their version of the hajj begins in Upstate New York and ends in Illinois.

Other post-Reagan candidates may passionately preach beliefs like Romney’s, but he’s the only one who can say American exceptionalism is his religion.

Except he doesn’t.

.........Romney’s reticence on the subject of God and country makes him a typical Mormon. Persecuted by the government in the 1800s, Mormons grew wary of how to merge their faith with their love for the land it blesses....

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; Government; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: amexceptionalism; mormon; nationalism; romney
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-127 next last
To: Agamemnon

Thank you so much for sharing your insights, dear Agamemnon!


51 posted on 05/13/2012 8:21:20 PM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Tennessee Nana

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reynolds_v._United_States


52 posted on 05/13/2012 8:24:37 PM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
 

Polygamy: How it all got Started


 
 
 
Joe: Hey Emma!   Guess what!?
 
Emma: You KNOW I hate these guessing games! What is it, Dear?
 
Joe: I heard a voice, probably the Lord, tell me I must take other wives.
 
Emma: WHAT!?   You ding bat!  Don't you KNOW what our precious BOOK says?   After all; YOU are the one that translated it!
 
Joe: Books; schmooks.   All I know is I've been COMMANDED to take other wives and you are to OBEY ME!!!
 
 
Emma:      "Though shalt NOT commit ADULTERY!!!"
 
 
Joe: Silly Woman!  You KNOW better than to take things out of CONTEXT!!!
 
 
 
 
 

 
...and the rest is HISTORY...
 

 
 
 
 
 
THE BOOK OF JACOB
THE BROTHER OF NEPHI
CHAPTER 2
 
  24 Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord.
  25 Wherefore, thus saith the Lord, I have led this people forth out of the land of Jerusalem, by the power of mine arm, that I might raise up unto me a righteous branch from the fruit of the loins of Joseph.
  26 Wherefore, I the Lord God will not suffer that this people shall do like unto them of old.
  27 Wherefore, my brethren, hear me, and hearken to the word of the Lord: For there shall not any man among you have save it be one wife; and concubines he shall have none;
  28 For I, the Lord God, delight in the chastity of women. And whoredoms are an abomination before me; thus saith the Lord of Hosts.
  29 Wherefore, this people shall keep my commandments, saith the Lord of Hosts, or cursed be the land for their sakes.
  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.
  31 For behold, I, the Lord, have seen the sorrow, and heard the mourning of the daughters of my people in the land of Jerusalem, yea, and in all the lands of my people, because of the wickedness and abominations of their husbands.
  32 And I will not suffer, saith the Lord of Hosts, that the cries of the fair daughters of this people, which I have led out of the land of Jerusalem, shall come up unto me against the men of my people, saith the Lord of Hosts.
 

Or even HERE:
 

 1 Timothy 3:2-3
 2.  Now the overseer must be above reproach, the husband of but one wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach,
 3.  not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money.
 
 
1 Timothy 3:12
   A deacon must be the husband of but one wife and must manage his children and his household well.
 
 
 Titus 1:6
   An elder must be blameless, the husband of but one wife, a man whose children believe and are not open to the charge of being wild and disobedient.



 
 
Emma: That's IT!   I'm LEAVING your sorry *!!!
 
Joe:  DARN you Emma; you were TOLD to accept this!!   Wait!!!   I hear a voice again!!!
 
 


 
THE
DOCTRINE AND COVENANTS
OF THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS
SECTION 132
 
  51–57, Emma Smith is counseled (commanded) to be faithful and true; 58–66, Laws governing the plurality of wives are set forth.
 
 
  51 Verily, I say unto you: A commandment I give unto mine handmaid, Emma Smith, your wife, whom I have given unto you, that she stay herself and partake not of that which I commanded you to offer unto her; for I did it, saith the Lord, to aprove you all, as I did Abraham, and that I might require an offering at your hand, by covenant and sacrifice.
  52 And let mine handmaid, Emma Smith, areceive all those that have been given unto my servant Joseph, and who are virtuous and pure before me; and those who are not pure, and have said they were pure, shall be destroyed, saith the Lord God.
  53 For I am the Lord thy God, and ye shall obey my voice; and I give unto my servant Joseph that he shall be made ruler over many things; for he hath been afaithful over a few things, and from henceforth I will strengthen him.
  54 And I command mine handmaid, Emma Smith, to abide and acleave unto my servant Joseph, and to none else. But if she will not abide this commandment she shall be bdestroyed, saith the Lord; for I am the Lord thy God, and will destroy her if she abide not in my law.
  55 But if she will not abide this commandment, then shall my servant Joseph do all things for her, even as he hath said; and I will bless him and multiply him and give unto him an ahundredfold in this world, of fathers and mothers, brothers and sisters, houses and lands, wives and children, and crowns of beternal lives in the eternal worlds.
  56 And again, verily I say, let mine handmaid aforgive my servant Joseph his trespasses; and then shall she be forgiven her trespasses, wherein she has trespassed against me; and I, the Lord thy God, will bless her, and multiply her, and make her heart to brejoice.


53 posted on 05/13/2012 8:25:51 PM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
The faith’s sacred text, the Book of Mormon, describes the United States as “a land of promise ...

Where to start??

1. THE 'sacred text'? they hold at LEAST 3 others as 'sacred': The KJV of the bible, The Pearl of Great Price and the Doctrines and Covenants.

The Book of MORMON contains almost NO MORMON doctrine and nothing about what goes on in the MORMON temples!

2. It CANNOT be describing the United State, for MORMON scholars canNOT decide on where to place the events mentioned in the BoM!!!

54 posted on 05/13/2012 8:30:57 PM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
...The KJV of the bible...

Is highly suspect, according to the MORMON creed - The Articles of Faith.

It is SO suspect that GOD himself told Joseph Smith to RETRANSLATE it to remove the ERROR that was contained in it; caused by the hand of man.

That work is known as the JST: the Joseph Smith Translation.

Strangely; the powers that be in Salt Lake City do NOT consider it to be SCRIPTURE!!!

55 posted on 05/13/2012 8:34:38 PM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Iceman Cometh
If the actions of one in the past color someone in the future, then all Catholics are as dirty as hell. Just sayin'.

If the KNOWLEDGE of the practices of the MORMON past, leads one to be silent about whether GOD sanctioned them, then most MORMONs are guilty of ACCEPTING the old ways of doing things.

Of course; I might be wrong.

If so, I am SURE that any MORMONs reading this will post some evidence to that fact.

56 posted on 05/13/2012 8:39:49 PM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Little Bill
My Fathers family is LDS and WE have fought in EVERY WAR This Country has engaged in from 1776 until last week.

Oh?

That's a neat trick!!

57 posted on 05/13/2012 8:41:34 PM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Conservative Vermont Vet

Sorry for your lack of principles...


58 posted on 05/13/2012 8:42:52 PM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
I don’t fail to understand anything, including your attitude and your little high pitched anti-conservative Romney song that he is secretly, something he isn’t, secretly? how twisted and bizarre.

Speaking of songs...


(click)
Praise to the Man!
 
 
 
Praise to the man who communed with Jehovah!
Jesus annointed that Prophet and Seer.
Blessed to open the last dispensation,
Kings shall extol him, and nations revere.

Chorus
Hail to the Prophet, ascended to heaven!
Traitors and tyrants now fight him in vain.
Mingling with Gods, he can plan for his brethren;
Death cannot conquer the hero again.

Praise to his mem'ry, he died as a martyr;
Honored and blest be his ever great name!
Long shall his blood, which was shed by assasins,
Plead unto heav'n while the earth lauds his fame.

Chorus
Hail to the Prophet, ascended to heaven!
Traitors and tyrants now fight him in vain.
Mingling with Gods, he can plan for his brethren;
Death cannot conquer the hero again.


Great is his glory and endless his priesthood.
Ever and ever the keys he will hold.
Faithful and true he will enter his kingdom,
Crowned in the midst of the prophets of old.

Chorus
Hail to the Prophet, ascended to heaven!
Traitors and tyrants now fight him in vain.
Mingling with Gods, he can plan for his brethren;
Death cannot conquer the hero again.


Sacrifice brings forth the blessings of heaven;
Earth must atone for the blood of that man.
Wake up the world for the conflict of justice.
Millions shall know 'Brother Joseph' again.

Chorus
Hail to the Prophet, ascended to heaven!
Traitors and tyrants now fight him in vain.
Mingling with Gods, he can plan for his brethren;
Death cannot conquer the hero again.


59 posted on 05/13/2012 8:46:13 PM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
Didja notice the GODS reference in the song above?

Romney, a dyed-in-the-wool MORMON ism believer and adherant, believes that HE is going to be one.


The Doctrine and Covenants

Section 132

Revelation given through Joseph Smith the Prophet, at Nauvoo, Illinois, recorded 12 July 1843, relating to the new and everlasting covenant, including the eternity of the marriage covenant, and also the plurality of wives (see History of the Church, 5:501–7). Although the revelation was recorded in 1843, it is evident from the historical records that the doctrines and principles involved in this revelation had been known by the Prophet since 1831.

1–6, Exaltation is gained through the new and everlasting covenant; 7–14, The terms and conditions of that covenant are set forth; 15–20, Celestial marriage and a continuation of the family unit enable men to become gods; 21–25, The strait and narrow way leads to eternal lives; 26–27, The law is given relative to blasphemy against the Holy Ghost; 28–39, Promises of eternal increase and exaltation are made to prophets and Saints in all ages; 40–47, Joseph Smith is given the power to bind and seal on earth and in heaven; 48–50, The Lord seals upon him his exaltation; 51–57, Emma Smith is counseled to be faithful and true; 58–66, Laws governing the plurality of wives are set forth.

 


 

 16Therefore, when they are out of the world they neither marry nor are given in amarriage; but are appointed angels in bheaven, which angels are ministering cservants, to minister for those who are worthy of a far more, and an exceeding, and an eternal weight of glory.

 17For these angels did not abide my law; therefore, they cannot be enlarged, but remain separately and singly, without exaltation, in their saved condition, to all eternity; and from henceforth are not gods, but are aangels of God forever and ever.

 18And again, verily I say unto you, if a man marry a wife, and make a covenant with her for time and for all eternity, if that acovenant is not by me or by my word, which is my law, and is not sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise, through him whom I have anointed and appointed unto this power, then it is not valid neither of force when they are out of the world, because they are not joined by me, saith the Lord, neither by my word; when they are out of the world it cannot be received there, because the angels and the gods are appointed there, by whom they cannot pass; they cannot, therefore, inherit my glory; for my house is a house of order, saith the Lord God.

 19And again, verily I say unto you, if a man amarry a wife by my word, which is my law, and by the new and beverlasting covenant, and it is csealed unto them by the Holy Spirit of dpromise, by him who is anointed, unto whom I have appointed this power and the ekeys of this priesthood; and it shall be said unto them—Ye shall come forth in the first resurrection; and if it be after the first resurrection, in the next resurrection; and shall inherit fthrones, kingdoms, principalities, and powers, dominions, all heights and depths—then shall it be written in the Lamb’s gBook of Life, that he shall commit no hmurder whereby to shed innocent iblood, and if ye abide in my covenant, and commit no murder whereby to shed innocent blood, it shall be done unto them in all things whatsoever my servant hath put upon them, in time, and through all eternity; and shall be of full force when they are out of the world; and they shall pass by the angels, and the gods, which are set there, to their jexaltation and glory in all things, as hath been sealed upon their heads, which glory shall be a fulness and a continuation of the kseeds forever and ever.

 20 Then shall they be gods, because they have no end; therefore shall they be from aeverlasting to everlasting, because they continue; then shall they be above all, because all things are subject unto them. Then shall they be bgods, because they have call power, and the angels are subject unto them.

 21Verily, verily, I say unto you, except ye abide my alaw ye cannot attain to this glory.

 22For astrait is the gate, and narrow the bway that leadeth unto the exaltation and continuation of the clives, and few there be that find it, because ye receive me not in the world neither do ye know me.

 23But if ye receive me in the world, then shall ye know me, and shall receive your exaltation; that awhere I am ye shall be also.

 24This is aeternal lives—to bknow the only wise and true God, and Jesus Christ, whom he hath csent. I am he. Receive ye, therefore, my law.

 25aBroad is the gate, and wide the way that leadeth to the bdeaths; and many there are that go in thereat, because they creceive me not, neither do they abide in my law.


60 posted on 05/13/2012 8:47:49 PM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Elsie
You folks DO know how the BoM was translated; right??



"Now the way he translated was he put the urim and thummim into his hat and Darkned his Eyes than he would take a sentance and it would apper in Brite Roman Letters. Then he would tell the writer and he would write it. Then that would go away the next sentance would Come and so on. But if it was not Spelt rite it would not go away till it was rite, so we see it was marvelous. Thus was the hol [whole] translated."
---Joseph Knight's journal.


"In writing for your father I frequently wrote day after day, often sitting at the table close by him, he sitting with his face buried in his hat, with the stone in it, and dictating hour after hour with nothing between us."
(History of the RLDS Church, 8 vols.
(Independence, Missouri: Herald House,1951),
"Last Testimony of Sister Emma [Smith Bidamon]," 3:356.

"I, as well as all of my father's family, Smith's wife, Oliver Cowdery and Martin Harris, were present during the translation. . . . He [Joseph Smith] did not use the plates in translation."
---(David Whitmer,
as published in the "Kansas City Journal," June 5, 1881,
and reprinted in the RLDS "Journal of History", vol. 8, (1910), pp. 299-300.

In an 1885 interview, Zenas H. Gurley, then the editor of the RLDS Saints Herald, asked Whitmer if Joseph had used his "Peep stone" to do the translation. Whitmer replied:

"... he used a stone called a "Seers stone," the "Interpreters" having been taken away from him because of transgression. The "Interpreters" were taken from Joseph after he allowed Martin Harris to carry away the 116 pages of Ms [manuscript] of the Book of Mormon as a punishment, but he was allowed to go on and translate by use of a "Seers stone" which he had, and which he placed in a hat into which he buried his face, stating to me and others that the original character appeared upon parchment and under it the translation in English."


"Martin Harris related an incident that occurred during the time that he wrote that portion of the translation of the Book of Mormon which he was favored to write direct from the mouth of the Prophet Joseph Smith. He said that the Prophet possessed a seer stone, by which he was enabled to translate as well as from the Urim and Thummim, and for convenience he then used the seer stone, Martin explained the translation as follows: By aid of the seer stone, sentences would appear and were read by the Prophet and written by Martin and when finished he would say 'Written,' and if correctly written that sentence would disappear and another appear in its place, but if not written correctly it remained until corrected, so that the translation was just as it was engraven on the plates, precisely in the language then used."
(Edward Stevenson, "One of the Three Witnesses,"
reprinted from Deseret News, 30 Nov. 1881
in Millennial Star, 44 (6 Feb. 1882): 86-87.)

In 1879, Michael Morse, Emma Smith's brother-in-law, stated:
 
 "When Joseph was translating the Book of Mormon [I] had occasion more than once to go into his immediate presence, and saw him engaged at his work of translation. The mode of procedure consisted in Joseph's placing the Seer Stone in the crown of a hat, then putting his face into the hat, so as to entirely cover his face, resting his elbows upon his knees, and then dictating word after word, while the scribes Emma, John Whitmer, O. Cowdery, or some other wrote it down."
(W.W. Blair interview with Michael Morse,
Saints Herald, vol. 26, no. 12
June 15, 1879,  pp. 190-91.)


Joseph Smith's brother William also testified to the "face in the hat" version:
 
"The manner in which this was done was by looking into the Urim and Thummim, which was placed in a hat to exclude the light, (the plates lying near by covered up), and reading off the translation, which appeared in the stone by the power of God"
("A New Witness for Christ in America,"
Francis W. Kirkham, 2:417.)


"The manner in which he pretended to read and interpret was the same manner as when he looked for the money-diggers, with the stone in his hat, while the book of plates were at the same time hid in the woods."
---Isaac Hale (Emma Smith's father's) affidavit, 1834.




61 posted on 05/13/2012 8:51:30 PM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

From Wiki

Religious Duty argument

The most important ruling of the case was over whether Reynolds could use a defense due to religious belief or duty. Reynolds had argued that as a Mormon, it was his religious duty as a male member of the church to practice polygamy if possible.

The Supreme Court recognized that under the First Amendment, the Congress cannot pass a law that prohibits the free exercise of religion. However it argued that the law prohibiting bigamy did not fall under this. The fact that a person could only be married to one person had existed since the times of King James I of England in English law, upon which United States law was based.

Although the constitution did not define religion, the Court investigated the history of religious freedom in the United States. In the ruling, the court quoted a letter from Thomas Jefferson in which he stated that there was a distinction between religious belief and action that flowed from religious belief. The former “lies solely between man and his God,” therefore “the legislative powers of the government reach actions only, and not opinions.” The court argued that if polygamy was allowed, someone might eventually argue that human sacrifice was a necessary part of their religion, and “to permit this would be to make the professed doctrines of religious belief superior to the law of the land, and in effect to permit every citizen to become a law unto himself.” The Court believed the true spirit of the First Amendment was that Congress could not legislate against opinion, but could legislate against action.
_____________________________________________

Mitt Romney, Dec, 2007, speaking @ the George Bush Presidential Library: “I believe in my Mormon faith and I endeavor to live by it. My faith is the faith of my fathers – I will be true to them and to my beliefs.”


62 posted on 05/13/2012 8:56:51 PM PDT by Tennessee Nana (Why should I vote for Bishop Romney when he hates me because I am a Christian)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

Those posts are about three screen pages of rainbow colors on my screen that I am not going to read.

I wish you would quit doing that to me, I’m not willing to wade through rainbows and pages, searching for whatever the pertinent point is that you wanted me to find buried in the mass of what look pages from a long, long, long course on Mormonism.


63 posted on 05/13/2012 9:15:56 PM PDT by ansel12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
Very interesting article. Before I read it, I knew practically nothing about the Mormon faith, other than its historic relationship with the practice of polygamy. Though I admit that I do like to listen to the Mormon Tabernacle choir, they do the American patriotic classics in a very uplifting manner, and this article helped me to understand why. Mormons are taught to believe in the value of America, and that is a good thing. But it seems to me, that the brief course in Mormon fundamentals that this article gives, makes me believe that not very many Mormons, who are interested in being faithful to God, could vote for Romney. Romney is about the most godless creature that the GOP has ever considered nominating. Romney sounds like a heretic to his own religion. While the Mormon religion teaches that America is deserving of the blessings of Divine Providence, Romney has wedded himself to policy positions that contribute to the cutting off of Divine Providence to this nation. And that is the subject of the article I would like to share with all of you here, who are struggling with the decision whether or not to vote for Romney. A no vote for Romney is a sure way to keep from compromising your soul before God. That is for sure.
Divine Providence
is the Key to the
Saving of America

The government keeps getting bigger, our chains keep get getting heavier, and our nation continues to decline, under both Democrat and Republican elites. The reason for this is that the people have lost the capacity to grasp the principle of Divine Providence and how that principle plays a central role in determining whether America rises, or falls.

We need to use this election cycle to begin the process of resurrecting in the people a new-found appreciation for the principle of Divine Providence. This is our only hope.

We can begin this process, in this election cycle, by coming to terms with this great truth, by studying it, and coming to understand it deeply, that we set America back substantially by allowing Romney to cast a deep inky black shadow of godlessness upon the once bright landscape of the Republican Party.

Please see:

VOTING FOR ROMNEY
IS TO VOTE FOR THE
DEATH OF AMERICA

The Republican elite has trained us to think inside a box they have created, which they enforce through the darkest side of peer pressure, which is public character assasination. And this box is like a little cage, inside of which they have mounted a circular treadmill, it is commonly referred to as a rodent exercise wheel, in which the little squirrel is free to run all day long, on their behalf, huffing and puffing, bleeding great drops of steaming sweat, thinking that miles and miles are covered in the direction of victory, when in fact the little squirrel is going worse than nowhere. The elites are carrying the cage downhill the whole time. Open the cage door, and climb out, and begin to allow real and valid outside-the-box ideas to populate the mind. To see is to believe.

Now is the time for all good men, and women, to stand up and shout, with one unified voice, "No more pet rodent exercise wheels for us!" We will choose to serve the Lord God, and finally, put our country back into an upward trajectory towards the realization of that Shining City on the Hill spoken of so eloquently by the late President Ronald Reagan.

Again, please see:

VOTING FOR ROMNEY
IS TO VOTE FOR THE
DEATH OF AMERICA


64 posted on 05/14/2012 12:18:36 AM PDT by GoldenEagles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tennessee Nana
“I believe in my Mormon faith and I endeavor to live by it. My faith is the faith of my fathers – I will be true to them and to my beliefs.”


65 posted on 05/14/2012 3:40:42 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
Those posts are about three screen pages of rainbow colors on my screen that I am not going to read.

What?

I go thru all the trouble to uncover facts about MORMONism, find the most pertainant things and accent them, make them large enough so that older eyes can read them; and then you say this?


HERE!

Other than TMI; you've no excuse left.



 
"Now the way he translated was he put the urim and thummim into his hat and Darkned his Eyes than he would take a sentance and it would apper in Brite Roman Letters. Then he would tell the writer and he would write it. Then that would go away the next sentance would Come and so on. But if it was not Spelt rite it would not go away till it was rite, so we see it was marvelous. Thus was the hol [whole] translated."
---Joseph Knight's journal.


"In writing for your father I frequently wrote day after day, often sitting at the table close by him, he sitting with his face buried in his hat, with the stone in it, and dictating hour after hour with nothing between us."
(History of the RLDS Church, 8 vols.
(Independence, Missouri: Herald House,1951),
"Last Testimony of Sister Emma [Smith Bidamon]," 3:356.

"I, as well as all of my father's family, Smith's wife, Oliver Cowdery and Martin Harris, were present during the translation. . . . He [Joseph Smith] did not use the plates in translation."
---(David Whitmer,
as published in the "Kansas City Journal," June 5, 1881,
and reprinted in the RLDS "Journal of History", vol. 8, (1910), pp. 299-300.

In an 1885 interview, Zenas H. Gurley, then the editor of the RLDS Saints Herald, asked Whitmer if Joseph had used his "Peep stone" to do the translation. Whitmer replied:

"... he used a stone called a "Seers stone," the "Interpreters" having been taken away from him because of transgression. The "Interpreters" were taken from Joseph after he allowed Martin Harris to carry away the 116 pages of Ms [manuscript] of the Book of Mormon as a punishment, but he was allowed to go on and translate by use of a "Seers stone" which he had, and which he placed in a hat into which he buried his face, stating to me and others that the original character appeared upon parchment and under it the translation in English."


"Martin Harris related an incident that occurred during the time that he wrote that portion of the translation of the Book of Mormon which he was favored to write direct from the mouth of the Prophet Joseph Smith. He said that the Prophet possessed a seer stone, by which he was enabled to translate as well as from the Urim and Thummim, and for convenience he then used the seer stone, Martin explained the translation as follows: By aid of the seer stone, sentences would appear and were read by the Prophet and written by Martin and when finished he would say 'Written,' and if correctly written that sentence would disappear and another appear in its place, but if not written correctly it remained until corrected, so that the translation was just as it was engraven on the plates, precisely in the language then used."
(Edward Stevenson, "One of the Three Witnesses,"
reprinted from Deseret News, 30 Nov. 1881
in Millennial Star, 44 (6 Feb. 1882): 86-87.)

In 1879, Michael Morse, Emma Smith's brother-in-law, stated:
"When Joseph was translating the Book of Mormon [I] had occasion more than once to go into his immediate presence, and saw him engaged at his work of translation. The mode of procedure consisted in Joseph's placing the Seer Stone in the crown of a hat, then putting his face into the hat, so as to entirely cover his face, resting his elbows upon his knees, and then dictating word after word, while the scribes Emma, John Whitmer, O. Cowdery, or some other wrote it down."
(W.W. Blair interview with Michael Morse,
Saints Herald, vol. 26, no. 12
June 15, 1879, pp. 190-91.)


Joseph Smith's brother William also testified to the "face in the hat" version:
"The manner in which this was done was by looking into the Urim and Thummim, which was placed in a hat to exclude the light, (the plates lying near by covered up), and reading off the translation, which appeared in the stone by the power of God"
("A New Witness for Christ in America,"
Francis W. Kirkham, 2:417.)


"The manner in which he pretended to read and interpret was the same manner as when he looked for the money-diggers, with the stone in his hat, while the book of plates were at the same time hid in the woods."
---Isaac Hale (Emma Smith's father's) affidavit, 1834.

66 posted on 05/14/2012 3:45:41 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife; All

Mormons do view the land mass that constitutes America as a Promised Land for them.

Other than their own religious system, I’m not sure what governmental system on this land would best fit them.

Mormons are Mormons, and have much in common, but are also individuals.

This is true when applied to people of other religious world views, as well. Stereotyping doesn’t necessarily get you there, if you’re trying to understand that one person.

When I look at Romney, it’s through the prism of Obama and the Statist thugs who hate America as founded and want to run it for themselves and ruin it for traditional Americans. I see someone who apparently will be the major opposition to Obama and minions.

Period.

Apart from the Obama prism, I don’t like what I see in Romney. That’s putting it mildly. But I flat out FEAR what I see in Obama, and I am deeply ANGRY at him and his. So that’s how I view Romney.

Romney the politician, apart from his position as major opponent to Obama, wouldn’t get the time of day from me.

As for voting, I’ve come down to this being a vote of conscience for every individual.

Where do you live? Is your state a toss-up? Or is it a given FOR or AGAINST Obama. And can you in good conscience pull the Romney lever in order to stop Obama, or in good conscience can you not?


67 posted on 05/14/2012 5:01:29 AM PDT by txrangerette ("HOLD TO THE TRUTH...SPEAK WITHOUT FEAR" - Glenn Beck)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

Hmmmmmmmmmmm

Does the number of your post count as 2/3 of THE number ???


68 posted on 05/14/2012 5:02:01 AM PDT by Tennessee Nana (Why should I vote for Bishop Romney when he hates me because I am a Christian)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: txrangerette

BUMP!


69 posted on 05/14/2012 5:07:04 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Tennessee Nana

No, but it DOES equal INT(#_Of_Beast/10)


70 posted on 05/14/2012 8:17:52 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

I don’t read but a hand full of your posts, the short ones, I don’t what that one was supposed to be either.

You don’t need to make every post of yours a huge, impersonal, cut and paste, history dump, I’m on your side and I just scroll right past them because they are rarely more than just massive spam rather than something that you personally wrote to the poster.

Even the post I am answering is one of those, and it is supposed to be a response to me already pleading with you to quit doing it to me.

By the way, people can wear glasses at the computer, or adjust their own text size, I doubt that people are spending the day looking at blurry threads that they can’t read, while hoping that they may come across one of yours, where you put the type “large enough so that older eyes can read them”.


71 posted on 05/14/2012 8:50:20 AM PDT by ansel12 (Ann Romney, 1994 'We didn't know a single Republican when we jumped in in December,')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: ansel12; Tennessee Nana; Alamo-Girl
I noticed you never posted during the 2007/2008 election cycle, we covered all this years ago, especially the Reagan bashing part of the Romney devotees comedy routine.

OK so you can go back to my posting history for 4-5 years (I have no problem with that, of course), but you can't by way of any amount of research seem to add substance to those 1993 "switch" allegations. Fair enough.

As you should know, 2007/2008 was also at a time when one was not as free to discuss such things around here. That said, Romney wasn't my first choice in that election cycle either, but you will also recall that many were banned from FR who had Romney and Giuliani (also not my first choice, and he faded prior to FL anyway) as their first choices.

We were stuck with McCain in 2008, but that said, we did get Sarah Palin. Now Sarah Palin would never have received the visibility that she ultimately did and has enjoyed since then -- all the way to NOT running in this cycle. Go figure. Apparently she did “figure” and calculated that there was no value in doing so. She's a politician like any one else and I have proposed a place for her in a Romney Administration where her skills sets may be used effectively.

As an extension of the Romney Administration, I would be employing her to do a job I think needs to be done to move conservatism forward. Unlike many around here, however, I have no conservative’s “crush,” just an interest to get a job done that corresponds with conservatism. That's it. And for conservatives not beguiled by a sense of hero worship, that's all that should be required for them, as well

Politicians are politicians. Here's me standing with a politician I got to meet back in 1969. That's me on the far left. You might even recognize this politician: Strom Thurmond. This was at a gathering of conservative religious Christians at the Christian Admiral hotel in Cape May, NJ. How do you like that big ol' Bible he's holding?

Photobucket

Now, unknown to anyone at this time and since ~ 1947 until the day he died, Strom was paying child support to a lady who happens to be “black” for what was a youthful indiscretion of his that bore fruit – an illigimate, born-out-of-wedlock child. Yes, a good ol' Southern Boy he was, wasn't he?

Now, this happened at the time he was a rising political star (did I happen to mention a (D) star? Oh yeah, by the time I met him he was a (R ), but again we’ve seen and welcomed similar conversions with Reagan, Perry, etc.). If he wanted to be honest, and own up to his fatherhood, to his child, and married the mother of his child in the deep segregationist South of the time, can we all agree that his political career would have been finished?

I'd hate to learn someday that Thurmond ever used campaign funds to pay off the mother, or the child, or else he'd be little different from that scoundrel, John Edwards, on trial today. I am hoping beyond hope he kept those accounts separate, but back in the 50's and 60's before all the campaign finance reform went in, who really knows?

OK, all that said, Thurmond, that outward paragon of virtue (and on this topic, much like Gingrich) lived what most of us would consider to be a HUGE lie in his personal life. He musta had enough political dirt on enough people to be able to keep that affair quiet until after his death and to allow his 50+ year political career to flourish in spite of the payments to his consort to keep her faithfully "quiet." He took care of her for over 50 years, that's for sure.

At the time I met him he’d already been living that lie for > 20 years! What’s even funnier in retrospect is that at the time he was having sex with her he was a “Dixiecrat” preaching the popular “segregation” meme to his constituents at the time.

Hypocritcal? You bet. Wrong? Absolutely. He’d later admit he was wrong to have been a (D) and all it stood for. He never would admit to the hypocrisy – that would have blown his political cover. As a conservative myself, who sees only a human race regardless of skin hue, I am happy that he got over all that by the time he became an (R ).

Funnier still, he regularly visited Bob Jones University and addressed chapel services to the entirety of the student body there from time to time. What do you think those segregationist racists, BJ Jr, BJ III, and the entire Administration who forbade a Vietnamese-heritage friend of mine from dating his white girlfriend, and forbade “blacks” and “whites” from dating at all (once they were finally forced to let “blacks” in at all) would have done if they knew about the virtuous Senator’s ½ black love child?

As disappointed as we all were to hear of this indiscretion and cover up, the only question any of us should have is this: did Strom Thurmand advance the cause of conservatism all those years in the Senate, or not? I think most on this board would say that he did advance the cause. If so, he did what we hired him to do. Tennessee Nana doesn’t seem to get this but that doesn’t mean we are endorsers of or parties in any way to what was Thurmond’s intentional decades-long and almost life-long deception(s). He voiced our platform and voted accordingly. He did what he was told. I’m happy.

FR lost a lot of good, long standing, conservatively minded posters in that 2007/2008 era. Realizing this I think FR has rethought that this time around, because we need a united front this time around. The stakes are far higher in this election.

Having come to the realization that we have been dealt the cards we have this election cycle, and where most of us did not get our first choice in the primaries, at the peril of Obama's forces dividing and conquering, freedom to speak freely has been granted by the owner of the site as of last week.

We don't have to like the politicians who represent us. In fact I advise against making friends of any one of them lest anyone be taken into their confidence. It should be simply the contractual "you perform, or you're out." We use them for what they are good for and what we believe to be in our collective best interest to advance conservatism. We expect that those who espouse our values and run on our values believe that those values reflect theirs also. But they are politicians who should be regularly subjected to a "Trust, but Verify" metric.

Too many are inclined to be almost worshipful of some conservative politicians, and almost to the point as the liberals were and are worshipful of their liberal "Messiah Obama."

Politicians are humans themselves and as corruptible by the system of power as any. Some have been tempted and acted out sexual sins and in most cases tried to hide them from their adoring public (e.g., Thurmond, Gingrich). Some attest to a faith walk "rudder" of Judeo-Christian based morality to keep them aligned personally and I welcome that (e.g., Bachmann, Palin).

Romney affirms marriage between one man and one woman, and he wants to rip the guts out of Planned Parenthood. I’m OK with that. He has affirmed his Mormon faith-walk. It is not mine. I believe he is sorely in error scripturally speaking. I am not electing a pastor. That said, his Mormonism, unlike Obama’s Islamo-cryptoMarxism, is 100% pro-America and affirms core conservative beliefs that are held by practicing Mormons and practicing evangelical Christians alike.

We have to face reality and use the imperfect tools we've been given to move conservatism into the arena using those elected to local and national offices and ride them constantly so we are the squeaky wheels getting the grease.

Not many conservatives have been quite so diligent on this aspect of conservative maintenance, but the "tools" we elect will have to be maintained for them to continue to be useful to promoting the conservative cause.

Conservatives are well advised not to make the same mistake as did our opposition. Put a check on the idealism when it comes to politicians. Expect them to disappoint. Stand on top of them. In the end they will tend to disappoint you less.

FReegards!


72 posted on 05/14/2012 9:19:06 AM PDT by Agamemnon (Darwinism is the glue that holds liberalism together)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Agamemnon; P-Marlowe; Cincinatus' Wife; Bushbacker1; GreyFriar; Alamo-Girl; xzins; Elsie
Let me be very clear again: I am an evangelical Christian and staunch conservative from way back. This is not in any way an endorsement in any way of Mormonism as religion. Where conservatism and American supremacy is the issue we are allied with their conservative positions, though most of us are not aligned with them on religious terms. I knew that 40 years ago.

What I am saying is that if Mitt Romney is given the freedom to tack toward what is his core, and not placed in the position of doing only what he can with a 90% (D) legislature like he had as Governor of Massachusetts, I think we might all be surprised to see how much of a core conservatism might actually reside there.

Indeed. I wouldn't rule that out of the realm of possibility. Evidently, based on his public statements today on Fox News, neither does Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council. He said that although there are profound, irreconcilable theological differences as between Evangelicals and Mormons, they share core values that are inherently politically conservative: Liberty, devotion to the Constitution, preeminence in international relations and national defense, commitment to the capitalist system, family and life values.

While Romney was not my "pick" as the GOP presidential candidate, it looks like he's on-track to win the nomination. Of course, this would be a horrific disaster for our nation — IF the caricature of the man I've been reading around here is at all a truthful description of the man. My problem is the caricature is so overblown and distorted that I do not recognize it as any kind of accurate picture of Mitt Romney in terms of who he is as a public (or private) man.

Of course, all I want to do is to remove the on-going criminal conspiracy from the White House. I figure the normal way to do that is at the ballot box. But it appears that some folks around here want to do it the hard way: To effectively concede the election to Obama (by giving support to a third-party candidate without a snowball's chance in Hell of being elected president), and then — assuming that we can elect a sufficient number of Tea Party-type conservatives to the House and to retake the Senate — try to (1) Impeach him, and (2) remove him from office. Part (1) looks relatively easy — assuming a GOP majority in the House. But (2) would require an enormous amount of political courage in the Senate — for the President would instantly produce the Race Card....

In this way, we will let the current dysfunctional GOP establishment know that we political conservatives are sick and tired of being taken for granted by a Party that, if anything, is embarrassed by us; that we're "mad as Hell and just not gonna take it anymore."

Well, it's a plan.... Can it work? I have no idea.

In an earlier post, I made a comment about "my fellow twits" that caused much pain among some of my correspondents. I had "stooped so very low," you see. But please note the deliberately considered language I used: I included myself in the group of twits ("my fellow...."). This is a simple acknowledgement that, as far as I am concerned at least, I have never seen a more unsettled state of affairs political in this nation in my lifetime, nor have felt so helpless about "fixing it." I have never seen a time where abject, calculated lies are accepted by the populace without demur, when the very language is being traduced (e.g., the very definition of "marriage" must be changed for "social justice" reasons, etc.), when class warfare is being assiduously cultivated by the Swindler in Chief, etc., etc. There is so much deliberately propagated chaos, some days it's hard to tell what's going on.... I'm suffocating in the Kultursmog....

And I blame Obama for all of this. Which is why I believe it is so very urgent to give him "the bum's rush" as soon as possible. I honestly do not believe that the America we know and love can survive four more years of this man.

Thus I consider myself a hapless "twit" with respect to present matters. I can think of no precedent that gives any guiding principle, yet I venture to give an opinion anyway. But I freely apologize to any person who was offended by my remark. Perhaps they really are wiser than I am....

In an earlier post, P-Marlowe flatly said that Romney does not have a prayer of winning in Massachusetts (or in California) on November 6th. I'm sure he's right about California. But I'm not so sure about Massachusetts.

Fenway Park enjoyed its 100th anniversary, coinciding with Opening Day, a few weeks back. So President Obama recorded a video address congratulating Red Sox fans on this milestone, which was put up on the Jumbotron for all to enjoy.

I was amazed at what happened next: the President was roundly, loudly BOOED by the fans. This happened in BOSTON of all places. I would never have expected it — but there it was. Evidently Red Sox fans are a different breed of cat than the elites that populate Cambridge, whose standard-bearer this year (after Obama) is the millionaire progressive "squaw," Elizabeth Warren.... I sure do hope the fans turn out to vote on election day.

I don't know what the outcome will be. Whatever it is, it seems there isn't much that I can do about it.

And so at this point, I am simply going to leave it all up to God.

All is in His Hands anyway.

May he continue to bless the United States of America — and my fellow correspondents. (I shall now retire the "twit" word....)

Thank you so very much, Agamemnon, for your insightful and highly informative essay/post!

P.S.:
BTW, an article in the May 2012 edition of the Smithsonian magazine corroborates the Romney family's background in the very place you have connected Skousen to: the 100+ year-old Mormon colony, Colonia Juarez, in Mexico. In the same edition, there was an eye-opening piece on Obama's background in Kenya....)

73 posted on 05/14/2012 9:33:50 AM PDT by betty boop (We are led to believe a lie when we see with, and not through the eye. — William Blake)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Agamemnon
Thank you so very much for sharing your insights and reasoning, dear brother in Christ!
74 posted on 05/14/2012 9:54:07 AM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl; GreyFriar; xzins; P-Marlowe; Cincinatus' Wife; zot; Interesting Times; Elsie
And then the rules all changed one day,
illegal it became;
To bring the Lamb of God to school,
Or even speak His Name.

How chilling, dearest sister in Christ! The Progressive Left (be it Marxist, Communist, or anarchist) has "re-educated" a couple of generations of school children by now into rejecting any idea of ultimate universal Truth, as grounded in the Logos of God....

Absent an anchor in Truth, everything becomes simply a matter of opinion, and one man's opinion is just as good as any other man's — unless the opinion is offered by a progressive elitist who deems the people must be governed for their own good. THAT opinion must be always be deferred to.

Our culture is increasingly irrational, even progressively insane, as a consequence.... Our Free Republic cannot be sustained on this basis.

What will the people do, next November?

That will tell me a lot about what we as a people have become, and whether we can continue to maintain a republican system of individual liberty under just and equal laws....

Thank you ever so much, dearest sister, for posting this chilling, yet ever-so-truthful version of "Mary Had a Little Lamb." And also for the SCOTUS precedents that set this train in motion....

75 posted on 05/14/2012 10:10:44 AM PDT by betty boop (We are led to believe a lie when we see with, and not through the eye. — William Blake)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Agamemnon

bttt - great post!


76 posted on 05/14/2012 10:11:50 AM PDT by Liberty Valance (Keep a simple manner for a happy life :o)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Agamemnon

That was something else we noticed from the romneybots in 2007, since they couldn’t defend Romney’s left wing life and record as a Governor, they would write long, meandering, personal essays, as though they would mesmerize people into joining Romney’s devotees.


77 posted on 05/14/2012 10:11:55 AM PDT by ansel12 (Ann Romney, 1994 'We didn't know a single Republican when we jumped in in December,')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

So when Mitt says Marriage has been ‘one man and one woman for thousands of years’ he does so as a person whose faith rewrote the cultural norms of marriage as recently as 21 years before Reagan was born. How can this be?


78 posted on 05/14/2012 10:14:51 AM PDT by ansel12 (Ann Romney, 1994 'We didn't know a single Republican when we jumped in in December,')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: betty boop; P-Marlowe

Rather than parse the twit sentence, I think you should just apologize.

You have been our FRiend for years, betty. Remember that.


79 posted on 05/14/2012 10:28:43 AM PDT by xzins (Vote Goode not Evil (the lesser of 2 evils is still evil))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: betty boop

We have a choice between Romney and Obama, such as it is. I think Clintonian adage “It’s the economy, stupid” will be Obama’s undoing.


80 posted on 05/14/2012 10:46:36 AM PDT by AppyPappy (If you really want to annoy someone, point out something obvious that they are trying hard to ignore)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: xzins
Rather than parse the twit sentence, I think you should just apologize.

I did apologize.

I only parsed what I deliberately chose to write, to indicate the spirit in which it was written.

Why do you suggest that I don't remember that we have been FRiends for years?

Do you believe that, just because we disagree, that I have removed you from my "friends list?"

Were that the case, I'd have to "unfriend" several members of my own family....

81 posted on 05/14/2012 10:50:20 AM PDT by betty boop (We are led to believe a lie when we see with, and not through the eye. — William Blake)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: AppyPappy
I think Clintonian adage “It’s the economy, stupid” will be Obama’s undoing.

I hope and pray that you are right about this, AppyPappy!

Thanks so much for writing!

82 posted on 05/14/2012 11:12:35 AM PDT by betty boop (We are led to believe a lie when we see with, and not through the eye. — William Blake)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
You don’t need to make every post of yours a huge, impersonal, cut and paste, history dump, I’m on your side and I just scroll right past them because they are rarely more than just massive spam rather than something that you personally wrote to the poster.

I know; but even though it was in response to one of your relies; the LARGER audience is to those who may NOT have ever seen it before.


They are impersonal on purpose.

I do not need to be making judgements on other posters, but to the organization which continues to push it's heresy on an unsuspecting populace.


They are massive on purpose, to show that the thing addressed is NOT some isolated rant from an insignificant rank and file member of the Organization; but a LEADER and a POLICY maker therein.

83 posted on 05/14/2012 11:16:58 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: betty boop; Agamemnon; xzins; P-Marlowe; GiovannaNicoletta; CynicalBear; Quix
This is a simple acknowledgement that, as far as I am concerned at least, I have never seen a more unsettled state of affairs political in this nation in my lifetime, nor have felt so helpless about "fixing it." I have never seen a time where abject, calculated lies are accepted by the populace without demur, when the very language is being traduced (e.g., the very definition of "marriage" must be changed for "social justice" reasons, etc.), when class warfare is being assiduously cultivated by the Swindler in Chief, etc., etc. There is so much deliberately propagated chaos, some days it's hard to tell what's going on.... I'm suffocating in the Kultursmog....

As am I, dearest sister in Christ!

This administration under the leadership of Obama is the most pro-Islam, anti-Christianity, anti-Israel I have ever seen.

Those of us particularly interested in Bible prophecy (I'm pre-wrath) will recognize the significance of the most powerful nation on earth turning its back on Israel, empowering her enemy-neighbors and generally setting up the situation in the Middle East like dominoes aligned to topple Israel into the sea. That coupled with the steep economic decline especially in Europe has some of us wondering whether the Gentile's clock has run out?

For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. - Romans 11:25

Then again, Satan has tried repeatedly to derail God's agenda and timing, e.g. Pharaoh and Herod era killing of infants. Could he be trying again to thwart the will of God by taking Israel out of play?

If so, I doubt God will use a basket-down-the-river or flee-to-Egypt escape to protect Israel from Satan's attempts. Since He already rescued her in power in the six day war of '67 - I imagine His rescuing her this time would be all the more miraculous.

I am certain that no one and no thing can thwart the will of God. Yet in the grand scheme of God's plans, I simply, as one of His kids called by His Name Christian, want to be on His "right" side.

If the former, the Gentiles clock running out, there's not a thing I can do to stop it nor would I want to stop it. My vote could go to anyone because no one has a prayer to stop the Obama pro-Islam, anti-Christianity, anti-Israel agenda. I would say: "... Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus!" (Rev 22:20)

However, if the latter, Satan trying to derail God's plan, perhaps I should be using my vote to get Obama out of office as job number 1 and replace him with a proven strong pro-Israel Christian.

However, there is no candidate with such proven credentials. So should I vote for the one with the best chance of defeating Obama and pray that he can and will stand against Israel's enemies?

And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed. - Genesis 12:3

What a quandary!

This calls for a lot of prayer and meditation.

Thank you so very much for outstanding essay-post, dearest sister in Christ!


84 posted on 05/14/2012 11:36:53 AM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: betty boop
The Progressive Left (be it Marxist, Communist, or anarchist) has "re-educated" a couple of generations of school children by now into rejecting any idea of ultimate universal Truth, as grounded in the Logos of God....

Absent an anchor in Truth, everything becomes simply a matter of opinion, and one man's opinion is just as good as any other man's — unless the opinion is offered by a progressive elitist who deems the people must be governed for their own good. THAT opinion must be always be deferred to.

Well and truly said, dearest sister in Christ!

Thank you so very much for your insights and encouragements!

85 posted on 05/14/2012 11:44:15 AM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Elsie
I know; but even though it was in response to one of your relies; the LARGER audience is to those who may NOT have ever seen it before.

Gee, You even admit that you post to the wide world, not individuals, it is unreadable cut and paste spam that when you dump dozens of them all at once, can make a thread unreadable.

If you know your subject well, it seems like you could do more focused responses to individual freepers, rather than document dumping on everyone.

86 posted on 05/14/2012 11:50:31 AM PDT by ansel12 (Ann Romney, 1994 'We didn't know a single Republican when we jumped in in December,')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
Three successive postings and you still can't back up that silly 1993 allegation, I see.

You should wish to have 1/2 as rich a history in the conservative movement as I have been blessed with having. You are clearly in need of a far more mature perspective on the nature of politics than you presently have.

All your sniping at Romney does nothing to defeat Obama.

At present you are part of the problem: shrill self-righteousness coupled with no credible plans to defeat Obama.

You have been successfully Alinsky-ed; you pose no threat to Obama and in fact I suspect his thugs are laughing at you and your kind at this very minute.

Romney's former challengers know how the game is played. They're lining up behind him, not sniping from the cheap seats like sore losers -- folks like you who won't let go of campaigns that have ended -- or never even started.

You can choose to be led by the losers and their circular firing squads, or by contrast you can choose instead to be a winner and to become a part of the solution in 2012 -- even as Romney's credible primary challengers have chosen to do.

FReegards!


87 posted on 05/14/2012 12:19:29 PM PDT by Agamemnon (Darwinism is the glue that holds liberalism together)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Agamemnon

You do like to write long personal attacks as some sort of substitute for conservative politics.

Your ignorance is displayed by you not knowing something as routine as that Romney reregistered Republican in October 1993. As Ann said ‘We didn’t know a single Republican when we jumped in in December,’.

It has been 7 years since Bishop Romney sought permission from his Prophet to run for President, we have been vetting Romney heavily since at least 2006 here at freerepublic, and you are only starting to look at the man.

You might do us all a favor and do some catching up by reading a little of JRs truth file on Romney, and learning why many of us conservatives won’t be voting for him.


88 posted on 05/14/2012 12:34:48 PM PDT by ansel12 (Ann Romney, 1994 'We didn't know a single Republican when we jumped in in December,')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl; xzins; P-Marlowe; Agamemnon; GiovannaNicoletta; CynicalBear; Quix; Elsie
This administration under the leadership of Obama is the most pro-Islam, anti-Christianity, anti-Israel I have ever seen....

Those of us particularly interested in Bible prophecy (I'm pre-wrath) will recognize the significance of the most powerful nation on earth turning its back on Israel.....

I am certain that no one and no thing can thwart the will of God. Yet in the grand scheme of God's plans, I simply, as one of His kids called by His Name Christian, want to be on His "right" side....

So should I vote for the one with the best chance of defeating Obama and pray that he can and will stand against Israel's enemies? ...

This calls for a lot of prayer and meditation.....

YES; and all I can say is: I am constantly ON MY KNEES these days....

God alone sees the big picture here. I am just trying to see as much of it as I, a sinful mortal, can, according to the Light He grants me, in and through His Holy Spirit.

May His Will be done, on Earth as it is in Heaven, now and always.

I really don't have anything further to add to this "debate."

Thank you my dearest sister in Christ for your outstanding essay/post, and for your kind words of support!

89 posted on 05/14/2012 12:38:40 PM PDT by betty boop (We are led to believe a lie when we see with, and not through the eye. — William Blake)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: betty boop
May His Will be done, on Earth as it is in Heaven, now and always.

Amen!

I am on my knees joining with you in prayer for our country.

Thank you oh so very much for your insights and encouragements, dearest sister in Christ!

90 posted on 05/14/2012 12:42:01 PM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl
Thank you so much for the ping, Alamo-Girl!

Mitt Romney's Mormonism aside, I have no doubt that while Barack Obama is a hardcore promoter of the socialist, homosexual, anti-God agenda, Romney would be on a parallel track, promoting the same agenda, just maybe not so in-your-face about it.

Mitt Romney has an unfortunate record with "gay" rights and abortion support, not to mention his own government health care system.

Support of Israel is the major concern, as the continued survival of our nation depends on it, but what assurance is there that Mitt Romney, who holds many of the same leftist positions as Obama, will stand by Israel? I don't really have any confidence in Romney on that point. At this time, I am seriously considering not voting, as I could not justify to God my support for either of these candidates.

It is indeed a quandry, and I think that the fact that we have two individuals who have no belief in, nor fear of, Jehovah God is indicative of the fact that we are already under judgment.

Let's have a mass homosexual wedding ceremony at the White House, shall we?

91 posted on 05/14/2012 1:37:03 PM PDT by GiovannaNicoletta ("....in the last days, mockers will come with their mocking... (2 Peter 3:3))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: ansel12; Elsie; betty boop; Alamo-Girl; Liberty Valance
You do like to write long personal attacks as some sort of substitute for conservative politics.

Seems that's all you've done to Elsie, who has actually taken the time to research Mormon doctrine, and post her research about it.

Very valuable from a theological discussion viewpoint in fact. It forms a religious basis for opposing Romney, and I respect her for that position. I oppose Romney's theological Mormonism too, but that's not what the election of 2012 is about.

Elsie's one of the good posters. Might want to leave her alone and stop picking on her.

I knew plenty of Bob Jones types that bought into all that "Curse of Ham" crap that the Mormon church at one time peddled too. Liberty Lobby sadly tended in that direction too. They were wrong and their positon is not conservative. God created a single human race, and Christianity is all about freedom found in Christ not rationales for perpetuating slavery and "racial" supremacies. Makes one wonder how Strom ever reconciled that kind of disconnect in his own life, doesn't it?

Let's leave that to the (D)-infested KKK shall we?

As Ann said ‘We didn’t know a single Republican when we jumped in in December,’.

What's laughable is that you actually think that is meanningful. You clearly don't know Massachusetts. Since there are more identified independents in MA than (R)'s Ann Romney's statement is nothing odd at all.

The State elects a 90% (D) legislature, the Kennedy stranglehold on the place intimidates most viable (R) opposition, and you're actually suprised they didn't know any (R)'s when he chose to run. Remarkable, but then again as I said before, it's clear that you know little to nothing about Massachusetts.

Takes guts to be an (R) and run as an (R) in MA. Assume Romney's an independent in MA - generally preferred over (R) -- especially in the venture cap world, it's no great leap to see him re-register formally as an (R). One in fact could even make the case that Romney had a lot of guts to challenge a (D) opponent in any political race of any kind. If he was less bold he could have run as an Independent, but, no, he chose to run as an (R).

So, again, what's your point?

It has been 7 years since Bishop Romney sought permission from his Prophet to run for President...

OK, let's see, Romney has been a registered (R) for ~20 years. Did you know that according to the Reagan Library, Ronald Reagan only switched his registration from (D) to (R) in 1962, yet he was being vetted for the 1st time for (R) Presidential nomination in 1968?

Again so what's your point?

You fire at me, and you fire at Elsie. You fire indiscriminately at those you consider to be your opponents and allies alike.

One might fairly describe you as at best a loose cannon, and at worse purposely divisive in the effort to unite conservatives against Obama.

One might fairly conclude that your contributions to strategy discussions involving unseating Obama are at this time both unfocused and valueless.

FReegards!


92 posted on 05/14/2012 1:39:35 PM PDT by Agamemnon (Darwinism is the glue that holds liberalism together)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: Agamemnon; Elsie

Thanks for the wordy gibberish and the tired display of ignorance about Reagan, in service to the anti-Reagan Mitt Romney.

I think me and Elsie can get along fine without a romneybot trying to understand us or our long time friendly relationship of shared views and goals.


93 posted on 05/14/2012 1:54:23 PM PDT by ansel12 (Ann Romney, 1994 'We didn't know a single Republican when we jumped in in December,')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
If you know your subject well, it seems like you could do more focused responses to individual freepers, rather than document dumping on everyone.

Not so much the subject, but the audience.

We have MANY more readers that we have writers on FR. I'm trying to hit the highways and byways. Perhaps to compel them to come in.

I surely do my share of interacting with individuals.

I cannot compete in the same way as 50,000 MORMON missionairies do; double teaming on a doorstep; so I have to do whatever I feel will work.


Let me have the masses. If I catch one; I'll pass 'im on to you guys for the skinning and mounting.

94 posted on 05/14/2012 1:57:55 PM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: Agamemnon
Did you know that according to the Reagan Library, Ronald Reagan only switched his registration from (D) to (R) in 1962, yet he was being vetted for the 1st time for (R) Presidential nomination in 1968?

You mean Governor "Ronnie Raygun" (I lived in California for a while during his time) the right wing Governor of California, deeply hated by the left, and loved by the right, unlike failed one term (34%) Gov Romney, the man who hated Reagan and was purely liberal, and anti-right?

You mean 7 years of military service Captain Reagan, who by the second half of the 1940s was already starting to be seen as a communist fighting conservative, testifying to Congress and naming names, working with the FBI, having to carry a gun for self defense from the left, Reagan?

The last time Reagan voted Dem for President was 1948, for Romney it was 1992, By 1952 Reagan was campaigning for Republicans as a "Democrat for Eisenhower", he kept using that anti-liberal, conservative club until 1962.

In 1952 Reagan was campaigning for Republicans like Eisenhower, who he campaigned for again in 1956, and then campaigned for Nixon against JFK in 1960, already having earned a reputation as an active speaker for conservatism for years.

The Reagan who formally registered Republican in 1962 and spoke at the Goldwater convention in 1964? Romney was already anti-Goldwater and anti-Reagan. Reagan was famous for his conservatism before the Vietnam War, and the Great Society, Roe V Wade, the abortion wars, Jimmy Carter, decades of Cold War defeats, and the radical 1960s, before the Reagan Revolution and the Contract with America, and Clinton, and the Gore election of 2000, Mitt Romney would not even register Republican during the Reagan Presidency or vote for him. Romney, at almost age 60, had a stroke (or something) and suddenly, unexplainedly, became a totally different person around 2006, merely to run for national office.

Reagan and Romney have nothing in common.

95 posted on 05/14/2012 2:17:13 PM PDT by ansel12 (Ann Romney, 1994 'We didn't know a single Republican when we jumped in in December,')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: ansel12; Elsie
Thanks for the wordy gibberish and the tired display of ignorance about Reagan, in service to the anti-Reagan Mitt Romney.

Sadly, it seems the one who has demonstrated no command of either his facts or of his knowledge of political history at all on this thread is you.

You are a hearsay peddler better suited to a gossip column somewhere, not a viable contributor to a constructive political strategy forum.

I think me and Elsie can get along fine without a romneybot trying to understand us or our long time friendly relationship of shared views and goals.

"Me and Elsie?" I believe that's "Elsie and I," young one. Repeat after me, say "Elsie and I." Go ahead. Say it again. I know you can, if you try. Just a reminder: this is a discussion for adults who actually have a command of facts not a kindergarten school yard where name calling still remains in fashion.

You can continue to snarl and call me a "romneybot" all you want, but you'll still be wrong, and your command of other facts will not be improved with your perpetual embrace of caricatures and factual errors.

Wow! Posting like what you just did to her in those multiple, successive, personally diminishing, if not outright insulting postings is your idea of what one does to their long-time friendly relationships?

As the saying goes: with friends like that who needs enemies?

If you would ever write anything like that at all to a real friend you'd take it off line and into a private posting, out of respect for them.

A real friend would not dress down another friend in a public forum like that.

If you continue to behave that way to your friends, you'll never be a winner at anything.

That was a perfectly classless act on your part, ansel12.

FReegards!


96 posted on 05/14/2012 2:55:36 PM PDT by Agamemnon (Darwinism is the glue that holds liberalism together)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
You mean Governor "Ronnie Raygun" (I lived in California for a while during his time) ...

His opponents and detractors derisively called him that, it's true. Not his real friends and supporters.

You and Reagan have nothing in common.

Busted.

Posters like you just make it so easy for me sometimes.

FReegards!


97 posted on 05/14/2012 3:05:12 PM PDT by Agamemnon (Darwinism is the glue that holds liberalism together)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: betty boop; Alamo-Girl
I will not be supporting Romney in any way, shape, fashion or form.

Jeremiah 7:15 And I will cast you out of my sight, as I have cast out all your brethren, even the whole seed of Ephraim. 16 Therefore pray not thou for this people, neither lift up cry nor prayer for them, neither make intercession to me: for I will not hear thee. 17 Seest thou not what they do in the cities of Judah and in the streets of Jerusalem? 18 The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead their dough, to make cakes to the queen of heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto other gods, that they may provoke me to anger.

"Behold, the LORD's hand is not shortened, that it cannot save; neither his ear heavy, that it cannot hear: But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you, that he will not hear." —Isaiah 59:1-2

Gideon cries out in Judges 6:13 in anger against God, “but now the LORD hath forsaken us, and delivered us into the hands of the Midianites.” Was God being unjust? Not one bit, Gideon was blind to the wickedness of his nation. Back in Judges 6:1 we read, "And the children of Israel did evil in the sight of the LORD: and the LORD delivered them into the hand of Midian seven years."

Pray that our leaders and others turn from their wicked ways but don’t pray for them to be blessed or for this nation to be blessed until they turn back to God. Go ahead and support Romney if you want but those of us who do our best to follow Biblical directives will not be with you.

98 posted on 05/14/2012 3:23:17 PM PDT by CynicalBear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: Agamemnon

LOL, spoken like a true liberal, Romney devotee.

First you ignore all that conservative history about Reagan that you did not know, and how it compared to the anti-Reagan, Romney, but you also didn’t catch the reference to “Ronnie Raygun” as being reflective of how the left has always hated him as a conservative, while Romney has never been a conservative.

Only a very ignorant romneybot, would compare Reagan and Romney, not only does it reveal they know nothing about either one, it shows they cannot even grasp the difference between being a Democrat in 1948, and an anti-Reagan, pro-abortion, anti-gun, pro-homosexual radical agenda lefty, more than 60 years after those long ago days in a different era, predating the Goldwater convention in 1964, the Vietnam War, and the Great Society, Roe V Wade, the abortion wars, Jimmy Carter, decades of Cold War defeats, and the radical 1960s, before the Reagan Revolution and the Contract with America, and Clinton, and the Gore election of 2000.

You would save us time by just reading the Romney Truth Files that JR has gathered on your man Mitt.


99 posted on 05/14/2012 3:28:00 PM PDT by ansel12 (Ann Romney, 1994 'We didn't know a single Republican when we jumped in in December,')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear

BTTT


100 posted on 05/14/2012 3:56:04 PM PDT by GiovannaNicoletta ("....in the last days, mockers will come with their mocking... (2 Peter 3:3))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-127 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson