NRA4Freedom Again, the truth is not bigotry, it is merely the truth.

I thought religion was all about “faith” not provable truth.
The provable truth is that life evolved and developed organically over unfathomable eons to peak with the creation of hairless apes who argue over which arcane deity is the coolest.

Also, traditionally, he has in effect been an abortion supporter, a gay “rights” supporter, and he appears to support embryonic stem-cell research to an extent. Frankly, he appears to me to be and issue “waffler” like Kerry was, and that’s going to be a pretty hard person to vote for. Maybe I am mistaken about him, but so far, that’s the way it looks to me.

But here’s a question for you: Would you not vote for Mitt Romney only because he’s a Mormon? Or are you desperately trying to find some reason to not vote for him that’s more politically acceptable (i.e. so you don’t have to admit you are being bigoted)? It’s dealing with people like you that makes me have sympathy for the Dem’s hsyterical rantings about “Jesus land’–they are talking about people like you, unlike most true Christians (which so far, you’ve not demonstrated you are).

PARIS (Reuters) – Pope Benedict was baptized at birth and will most likely be baptized again one year after his death, not by his Roman Catholic Church but by a Mormon he never met…

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070205/lf_nm/religion_mormons_baptism_dc_2

Nothing biblical about this kind of goofiness.

Mainstream Mormons haven’t condoned multiple marriages in more than 100 years.

This would be a more accurate statement:

“Mainstream Mormons outside of Utah haven’t condoned multiple marriages in more than 100 years.”

I’m not talking about that nutball Warren Jeffs. I’m talking about little towns like Bluffdale tucked away between Draper and Riverton, which is south of Salt Lake City. This is one example of may such towns.

I’ve seen the big multi-family homes and 18th century wardrobes. The privacy of the sister-wives in these plural families is well protected from the prying eyes of the media, very often by the local media themselves.

“But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtlety, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him. For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.”

and do you know just how easy it is to tell what this verse is talking about? It says “another Jesus…whom we have not preached”. So let’s compare the Mormon Jesus to the Jesus of the Bible. Is the Jesus of the Bible the brother of Lucifer like Mormon theology says? No, Lucifer was an angel, a creation OF God. Is the Bible Jesus merely a created being, the fist of many of the offspring or creations of God like Mormon theology says? No, the Bible Jesus IS God, and He existed forever with God. Was Christ conceived through a physical act, like Mormon theology says? No, the Bible Jesus was conceived in the womb of a virgin by the Holy Spirit, who is also God. Was the Jesus of the Bible a married polygamist with children? No, He was, and is, God. Did the Jesus of the Bible earn his own salvation on the Cross? No, salvation was never required of Jesus Christ, because He was perfect in all His ways from the beginning, unlike the teachings of Mormon which attempt to reveal Him as a once mortal and imperfect man.

No, you cannot merely attach someone’s name to your religion and then expect everyone to take for granted that the words mean what you say they do, no matter how much you WANT people to believe that they do. And interestingly enough, one of your own church Presidents actually told the truth in 1998, when he made a statement in Paris when

“In bearing testimony of Jesus Christ, President Hinckley spoke of those outside the Church who say Latter-day Saints ‘do not believe in the traditional Christ. No, I don’t. The traditional Christ of whom they speak is not the Christ of whom I speak. For the Christ of whom I speak has been revealed in this the Dispensation of the Fulness of Times. He together with His Father, appeared to the boy Joseph smith in the year 1820, and when Joseph left the grove that day, he knew more of the nature of God than all the learned ministers of the gospel of the ages. (Church News, week ending June 20, 1998, page 7)

Of course, Mormons will ultimately deny that any of the teachings of the past leaders of the Mormon church are their doctrines and theology NOW, since there are SO many things recorded from what these people and the Mormon church has taught in the past, to attempt to argue their doctrinal positions would be impossible.

But in order to really bring into view the deceptive ways of the LDS church, maybe we should actually begin with discussing the curse of Cain. You know, that little doctrine that was a part of the LDS church for over a hundred years that pointed out that black folk are the color they are because they are the seed of Cain and under the curse. Oh wait, I forgot that for the last decade or so, the LDS church outrightly denies that it ever had any such teaching or theology. Imagine that. But since some people are old enough to remember such teachings, lots of people know the truth. Lots of young Mormons have no clue. I’m sure if you ask your bishop, they will tell you you not to worry about it though, that’s how deception works.

If you REALLY want to go there, and reveal all the teachings of the Mormon church and how they differ from what the Bible says, feel perfectly free. I’m not afraid of the truth, are you?

In fact, the very idea that because I simply pointed out that some important Mormon doctines are wholly incompatable with the “Christian” Bible you are threatening to stop voting for conservatives, well, that’s very liberal of you

NRA4Freedom on February 7, 2007 at 8:29 PM

Actually, it sounds like the anti-Mormon bigots are the ones who are going to change their vote because they can’t stand Mormonism. Not us Mormons.

Wow. So you’re saying that the doctrine that God created the universe, that he loves us, that he sent his only begotten Son, Jesus Christ, to teach his Gospel, die on the cross, and be resurrected, to atone for our sins, and be the example we are to follow, and that God still lives and does his work today, and that to be saved we have to believe in and follow Jesus Christ, and that ultimately it is his grace that saves us (and those are the central doctrines of the Mormon Church), is in opposition to the Bible? I have a feeling that there are one or two non-Mormon Christians that would take issue with that rather bizarre assertion. Even some pop-Christians would have a hard time believing that you have actually read the Bible, if you believe that those things are in opposition to the Bible.

If your brand of Christianity denies those things, then I have no problem with being marginalized. If hellenized (what is often misnamed as “traditional”) Christianity denies those things, then the pop-Christians can keep their clique. I don’t want to be a part of it. I’d rather have the glassy-eyed, frothing at the mouth, toothless religious bigots saying we’re a cult. Jesus knows I believe in him and am trying to follow him. Why should I care if some mortal ignoramus doesn’t believe it?

Only a hardcore religious bigot, a person ignorant of Christianity, or a person ignorant of the true teaching of Mormonism would believe that hackneyed old myth.

Unfortunately, it’s usually a combination of all three.
(When a person becomes an anti-Mormon, God strikes him stupid.)

I don’t mind if somebody doesn’t believe Mormon doctrine. But if you’re going to reject something, reject what actually is official church doctrine. Some of the goofy things you guys are writing hear bring me to tears with laughter.

Just one example of something that somebody pulled out of his behind (or probably got from some poorly done anti-Mormon website).

>was appointed by a counsel of gods in the heavens to his high position as the god of planet Earth

Uh, no. Maybe you got that from an episode of Battlestar Galactica or something. God the Father is the creator of the universe. If anybody appointed him to the position of god of planet Earth, it was himself. He created the universe, and the Earth, and he appointed his Son Jesus Christ to come here as the Messiah to establish his church, teach his Gospel, die on the cross, and be resurrected, bringing the victory over physical death to all mankind. And his atonement brings forgiveness to all who repent.

Where’d all that come from? Oh, gee. I don’t know. Maybe…THE BIBLE?!

And I keep seeing that goofy thing about Mormons thinking that we can work ourselves into heaven. I’d like to smack the doofus that came up with that one, but that wouldn’t be too Christian of me, so I’ll leave that up to the pop-Christian religious bigots. We believe, as The Bible says (oh know, there it is again!), that “faith without works is dead,” but that doesn’t mean that we don’t believe in grace. A Mormon that actually knows and believes in Mormon doctrine knows that no matter how hard we work, it will never be enough to get us to heaven. The work that we do is to enter into and maintain a covenant relationship with Christ (we remember him and emulate him and obey him), and then all the vertical work (toward Heaven) is through the grace of Christ. We are saved by grace.

Again, where did all that come from? Oops, The Bible. Pretty mundane, huh.

Sorry that there aren’t any truly sordid details about the Mormon Church. No aliens, no harems, no magic or late-night sacrifices in the middle of the forest, no horns, no laser shows. (Oh, well, actually, I think the Osmonds do a laser show during their concerts.) We’re actually kind of boring, when you think about it. Maybe that’s why people keep making up stories. Our reality is just not interesting enough for the tabloids that seem to interest the trailer trash types so much…

Let’s have a specific, point-by-point discussion of the differences between modern mainline (i.e., monogamous) Mormonism on the one hand and Catholic and Protestant Christianity on the other, instead of just trading barbs and hyperlinks. That way we get to hear what Mormons believe from Mormons themselves and their answers to the claims made by their critics. Isn’t that how a debate is supposed to go?

NRA4Freedom on February 7, 2007 at 9:52 PM

I’m not going anywhere and I’m still waiting for you to prove your beliefs to be factual.

You all sound like the proverbial little boy who is going to just take their marbles home and quit playing if you can’t have your way.

Again, the truth is not bigotry, it is merely the truth. If you want to be Mormon, feel perfectly free to do so, it’s a free Country. But beating your fists on the ground and holding your breath because the easily determined facts don’t happen go your way is pretty strange, really it is.

You also obviously do not understand the meaning of my moniker, that’s too bad too.

Before you go around saying I and the other 12 million members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints do not, in fact, believe in Christ, I recommend you read something not written by people who have an axe to grind. If you can’t be intellectually honest enough to do that, then just admit it. As it is, your tactics have been widely recognized as bigoted in nature. You can cry “wolf” all you want, but the link I gave earlier is more than adequate rebuttal to your claims we are not followers of Christ. So just shut up and go away, you ruined this thread for anyone else who wanted to mock Corn.

And kudos to everyone else who recognized him for what he was.

Jummy – yeah that’s right, let’s rid the conservative movement of all the Christians. We might be able to get as many votes in 08 as Ralph Nader did last time around. Loser.

I’m thinking that the Bible would be holding the only “definition” of what is or is not “christian” that matters

Actually I think God is the final arbiter of such things, and not your rather shakey and stupid interpretation of the Bible.

You see if you want to go on that, by your behavior here, by my opinion you are not a Christian no matter what you claim. The LDS most definately are.

You can “say” what you want.. but your “Saying” means nothing but your own rhetoric and hyoperbole. So what point do you grow up and quit being someone that owns something he doesn’t and start behaving like you claim you are?

NRA4Freedom on February 7, 2007 at 8:29 PM

I would appreciate it if you would change your handle. As a former Mormon and a NRA member, I find your misrepresentation of the facts to be reprehensible. I doubt that anyone in the NRA would want you to represent them on this issue, and if they did want an “Anti-Mormon bigot” to be speaking about freedom of religion, I would drop my membership.

NRA4Freedom on February 7, 2007 at 5:14 PM

You are taking a very arrogant tone here……I have asked you twice now to prove your faith to be factual. THEN and ONLY THEN, can you demand your beliefs as the standard for others to be held to.

NRA4Freedom, you shouldn’t take the Mormon vote for the Republican party for granted. If enough people like you that call yourselves “conservative” keep up this bigoted crap, there are enough moderate Democrats in the West we can vote for and leave all you exclusionary so-and-so’s out in the cold in 2008.

WasatchMan on February 7, 2007 at 5:36 PM

Honestly, I am not too concerned with who you vote for. In fact, the very idea that because I simply pointed out that some important Mormon doctines are wholly incompatable with the “Christian” Bible you are threatening to stop voting for conservatives, well, that’s very liberal of you, politically speaking of course. And by the way, the TRUTH is not and never is “bigotry”, it is simply the truth.

Enough said…

The movie “Swimfan” was (very) loosely based on her.

At Simon Fraser University in British Columbia, Canada (my province), Rachel Marsden falsely accused the swimming coach, Liam Donnelly, of severely sexually harrassing her over their 16-month romantic relationship. She caused Mr. Donnelly to be fired and his name to be dragged through the mud.

The movie, Swimfan, even used the name “Donnelly” for the first man the protagonist destroyed, just in case followers of the above case missed the reference.

In fact, this happily married man had never even dated her and did not harrass her (she had a thing for him, obviously), as her own obsessive emails later proved and she later admitted. She ruined the man’s life when he wouldn’t sleep with her, basically.

He was reinstated, she was disgraced, and for reasons that utterly escape me, Bill O’Reilly on FOX News, among others, and many Republicans believe that this woman is a great Canadian commentator. This is embarrassing to Canadian conservatives, in my humble opinion.

You want intelligent Canadian commentary? Try Andrew Coyne andrewcoyne.com, a brilliant political analyst whose 5-10 year ahead political predictions on Canadian electoral politics tend to work out. Or for the mainstream “(wo)man in the street” opinion, visit 2005/6 top Canadian blogger, Kate MacMillan of “Small Dead Animals” smalldeadanimals.com. Or even the perspicacious and well-travelled, Mark Steyn.

To consider Rachel Marsden an authority on something so subject to human emotion as politicals is farcical. I gather it has something to do with her looks.