Posted on 12/23/2013 10:08:07 AM PST by Colofornian
With such a worldwide anti-morg conspiracy I’m surprised you haven’t formed your own civil rights organization.
Sorry, but apparently you don't get it...The founder of this Web site has repeatedly said:
"I'm biased toward God...As a conservative site, Free Republic is pro-God..."
Statement by the founder of Free Republic
"Then those people who saw the films went home and caused trouble for their neighbors, family members, etc. There was no peace. When you've ever had to fear for the safety of your children because half the town has been told by their preachers that you're the devil... you let me know, k?"
That's a whole lotta slander coming down on the Baptists there sport...
Got proof of this? I don't deal in anecdotal bs and your statement sure can be inferred as a conscious and systematic effort by the Baptists. Much like your projection referring to the Nazis...
I'll tell you what though, I'll trade anecdotal with you, just this once...
My grandparents (RIP) were HARDCORE Southern Baptists, hardcore enough that my Grandpa would challenge his Pastor if he heard or read something not directly attributable to the Bible. And if that Pastor and the elders wouldn't stand to be corrected, he would leave and find himself another congregation. Only happened a couple of times that I know of, but my Grandpa knew the Bible and he lived it.
Now when he found out that his grandson was marrying a mormon, he didn't demonstrate any of the behaviors you mention towards me or my bride...now, one would argue, "You're family, harumph! Of course he wouldn't! HARUMPH!". But he did bring up the God Makers and we had a discussion about that. I'll disagree about the "complete lies" comment, it was easy to dismiss because the authors did misrepresent and exaggerate, but it wasn't "complete lies", many nuggets of truth in it.
He approached me and my wife with grace, love and concern about our immortal souls. And when we visited with him over the holidays, we always attended services with them and not once were ever made to feel unwanted or, as you stated, "in fear of our lives" by the members of the congregation. We should have been "in fear" for our souls though.
Again, I reiterate, if he would rebuke his Pastor, why wouldn't he rebuke me or my bride?
See how simple this is?
Sorry, you don’t get it. The fr website doesn’t specify which god or denomination. Jewish people are welcome here, as are Christians and Mormons. Get over yourself.
Sorry, you still don't get it...In that linked statement, Jim listed: " I'm biased toward God, country, family, liberty and freedom..." -- in that order...
And THEN he added: "As a conservative site, Free Republic is pro-God, pro-life, pro-family, pro-Constitution, pro-Bill of Rights, pro-gun, pro-limited government, pro-private property rights, pro-limited taxes, pro-capitalism, pro-national defense, pro-freedom, and-pro America."
So there he listed over a dozen attributes of FR...and who was first? (God)
Yet you claimed in post #57: "This website is about conservatism NOT religion." And then in your last post, you didn't admit that this was a faulty statement.
"Jewish people are welcome here, as are Christians and Mormons."
Well, indeed Mormons are welcome here!
Yet notice that Jim said "God" in the singular:
Had Jim said "Gods" in the plural, Mormons would feel even more welcome here -- and Muslims, Christians and Jews -- who are monotheists -- may feel out of place.
You see, Mormons are polytheists: Three separate personages--the Father, Son and Holy Ghost--comprise the Godhead...To us, speaking in the proper finite sense, these three are the only gods we worship." (Lds "apostle" Bruce McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, pp. 567-577, 1966 edition)
By NOT acknowledging the pantheon of Mormon gods -- including the OTHER Mormon gods not worshiped by Mormons -- Jim has indeed made a statement that doesn't embrace polytheistic religions.
'Tis a simple math issue of comprehension.
No you don’t get it. Jim didn’t specify anything other than a belief in a higher power. Read his quote again. Moreover, this site is about conservative politics not religion. Conservatives come from many different faiths, including Mormonism. This seems difficult for you to grasp.
Many Mormons are good people. Many “Christians” who claim to judge others in behalf of God, will be shocked on judgment day.
Merry Christmas!
Tulane, JR wouldn’t have included a “Religion” section here if this site wasn’t integrated with that.
As I said, Mormons & other non-Christians are welcome to FR...But that doesn't mean that Jim hasn't "specified anything":
Now is that specific 'nough for you?
Thank God. And yet this was responded to by a Mormonic poster who promotes the LDS on his home page.
BTW, do you know where they are some good tracts against Mormonism in Spanish?
“Absolutely not, please do. Words mean things. And emotionally charged words and rhetoric stir emotions. This is exactly what the Nazis did in the 30’s to stir up hate against the Jews. “
In other words, you give me permission to judge your religion, to conclude that Joseph Smith is a false prophet, a known bigamist, and a fellow who had relations with a girl as young as 14 years old, but if I do so, this is the same thing as “[stirring] up hate against the Jews.”
“And you think the people who do these things are going to heaven? That God is just going to welcome them with open arms? People that have stirred up hate and resentment among mobs of people to target another group is some how “christian” and they are saved?”
According to your religion, they’ll just go to one of the lesser heavens and will still get a chance for a ghost Mormon to go and preach to them after death.
We teach that no one is saved by their works, nor are they damned by their flaws, but are saved despite their demerits by the grace of God.
And if it is by grace, it is no more of works:
Rom_4:4 Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.
I’m not concerned with whatever accusations of murdering you make against Christians. The fact of the matter is, Mormonism is a religious cult which teaches a Gospel of merits for the sole purpose of becoming a God after death.
I’m sorry, but 2,000 years of Christianity aren’t going to change just because you’re comparing me to the Nazis.
“However, blood atonement is only applied to murderers who actually know the doctrine of God. People who know better, there is no forgiveness in this life. “Christians” all across the world practice one form of “blood atonement” or another. We call it the death penalty.”
Here’s Blood Atonement against an alleged sin of adultery, not murder:
“Rasmos Anderson was a Danish man who came to Utah... He had married a widow lady somewhat older than himself... At one of the meetings during the reformation Anderson and his step-daughter confessed that they had committed adultery... they were rebaptized and received into full membership. They were then placed under covenant that if they again committed adultery, Anderson should suffer death. Soon after this a charge was laid against Anderson before the Council, accusing him of adultery with his step-daughter. This Council was composed of Klingensmith and his two counselors; it was the Bishop’s Council. Without giving Anderson any chance to defend himself or make a statement, the Council voted that Anderson must die for violating his covenants. Klingensmith went to Anderson and notified him that the orders were that he must die by having his throat cut, so that the running of his blood would atone for his sins. Anderson, being a firm believer in the doctrines and teachings of the Mormon Church, made no objections... His wife was ordered to prepare a suit of clean clothing, in which to have her husband buried... she being directed to tell those who should inquire after her husband that he had gone to California.”
http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/mountainmeadows/atonement.html
Another example, as well as the use of castration:
“I knew of many men being killed in Nauvoo... and I know of many a man who was quietly put out of the way by the orders of Joseph and his Apostles while the Church was there.” (Ibid., page 284) Lee also revealed another very cruel practice which took place both in Nauvoo, Illinois, and in early Utah:
“In Utah it has been the custom with the Priesthood to make eunuchs of such men as were obnoxious to the leaders. This was done for a double purpose: first, it gave a perfect revenge, and next, it left the poor victim a living example to others of the dangers of disobeying counsel and not living as ordered by the Priesthood.
“In Nauvoo it was the orders from Joseph Smith and his apostles to beat, wound and castrate all Gentiles that the police could take in the act of entering or leaving a Mormon household under circumstances that led to the belief that they had been there for immoral purposes.... In Utah it was the favorite revenge of old, worn-out members of the Priesthood, who wanted young women sealed to them, and found that the girl preferred some handsome young man. The old priests generally got the girls, and many a young man was unsexed for refusing to give up his sweetheart at the request of an old and failing, but still sensual apostle or member of the Priesthood. As an illustration... Warren Snow was Bishop of the Church at Manti, San Pete County, Utah. He had several wives, but there was a fair, buxom young woman in the town that Snow wanted for a wife.... She thanked him for the honor offered, but told him she was then engaged to a young man, a member of the Church, and consequently could not marry the old priest.... He told her it was the will of God that she should marry him, and she must do so; that the young man could be got rid of, sent on a mission or dealt with in some way... that, in fact, a promise made to the young man was not binding, when she was informed that it was contrary to the wishes of the authorities.
“The girl continued obstinate.... the authorities called on the young man and directed him to give up the young woman. This he steadfastly refused to do.... He remained true to his intended, and said he would die before he would surrender his intended wife to the embraces of another.... The young man was ordered to go on a mission to some distant locality... But the mission was refused...
“It was then determined that the rebellious young man must be forced by harsh treatment to respect the advice and orders of the Priesthood. His fate was left to Bishop Snow for his decision. He decided that the young man should be castrated; Snow saying, ‘When that is done, he will not be liable to want the girl badly, and she will listen to reason when she knows that her lover is no longer a man.’
http://exmormon.org/d6/drupal/bloodatn
“Are you kidding? There’s 1800 years of it.”
No there isn’t, because the “it” is:
“please find anywhere in the confessions of the Southern Baptists, RCC, Presbyterians, any doctrine similar to Blood Atonement, or any command to murder enemies of the church”
IOW, the “It” I want is the equivalent of Brigham Young’s doctrine of Blood Atonement, taught in any church.
“How many times have we seen posts claiming that Mormon’s are obsessed with money and sex? Subhuman, deceivers, evil, cultists, unfit for compassion or charity, deserving of violence, etc... “
In that case, you should be able to produce the posts you are describing. I’m sure the Religion Moderator will be interested to see them too.
“Strawman. All words are not the same nor all criticism the same.”
Are you sure you understand what a strawman is? Your attacking me on the basis of condemning Mormonism, saying it is the same thing as what the Nazis did for the Jews. And then you turned around, right after writing this sentence, with the same thing:
You write:
“The Eternal Jew (1940), directed by Fritz Hippler, portrayed Jews as wandering cultural parasites, consumed by sex and money.” -Source
It’s the same propaganda that’s always used by one group to demonize and stir up hated against another.”
I can’t help but to notice that this is the only thing you’ve been talking about in this thread. Not one peep about anything actually factually said about Mormon theology or Joseph Smith.
“You will find no actual proof that anyone was ever put to death by any order of the LDS Church. It just didn’t happen.”
It’s already been proven. Unless Brigham Young did NOT say this:
“There are sins that men commit for which they cannot receive forgiveness in this world, or in that which is to come, and if they had their eyes open to see their true condition, they would be perfectly willing to have their blood spilt upon the ground, that the smoke thereof might ascend to heaven as an offering for their sins; and the smoking incense would atone for their sins, whereas, if such is not the case, they will stick to them and remain upon them in the spirit world.
“I know, when you hear my brethren telling about cutting people off from the earth, that you consider it is strong doctrine; but it is to save them, not to destroy them....
“And further more, I know that there are transgressors, who, if they knew themselves, and the only condition upon which they can obtain forgiveness, would beg of their brethren to shed their blood, that the smoke thereof might ascend to God as an offering to appease the wrath that is kindled against them, and that the law might have its course. I will say further;
I have had men come to me and offer their lives to atone for their sins.
“It is true that the blood of the Son of God was shed for sins through the fall and those committed by men, yet men can commit sins which it can never remit.... There are sins that can be atoned for by an offering upon an altar, as in ancient days; and there are sins that the blood of a lamb, or a calf, or of turtle dove, cannot remit, but they must be atoned for by the blood of the man.” (Sermon by Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 4, pages 53-54); also published in the Mormon Church’s Deseret News, 1856, page 235)
“Officially condemning them meant they were heretics and were put to death for it. “
Where do you find “condemining them” defined as “putting them to death”? Can you please provide this definition from any actual confession or source for any church?
Oops, I forgot to include this in the previous post.
Does this guy have an axe to grind?
In 1958, Gustive O. Larson, Professor of Church History at the church’s Brigham Young University, acknowledged that blood atonement was actually practiced. He related the following:
“To whatever extent the preaching on blood atonement may have influenced action, it would have been in relation to Mormon disciplinary action among its own members. In point would be a verbally reported case of a Mr. Johnson in Cedar City who was found guilty of adultery with his stepdaughter by a bishop’s court and sentenced to death for atonement of his sin. According to the report of reputable eyewitnesses, judgment was executed with consent of the offender who went to his unconsecrated grave in full confidence of salvation through the shedding of his blood. Such a case, however primitive, is understandable within the meaning of the doctrine and the emotional extremes of the [Mormon] Reformation.” (Utah Historical Quarterly, January, 1958, page 62, note 39)
http://exmormon.org/d6/drupal/bloodatn
Let me know by Freepmail the post # and thread if you see a post which condemns individual Mormons rather than Mormon beliefs, deities, religious authorities, etc.
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.