Video: “I know Mitt Romney is not himself Christian…”

posted at 9:30 am on August 30, 2007 by Allahpundit

The things you learn on “Countdown.” Between this and that big dog-on-the-roof expose, this might be her year for a Pulitzer. Click the image to watch.

cox-romney.jpg


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 5 6 7

You are all working hard to held Ap get his phone…

Mcguyver on September 1, 2007 at 11:22 AM

Neh ne ne ne Neh, Neh ne ne ne Neh!!!

Mcguyver on September 1, 2007 at 11:23 AM

Thanks to the biggest pile of bull crap below me, you all helped to make this possible…

That was a thrill!!!

Mcguyver on September 1, 2007 at 11:26 AM

Thanks to you all! I needed that “lift”.

I found out just how well I float on crap!

Yeah, I’m rather buoyant.

I routinely turn piles of bull crap into roses.

Now I have to get away from this addiction called HA and get some work done.

Booya!

Mcguyver on September 1, 2007 at 11:34 AM

What a strange and eccentric person.

Christoph on September 1, 2007 at 12:01 PM

Joseph Smith has no proof that he was ordained as a prophet. You are taking his word for it. It is offensive for you to say that you have the orchestra. All you have is the word of a man with no proof whatsoever.

Rose on September 1, 2007 at 12:48 PM

And why is the Book of Mormon written in King James English? The reason the Bible was originally translated in that style was because that was the common speech at that time. There was no reason for Joseph Smith to use that style. The only reason he did is because he fabricated it and he used the Kings James Bible as his influence. There are parts of the Book of Mormon that are lifted almost verbatim from the King James Bible.

Rose on September 1, 2007 at 1:03 PM

And other sources, including spelling errors, verbatim.

Look, they have to willfully suspend their reason to believe what is provably a lie. They’re cult members. Don’t expect to convince them here.

Christoph on September 1, 2007 at 1:06 PM

I’m done. I’m finished feeling the “love” on this thread, by being called a cult member. Continue to wallow the the mud if you wish, kiddies.

WasatchMan on September 1, 2007 at 4:05 PM

Bye, WasatchMan. I sincerely hope you reevaluate your religion at some point in your life, and find one started by at least a somewhat less creepy mystic.

And therein lies my preference for Christianity.

Christoph on September 1, 2007 at 5:20 PM

However, this isn’t a church social or a game of Monopoly at home, both things I enjoy with my Mormon friends and their families.

Christoph on September 1, 2007 at 10:36 AM

And there you go again, bringing up your Mormon friends like John Kerry and his Vietnam record, as though it gives you the authority to be as vile against Mormons as you please.

And therein lies my preference for Christianity.

Christoph on September 1, 2007 at 5:20 PM

Preference but not adherence. Seems pointless to me.

Out of curiousity, why was the prophet of God given 33 women in marriage including 2 14-year old girls?

Reward for services rendered?

Seriously, this is what you’re stuck on?

King Solomon, who the Bible named the wisest man, had 700 wives and 300 concubines.

And there was a time when teen girls were married off to older men, a scene shown in Romeo and Juliet.

You have some valid complaints against Joseph Smith, so there’s really no reason to get hung up on this one, especially since Mormons have spoken out against polygamy.

Though really, I don’t get the infatuation with going into a religions past when you might be able to get something really juicy on what’s wrong with it currently. If you could do that and really prove what a cult it is, then you might look a tad bit less like a prick.

If you look at any religion’s past, including Christianity, you’ll find some disgusting people who helped make it what it is today. While Jesus was perfect on earth, none of His other prophets were. They may have given perfect prophesies, but they were not perfect people.

Esthier on September 1, 2007 at 8:51 PM

But the very foundation of Mormonism is that Joseph Smith was given authority which he claims that the other Christian churches didn’t have. So it is appropriate to investigate his life and the way he claims to have received that authority. If he was a fraud than that does affect the things that he claims were true and that are the foundation of the religion.

Rose on September 1, 2007 at 9:02 PM

If he was a fraud than that does affect the things that he claims were true and that are the foundation of the religion.

Rose on September 1, 2007 at 9:02 PM

The fraud charges should only apply to his prophecies. Were they truthful or were they lies?

If even one was untrue, then yes, those who base their faith off of his lies are basing their faith on lies; however, that says nothing of those who base their faith on Christ and only use Smith’s words the way others use Plato’s words.

Esthier on September 1, 2007 at 10:37 PM

Anyway, last word on the subject: Joseph Smith was a sexually abusive, violent, con-man and a false prophet.

Those who follow him knowingly or otherwise follow same.

I feel some sympathy toward them for following this evil man, but will not refrain from pointing out how evil he is.

And to equate Smith with Plato is, once again, Esthier, demonstrating why you disgust me. When you’re not pulling for Satanists.

Christoph on September 1, 2007 at 11:09 PM

And to equate Smith with Plato is, once again, Esthier, demonstrating why you disgust me. When you’re not pulling for Satanists.

Christoph on September 1, 2007 at 11:09 PM

And that comment shows your complete ignorance on my statement.

I do not “pull for” Satanists any more than I “pull for” pricks or, to use my analogy, whores and those who get paid for blow jobs.

And no, I’m not equating Plato and Smith; it’s only your own bias against me that would make you believe that. If you could read my comments with rationality, it’s possible, though not probable, that you’d understand what I was saying.

Esthier on September 1, 2007 at 11:36 PM

Oh, and following someone’s words has NOTHING to do with what sort of person he/she was. Most of the great men we revere from our resent past were adulterers, a pathetic sin, but that doesn’t take away from their words.

If something is true, it doesn’t becomes a lie because of the messenger.

None of your insults can take away from that.

Esthier on September 1, 2007 at 11:40 PM

This person started a religion based on his words. So his character is important. If he wasn’t an honest person and had a reputation as a conman than it is reasonable to question his words.

Rose on September 2, 2007 at 12:16 AM

I was going to retire, but I can’t resist commenting on this, your brilliant observation:

This person started a religion based on his words. So his character is important. If he wasn’t an honest person and had a reputation as a conman than it is reasonable to question his words.

Particularly if he claimed he found said words after a conversation with an angel written on a gold book, since lost, in some mystic tongue.

In such a case, questioning said words is reasonable and all of Esthier’s arguments — in defense of a false prophet’s religion predicted by the Bible she claims as a Christian to believe — fall so far off the mark as to be farcical.

Christoph on September 2, 2007 at 1:33 AM

So – let’s just get this straight. Traditional Christians are not allowed to cast any doubt whatsoever as to whether Mormons adhere to traditional Christian doctrine, or we are demonic bigots, which seems to be your favorite word.

However, you, as a Mormon, are completely justified in doing what you just accused us of doing. Your argument sounds like: I’m rubber you’re glue…

nailinmyeye on September 1, 2007 at 9:49 AM

Cuts pretty deep don’t it?

First, I never said I was a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.

2nd, I never said evangelicals could not make value judgments. What I said, which many the so-called evangelicals around here ignored, was that I’d like to see an evangelical explain the benefits of their faith without slamming any other persons faith or non-faith.

The bigots CAN NOT do it. They ARE bigots disguising themselves as the only arbiters of truth, and casting Jesus’ teachings in a bad light because they lie and misrepresent what Jesus taught.

Sick and pathetic.

csdeven on September 2, 2007 at 9:07 AM

So – your answer to all of right2bright’s questions is, basically, “shut up because you suck and you don’t understand”? That’s cool. Thanks for clearing that up.

nailinmyeye on September 1, 2007 at 9:52 AM

The answer to every one of her accusations was there, you just closed your eyes, ears, and mind to it.

Go re-read it.

csdeven on September 2, 2007 at 9:10 AM

Two things here -
1) So, are you saying that the Bible is not the world of God?

No. I am demanding you hold to the same standards of proof that you demand of every other faith out there.

2) By your reasoning here, couldn’t I just respond that “the Book of Mormon sums up what you have been TOLD it sums up, or means, or whatever”?

Sure you could, but have YOU read it? I doubt it because your PASTOR told you what it meant, and I am pretty dang sure he uses some out of context scripture to tell you that you should not search it out for yourself. I have read the bible and have come to my own conclusions.

Tell me – what part of the Nicene Creed is not found in the Bible?
nailinmyeye on September 1, 2007 at 9:58 AM

It’s what they LEFT OUT, that is the concern.

Just look at what the creed has wrought…..those that adhere to it are teaching the simplest, most basic teachings that appeal to the larger group. This puts teachings above church loyalty. But here we are, 1700 years later, and we have sooooo many so called “churches” teaching variations on the theme. WHY? Because each Pastor preaches that which tickles the ears of enough people to get them to crack open their wallets and buy him a lifestyle.

Many so called “Christians” through the years have used attacks against the LDS church as a way to froth up their followers and and in turn keep the coffers full.

csdeven on September 2, 2007 at 9:34 AM

Joseph Smith has no proof that he was ordained as a prophet. You are taking his word for it. It is offensive for you to say that you have the orchestra. All you have is the word of a man with no proof whatsoever.
Rose on September 1, 2007 at 12:48 PM

You have as much proof that the bible is the unerring word of God.

It’s faith. It always has been and always will be. The attacks on the LDS church, and the evangelical insistence that the bible is completely unerring PROVES that the evangelicals are basically faith-less. Faith does not require that we have a body of work we point to that requires no faith to use as a guide in our lives.

The faith that believers use to intimidate non-believers is suddenly forgotten when it is pointed out that there is not a soul on earth who can prove the bible is absolute truth.

In the end you have as much proof that your faith is the absolute truth as the LDS have to prove their faith is absolute truth. This makes you brothers in the exercise of faith, a virtue that should bind you together and I dare say that God would be very pleased with.

Yet, bigoted evangelicals doing all they can to tear that bond asunder.

And believers in God wonder why there are many fine people in this world that have no use for Gods message. In part it’s because those who choose to speak for him are arrogant, hypocritical, and close minded.

csdeven on September 2, 2007 at 9:48 AM

And why is the Book of Mormon written in King James English? The reason the Bible was originally translated in that style was because that was the common speech at that time. There was no reason for Joseph Smith to use that style. The only reason he did is because he fabricated it and he used the Kings James Bible as his influence. There are parts of the Book of Mormon that are lifted almost verbatim from the King James Bible.
Rose on September 1, 2007 at 1:03 PM

Does it matter? You still have to prove why the belief in the trinity is fact. You need to prove that God REALLY wants us to believe it, but goes through all the trouble to show himself as three separate distinct persons. You also need to explain what God does with his Jesus skin suit when he wants to be in the Father role. It’d also be nice to square the fact that God knows things that Jesus does not. IE: When the second coming of Christ will be. God knows, Jesus does not?

And please, don’t refer back to the bible for proof. It wont hold up.

Man is created in Gods image. Since that image also means our intellect etc, that has to be the standard that we use to vet out demoniacally possessed evangelicals that demand we cast off that intellect when intellect is the tool God wants us to use in many situations.

Any fool can see that during the baptism of Christ, all three members of the Godhead were shown in three distinctive personages. Christ in the water, the Holy Spirit in the form of a dove, and Gods voice coming down from heaven. Along with all the other clues, it’s very clear that the nature of the Godhead was clearly understood to be three separate members, and certainly not a trinity.

You’ve got bigger problems than why JS, someone you despise and distrust, wrote the BofM in the kings English. You need to prove the bible to be the unerring arbiter of truth so we can properly vet the teachings of others.

I know you wont do that. Can’t do that. And worse yet, will not go back to Christs teachings and humble yourself to the fact that you have no standing to judge anyone but your own actions.

csdeven on September 2, 2007 at 10:10 AM

Man is created in Gods image. Since that image also means our intellect etc, that has to be the standard that we use to vet out demoniacally possessed evangelicals that demand we cast off that intellect when intellect is the tool God wants us to use in many situations.

Dude, you make it really hard to want to talk to you when all you do is call me, or people like me, possessed by demons. I don’t get it. This whole time I’ve said nothing more that “Mormons are not Christian in the traditional sense, but an offshoot of traditional Christianity. I would not call them “Christian”” But you, man, right of the bat, slam anyone different from you as demonic.

Cool. Whatever makes you feel better.

nailinmyeye on September 2, 2007 at 3:04 PM

In such a case, questioning said words is reasonable and all of Esthier’s arguments — in defense of a false prophet’s religion predicted by the Bible she claims as a Christian to believe — fall so far off the mark as to be farcical.

Christoph on September 2, 2007 at 1:33 AM

And again you prove yourself a cartoon. I haven’t even once defended Mormonism.

Any fool can see that during the baptism of Christ, all three members of the Godhead were shown in three distinctive personages. Christ in the water, the Holy Spirit in the form of a dove, and Gods voice coming down from heaven. Along with all the other clues, it’s very clear that the nature of the Godhead was clearly understood to be three separate members, and certainly not a trinity.

csdeven on September 2, 2007 at 10:10 AM

I don’t understand you here. You tell others not to use the Bible for proof of anything, because it won’t hold up but then use the Bible here to make your point.

Furthermore, if we can’t use the Bible, then what can be used? What else is there?

Esthier on September 2, 2007 at 3:16 PM

If you can’t use the Bible to prove Christianity why do you think that you can use the Book of Mormon? What to you have as proof of anything? Who Joseph Smith was and whether or not the Book of Mormon is authentic is the heart of Mormon belief.

Rose on September 2, 2007 at 3:33 PM

Christoph,

If you’re still reading this, my analogy is here:

baldilocks on August 30, 2007 at 6:00 PM

It’s been too hot here in LA to sit in my AC-less home office, so I haven’t kept up. And, BTW, I’m a chick. :-)

baldilocks on September 2, 2007 at 6:21 PM

You have been brainwashed by your paid pastor who has a vested interest in keeping you aggressive against and scared of that which will take you (and your tithings) out of his church and to another church of your choosing. His motivation is money because he needs it to survive. I don’t trust the words of those who need to deride another faith in order to buoy up their own, and scare their followers into action.

Can you bigots EVER just come into one of this topics and explain your beliefs without pointing to others? In my experience you cannot, because that is how you are told to approach those of the LDS faith.

The LDS do not need to, and rarely do attack evangelicals. In general they view them as brothers in the faith (except for the bigots, and even then they do not lash out at them for their vile behavior towards the church). They liken the difference between evangelicals and the LDS this way….the evangelicals have one instrument in Gods plan, whereas the LDS have the orchestra.

My suggestion to you is to shut your mouth until you get the facts about the authorized teachings of the LDS faith, because none of your citations are part of authorized canon of the LDS church.

csdeven on September 1, 2007 at 7:00 AM

Let’s take this point by point my friend.

I have had dozens of pastors in my life, they must have all been great a brainwashing. Pay is the last thing Mormons can speak about. I can go to any church, anytime a worship. But try to go to a temple and not be a tithing Mormon, you will be turned away. Never had a pastor ever mention Mormon’s from the pulpit, privately we have prayed for each of you to seek and see the truth. Spend a year in a Luthern Church, and you will never hear the pastor speak of Mormon’s , Jews, Muslims, from the pulpit. That shows that you have spent zero time in a Christian Church.

Second Point, this post is about the Mormon faith, look at the top and listen to the video. What she said is accurate, that is all we talked about, until a mormon took offense of the truth. I never called you a bigot, why do you insist on calling everyone who disagrees with your religion a bigot? Because that is what the mormon’s are taught at an early age.
“But the Bible has been robbed of its plainness; many sacred books having been lost, others rejected by the Romish Church, and what few we have left, were copied and recopied so many times, that it is admitted that almost every verse has been corrupted and mutilated to that degree that any two of them read alike.” (Orson Pratt, The Seer, pg.213)
This is propaganda that you think Christians practice. Look at my other quotes and this one, who is the false prophet…and the false profit?
Authorized canon’s, but they are from leaders and prophets that are honored. Are you saying Orson Pratt is a liar? Brigham Young is a liar? Orson Hyde a liar? Joseph Smith a liar? They never said the things quoted in my post?

right2bright on September 1, 2007 at 2:32 AM

And now you are denying you are mormon? Okay. You say they are not your authorized canon, but that is the answer everytime their is a descrepancy. You just change the canan…I know, let’s let the black’s join the church and not keep them out anymore…just happened to happen when they would have been fried for being…here is your word…a bigotted church. I know, from now on we do not allow polygamy. I use quotes from your leaders and you call me a bigot.
Okay, I am a truth quoting bigot, a bigot because I quote bigots, how biggoted of me to be a bigot. There your favorite word used several times. Print it cut it out and sleep on it. I am glad that you believe the American Indians are the Jews, I am glad that you want to baptize dead Jews and make them mormon, I am glad you finally have accepted blacks into your fold. Now you can call yourself…unbigots.

right2bright on September 2, 2007 at 6:57 PM

And again you prove yourself a cartoon. I haven’t even once defended Mormonism.

Esthier

I don’t know if you’re mentally ill or what, but you did defend Satanism.

Christoph on September 2, 2007 at 7:20 PM

baldilocks, you’re a chick, huh?

Sweet.

I don’t want to taint my reminiscing about your being female with this comment, so I’ll address your analogy momentarily.

Christoph on September 2, 2007 at 7:22 PM

baldilocks, I think secretive evil people are often, but not always, as dangerous as loud ones.

Hitler was an evil niece-scatalogical-perverted psychopath, but in his case, if he’d have kept quiet he would obviously have done less harm.

So your story represents a valid enough viewpoint, but it’s hardly universal.

If I, for example, think about women in less than glowing terms… and I assure you that on the contrary I think of them in very glowing terms… I do less harm if I keep these thoughts to myself than I if offend teenage girls who walk by by catcalling and scaring the daylights out of them.

And I’ve seen men do this.

The evil is wrong in both cases, but it’s just simplistic to say that loudly advocating/spreading/practicing evil is better than keeping it inside.

I have had problematic (like, say, being angry or coveting something, or lust) thoughts from time to time… who hasn’t? I temper them.

When you throw something out into the public realm and loudly stand behind it it becomes who you are and defines you. Either through the power of affirmation and self-image or just through what expert in persuasion, Robert Cialdini, described as the powerful weapon of automatic persuasion: consistency.

People feel enormous social pressure to be consistent with what they’ve publicly stated before, good or bad, which is one of the main reasons people don’t change their minds constantly.

So I think your step-dad is a great fellow, but hasn’t thought the matter through properly. He’s falling back on a cultural truism I’ve heard reiterated many times before rather than thinking about the inevitable consequences of what he’s talking about.

Christoph on September 2, 2007 at 7:35 PM

I don’t know if you’re mentally ill or what, but you did defend Satanism.

Christoph on September 2, 2007 at 7:20 PM

No, I didn’t. You seem to be the only one who doesn’t get that.

Esthier on September 2, 2007 at 7:47 PM

So your story represents a valid enough viewpoint, but it’s hardly universal.

She was agreeing with my viewpoint, the one you think is vile and stupid.

Esthier on September 2, 2007 at 7:50 PM

baldilocks, you’re a chick, huh?

Sweet.

I don’t want to taint my reminiscing about your being female with this comment, so I’ll address your analogy momentarily.

Christoph on September 2, 2007 at 7:22 PM

What exactly is that supposed to mean?

Lancer on September 2, 2007 at 8:18 PM

Nice nickname, Lancer.

Christoph on September 2, 2007 at 9:03 PM

Furthermore, if we can’t use the Bible, then what can be used? What else is there?

Esthier on September 2, 2007 at 3:16 PM

Please. right2bright is close to getting an education. I’m not going let this go off into lala land explaining it to you. She already has enough trouble staying focused.

csdeven on September 2, 2007 at 11:43 PM

But you, man, right of the bat, slam anyone different from you as demonic.

Cool. Whatever makes you feel better.

nailinmyeye on September 2, 2007 at 3:04 PM

What is wrong with you people? Did I single you out? Did I use your name?

Why in goodness name is it that you people jump into the middle of conversations without having the context of the entire discussion?

csdeven on September 2, 2007 at 11:45 PM

If you can’t use the Bible to prove Christianity why do you think that you can use the Book of Mormon? What to you have as proof of anything? Who Joseph Smith was and whether or not the Book of Mormon is authentic is the heart of Mormon belief.
Rose on September 2, 2007 at 3:33 PM

You cannot. And therefor have no credibility to judge others as to their standing as a Christian.

Get it now?

csdeven on September 2, 2007 at 11:48 PM

right2bright on September 2, 2007 at 6:57 PM

Still waiting for you to prove your faith and the bible are the most factual so that I can take what you say as in fact the truth.

And as far as mormon bashing goes, you are getting your bigoted information somewhere and if it aint your pastor it’s a different pastor. Funny thing is, YOU LOVE IT! YOU LEARN IT! YOU WANT TO TEAR DOWN THE LDS WITH IT! You do not see the LDS church devoting entire websites, sermons, and retreats to the perfection of destroying others religion. That something that seems especially suited to bigoted so called “Christians”.

So spare me and the group your BS.

csdeven on September 2, 2007 at 11:56 PM

You can’t “prove” Christianity any more than you can “prove” any other religion, including atheism. But the Bible is the Scripture, the written Word of Christianity, that is the core of Christian beliefs.
The question of whether people of a certain belief system are Christian is an important question, and like it or not, one that Christians do have to ask and answer.
With regards to the Mormons, the prime questions are, how do their beliefs compare to those laid out in the Bible? If they are Christian, what then of Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon? What do they add to the Bible that distinguishes them from others who claim to be Christian?
These are questions that can be answered. Once answered, a person merely has to compare them with basic Christian beliefs to make a determination. One does not even need to be a Christian or a Mormon to make such a call, as long as he or she is familiar with the theologies of both. Sorry, csdeven, but your argument that no one has credibility to judge whether someone else is Christian or not is simply nonsense.

Lancer on September 3, 2007 at 12:08 AM

I don’t understand what it is that Cs is trying to get us to “get”. They put all their faith in the teachings of Joseph Smith and the other leaders of their church assuming them to be infallible. They believe that anyone who criticizes them to be demons. However he had no problem with slamming the Bible and traditional Christianity. If the two are not comparable than the statement that Mormonism is not a traditional Christian religion is an accurate one.

Rose on September 3, 2007 at 12:26 AM

Exactly, Rose.

The mere fact that they consider the Book of Mormon Scriptural is a significant mark against their being “traditional Christians.” One does not hear Christians arguing that we are “traditional Jews” because we aren’t-we have Christ and the New Testament that distinguishes us from the Jews. So, if Christians do not claim to be Jews, it is entirely appropriate to question whether Mormons are “traditional Christians.” The question does not even extend to whether the Mormon beliefs are true or not.

Lancer on September 3, 2007 at 12:42 AM

Lancer on September 3, 2007 at 12:08 AM

Sure it does. You just can’t accept the fact that the accusations leveled at others faith in based on writings that they refuse to prove as authentic.

What the bigoted evangelicals are doing is akin to judging the truthfulness of the book “Patriot Games” by the book “Red Storm Rising”. RSR cannot be proven factual so there is no standing to judge PG as not meeting the standards of RSR.

I hope the group is paying attention. Rose and Lancer have jumped the shark in this discussion.

Nice try you two. You have been trying to disparage the LDS church by pointing to the bible as the unerring guidepost to debunk their faith. I have completely and utterly frustrated your attempts and here you are now, readily agreeing that the truth has nothing to do with it! You have in effect agreed that both the evangelicals and the LDS are equal in credibility as faiths that teach the truth.

Therefore, the evangelicals are the pot calling the kettle black.

Nice to see you come around. I’m sure you didn’t realize it, but never the less, you have arrived.

csdeven on September 3, 2007 at 1:34 AM

Sorry, but I don’t follow your logic, if there is any. You have said nothing that proves the Book of Mormon to be true or any of the teachings and yet you continually say that they are above criticisms. You have not frustrated anything. You appear not to even understand the arguments. I do not in any way consider the Mormon religion equal to Christianity. It is not even Christianity, that is the point. I do not see any truth in Joseph Smith and hence I see no truth in his religion.

Rose on September 3, 2007 at 1:51 AM

There are over 5600 Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament in existence today. These manuscripts date from within 70 years of the crucifixion of Jesus. These manuscripts are all basically identical with 99% accuracy rate when compared to each other. These manuscripts are available for scrutiny and the different translations are from these original manuscripts. These manuscripts are the writings of people who were eyewitnesses to Jesus’ life, ministry, death and resurrection.
The Book of Mormon was written by one man. The plates are not available for dating or any kind of examination. The whole Mormon religion is based on the word of this one man.

Rose on September 3, 2007 at 2:34 AM

Sorry, but I don’t follow your logic, if there is any.
Rose on September 3, 2007 at 1:51 AM

Yeah, no kidding? Frankly, it’s getting real tiring trying to get you to stop with your “by rote” argument. You have been conditioned, brainwashed if you will, with lies and half-truths about your own beliefs. So much so that you have not even grasp the fact that I never said the LDS scriptures are 100% accurate. What I did say is that the bible is not able to be proven, and since it is that text that you are using to judge others by, you are not on solid ground to make accurate judgment. You need to learn what humility is. You should be humbled by the fact that you cannot prove the bible factually and therefore your entire belief system is as likely to be wrong as it is to be right.

csdeven on September 3, 2007 at 10:10 AM

Rose on September 3, 2007 at 2:34 AM

“Basically identical”?

Well sorry, 70 years after the fact and “basically identical” doesn’t give you absolute moral authority to pass judgment on others.

You need to find enough humility to admit to yourself that you may be totally or partially wrong and others may be completely or partially correct, and then act accordingly.

You do that, and you’ll be more in line with the second greatest commandment.

csdeven on September 3, 2007 at 10:15 AM

I’m not the one who’s jumped the shark, csdeven.
I have made no claim about the truthfulness or lack thereof regarding the Mormons and their Prophet and Book. In fact, I have made a point of not doing so. The only question I have been addressing is, “Are the Mormons actually Christian or not?” I have not addressed the truthfulness of the claims of the Bible or the BoM, as that is a separate issue. Your insistence that I am trying to disparage the LDS indicates that you either have not read what I have been writing, or have not understood it.
If you think this is a change of tactics on my part, go back and read my previous threads, and then go to the top and look at the initial article that started this discussion.

Lancer on September 3, 2007 at 10:25 AM

But since you brought it up, Rose is right about the thousands of manuscripts of the New Testament and the level of agreement between them. If you discard the NT because you insist that we can’t really know what the original authors wrote, then you have to discard the entire body of ancient and medieval literature, none of which is as well attested textually as the NT. Goodbye, Josephus! Farewell, Beowulf!
As far as “proving” the Bible is true, I don’t think there is any level of proof reasonably possible that you would accept.

Lancer on September 3, 2007 at 10:36 AM

That something that seems especially suited to bigoted so called “Christians”.

So spare me and the group your BS.

csdeven on September 2, 2007 at 11:56 PM

I have not called you a bigot, you upped the ante by making personal attacks.
If you don’t think the bible is factual, why do the mormons put such stalk in it. After 2,000 years don’t you think the bible is accuarate enough without someone like Joseph Smith (and you saw my quotes from this nutty guy) to “interpret”. You think Jesus was a polygamist? your founders and leaders did. You think the only way through salvation is Joseph Smith, your founders and leaders think so. I happen to think the bible is accurate when it talks about false prophets (your Joseph Smith), about mis-interpreting the bible (Jesus was married to three woman?). Thousands of texts to back it up (not one man’s fantasy). If you want to put faith in one man (and all men are fallible says the bible, no man is infallible states the bible) than that is your choice. I will take a faith that has stood the test of time. Steel sharpens steel, says the bible. And your screaching and preaching about millions of us be brainwashed doesn’t make a dent compared to the other millions who want to destroy us.

So wear your protctive clothing, turn people away at your temple because they don’t tithe the right amount, or strictly adhere to your doctrine. And call them names if they don’t adhere to your fantasy world (American Indians are Jews? any Arch. digs back up the morons claims of tribes? Your people are running out of time). My God did away with that bigottry, all can worship him at any time, any circumstances all are welcome. Especially you csdeven. We don’t have “temple Christians”, we have everyday people looking to find the “way”, and all are accepted into the Christian church when they accept Jesus Christ as their savior…not Joseph Smith.
You accept the burning in the bosom (or whatever), I’ll take the bible.
And pick up some easy cool books like C.S. Lewis, and begin the journey that will be filled of life and hope, and get rid of your anger.

right2bright on September 3, 2007 at 10:36 AM

These documents are far more credible than one man, one angel, some plates and a couple of stones. Where is your humility and why do you not agree that you could be wrong?

Rose on September 3, 2007 at 10:41 AM

Nice try you two. You have been trying to disparage the LDS church by pointing to the bible as the unerring guidepost to debunk their faith. I have completely and utterly frustrated your attempts and here you are now, readily agreeing that the truth has nothing to do with it! You have in effect agreed that both the evangelicals and the LDS are equal in credibility as faiths that teach the truth.

rankly, it’s getting real tiring trying to get you to stop with your “by rote” argument. You have been conditioned, brainwashed if you will, with lies and half-truths about your own beliefs.

I have enjoyed what you have to say on other threads. On this subject, however, it seems to me that you have proven yourself woefully ignorant of Christian theology, and with a debate style that is extremely strange. Honestly, if I hadn’t read your comments on other threads, I would think you are a troll. You seriously just are not making sense.

Oh, and for the record – I wasn’t satisfied with what my minister was saying to me, so I have been in school for 10 years studying the Bible in order to study for myself what it says. Don’t tell me that I’m reciting rote beliefs and am brainwashed. Unless, of course, that is your debate strategy – whenever someone disagrees you call them a zombie.

nailinmyeye on September 3, 2007 at 10:43 AM

You need to find enough humility to admit to yourself that you may be totally or partially wrong and others may be completely or partially correct, and then act accordingly.

You do that, and you’ll be more in line with the second greatest commandment.

csdeven on September 3, 2007 at 10:15 AM

Yeah, I’ve done that, and, it has come down to Christianity being mostly or totally correct, and Mormonism being mostly or totally incorrect. Which is why I am a Christian. I seriously can’t figure out what you are getting at.

nailinmyeye on September 3, 2007 at 10:47 AM

I’m not the one who’s jumped the shark, csdeven.
Lancer on September 3, 2007 at 10:25 AM

the prime questions are, how do their beliefs compare to those laid out in the Bible?

It doesn’t matter. That’s like saying it is preferable to judge the LDS scriptures by the bible which has no standing as an authorized perfect text. Wake up.

Lack of understanding happens when someone, YOU specifically, stick your nose into a debate half way through it. WHY is it so hard for you people to get that through your thick skulls?

I understand what you are saying, but it has little to do with what I am arguing.

csdeven on September 3, 2007 at 10:54 AM

Yeah, I’ve done that, and, it has come down to Christianity being mostly or totally correct, and Mormonism being mostly or totally incorrect. Which is why I am a Christian. I seriously can’t figure out what you are getting at.

nailinmyeye on September 3, 2007 at 10:47 AM

Well, well, well! We have a winner! You have admitted that the evangelicals are partially wrong. Now, which parts are they wrong about?

csdeven on September 3, 2007 at 10:56 AM

Holy troll, csdeven. Give it up already. It’s proven that Joseph Smith was a serial sex-abusing gun-toting financial and “spiritual” manipulator.

Christoph on September 3, 2007 at 11:00 AM

Let me see if I have this right:
The Mormons believe that both the Christian Bible and the Book of Mormon are the Word of God. (Someone correct me if I am wrong here)
You, csdeven, are stating that the Bible is not the Word of God.
That means that you are neither Christian nor Mormon.
So what exactly is your stake in this debate, other than to gleefully attack people with whom you disagree?

Lancer on September 3, 2007 at 11:08 AM

I don’t think there is any level of proof reasonably possible that you would accept.

Lancer on September 3, 2007 at 10:36 AM

Are you kidding? What a friggen fool! WHY would anyone listen to a group of people who want them to rest their everlasting salvation on reasonable proof?! Sorry, there is too much at stake for that. ESPECIALLY when this so called “reasonable correct” bible teaches that your second greatest responsibility in obedience is to treat others as yourself! Would YOU accept the teachings of the LDS church if they could show reasonable (“reasonable” being defined by them and not you) proof that it is mostly correct? Hell no you wouldn’t! Since that is the case, WHY, in the face of treating others as yourself do you persist in attacking them and trying to destroy that which THEY have faith in? I’ll tell you why. It’s called bigotry.

My solution to you evangelical bigots who have been brainwashed by your paid pastor, is for you to shine light upon the teachings you have faith in and let those who are on a different path choose freely because what you have to offer is best. Leave the tearing down of that persons faith to them to work out, because if your message is so strong, they will do it all on their own, and I promise you, they will seek you out for further answers.

This is exactly how the LDS approach all people that seek to convert. Not one single disparaging remark will be uttered by one who speaks the accepted teachings of the LDS church.

csdeven on September 3, 2007 at 11:11 AM

Correction:

This is exactly how the LDS approach all people that seek to convert.

This is exactly how the LDS approach all people that THEY seek to convert.

csdeven on September 3, 2007 at 11:13 AM

Well, well, well! We have a winner! You have admitted that the evangelicals are partially wrong. Now, which parts are they wrong about?

csdeven on September 3, 2007 at 10:56 AM

Heh. You completely missed the point of my posts. I refuse to have this debate on your terms exclusively.

Lancer is right – csdeven is both denying tenets of Christianity and Mormonism, and therefore, I cannot figure out his stake in the debate. Don’t feed him anymore.

nailinmyeye on September 3, 2007 at 11:14 AM

Lancer on September 3, 2007 at 11:08 AM

YOU sir, are the poster child for keeping ones nose out of other persons discussions. Especially when you have not been involved from the beginning. I’m not going to side track all the great progress I am making with right2bright just to get you up to speed. So, get with the context of the discussion or butt out.

csdeven on September 3, 2007 at 11:16 AM

I don’t see how you can say that the LDS does not tear down when they teach that other Christians are brainwashed by their pastors. This is tearing down. You cannot attack the validity of the Bible and then say that what you believe is not available to be torn down. We have as much right to question the validity of Mormon documents as you have to question the validity of the Bible.

Rose on September 3, 2007 at 11:23 AM

Heh. You completely missed the point of my posts. I refuse to have this debate on your terms exclusively.

Lancer is right – csdeven is both denying tenets of Christianity and Mormonism, and therefore, I cannot figure out his stake in the debate. Don’t feed him anymore.

nailinmyeye on September 3, 2007 at 11:14 AM

Bwahahahahaha!!!

Do you think anyone with at least half a brain is fooled by that load of horse $hit?! Your problem is that you started down the road I led you too and because your bigotry is so ingrained into your basis of faith, you arrogantly didn’t see it until it was too late!

Bottom line? You admitted exactly what I wanted you to and therefore my argument stands. Now, go back to your pastors bigoted teachings, stick your head back up your a$$ and live happily ever after.

csdeven on September 3, 2007 at 11:28 AM

You are resting your beliefs on the documents of church leaders who do not allow any questioning of the validity of those documents. However these church leaders say that anyone who is outside of the Mormon faith have been brainwashed. It would appear to be the other way around.

Rose on September 3, 2007 at 11:29 AM

they teach that other Christians are brainwashed by their pastors
Rose on September 3, 2007 at 11:23 AM

Where does the LDS church teach that?

csdeven on September 3, 2007 at 11:29 AM

So who are the bigots?

Rose on September 3, 2007 at 11:30 AM

I agree, nailinmyeye. Is he even reading my posts? I have made a point of not attacking Mormons. And now he calls me a “friggin fool” for talking about “reasonable proof.” What’s his standard? Unreasonable proof? Hey, I’d love it if Doctor Who showed up on my doorstep and took me back in time to witness the Crucifixion and Resurrection personally, but somehow I doubt that’s going to happen anytime soon.
He’s a lost cause. We’re wasting our time with him.

Lancer on September 3, 2007 at 11:32 AM

Where did you get it? Did you come up with it by yourself? One Mormon told me that they do, but maybe he was lying.

Rose on September 3, 2007 at 11:33 AM

I’ve known many Mormons, some in my family, and I have never heard any of them use the kind of language that CS uses. Maybe he really isn’t LDS and is just defending the religion because he is a big supporter of Mitt.

Rose on September 3, 2007 at 11:35 AM

Well class, I’ll leave you to deny the road you find yourself on (the one I led you to) until a little later on today. I suspect you will join forces and convince yourselves that many fools ignoring the facts somehow makes your foolishness as wisdom. I don’t expect you to pause and reflect on your bigoted nature and get yourself in line with the second greatest commandment when it comes to tearing down other persons belief system. :-)

csdeven on September 3, 2007 at 11:38 AM

Possibly, Rose, or maybe he just likes to argue for argument’s sake.
His 11:28 post sounds like a cackling, maniacal villian in one of the old B-movies.
One thing is for sure: he is unlike any Mormon I have ever met.

Lancer on September 3, 2007 at 11:42 AM

Lancer on September 3, 2007 at 11:32 AM

He is a dishonest debater. It is difficult to talk to someone who refuses to listen to what you are saying, and insists that you are saying something else, and then berates you as a bigot, or fool, or idiot, or whatever, for something you didn’t say, and for not accepting his ridiculous claims.

nailinmyeye on September 3, 2007 at 11:42 AM

I see bigotry in the statement that Christians are being brainwashed by their pastors. Silly statement from someone who does not allow any criticisms directed toward Mormonism. So you do not believe that saying that the Bible is not valid and Christians are brainwashed is not tearing down someone else’s belief system? You have an odd way of looking at things.

Rose on September 3, 2007 at 11:44 AM

That last statement was obviously for Cs.

Rose on September 3, 2007 at 11:45 AM

He “led” us to this “road”? Can we say “delusions of grandeur”?
I have to go too, however. It’s been interesting. I have learned more about some of the posters here (good and bad) than I have about the topic under discussion.

Lancer on September 3, 2007 at 11:51 AM

Lancer, I’m the one who has been attacking. It was in response to Cs’ attack on the Nicene creed which I feel is a comprehensive statement of Christian faith. Perhaps I shouldn’t have been so forceful in my statements. But I stand by all of them. Maybe he confused our posts.

Rose on September 3, 2007 at 11:54 AM

have been brainwashed by your paid pastor,
csdeven on September 3, 2007 at 11:11 AM

Doctrine and Covenants 42:71-73 states that bishops (as well as elders and high priests who assist these bishops) are to receive “a just remuneration for all their services.” Writing on this passage, Hyrum Smith and Janne Sjodahl state:

“The law of remuneration is that those who administer in spiritual affairs must have their stewardships and labor for their living, ‘even as the members.’ This is wisdom. For in that position they are absolutely independent and can preach the truth without fear. Those who administer in temporal affairs and give their entire time to public business are to have a just remuneration. If they were to earn a living for themselves they could not give all their time and energy to the community” (Doctrine and Covenants Commentary, 1973 edition, p.234).

And the bible says:

Paul defends a paid ministry in 1 Corinthians 9. He correctly concludes that pastors should be supported by comparing the minister to a soldier, a vinedresser, and a shepherd. Does that soldier go to war at his own expense? Does the vinedresser not eat of the fruit he has planted? Does not the shepherd drink the milk of his own flock?

So I guess Paul was a “heirling clergy” brainwashed, and not worth following. So now you are dissing one of Christs most loyal servants…you mormons have no shame.
Good idea for the mormon’s, all the more for the church to become wealthy, not having to pay clergy…but then you get what you pay for.
See how that cuts? One can use an argument that the mormon’
s are greedy.
But then even your doctrine says it is okay…confusing to you isn’t it, they say it is wrong to pay clergy, then tell you it is okay.
Well, they have both bases covered.

right2bright on September 3, 2007 at 3:11 PM

Rose,
That seems likely, given what he said that I had said. But you are right to defend the Nicene Creed-that makes you not an attacker, but a counter-attacker.

Lancer on September 3, 2007 at 4:06 PM

Please. right2bright is close to getting an education. I’m not going let this go off into lala land explaining it to you. She already has enough trouble staying focused.

csdeven on September 2, 2007 at 11:43 PM

But it seems crucial to this entire discussion. If Christians are not to base their theology on the Bible, then what is left? Our own opinions, hearing voices?

I’m being sincere, and though my opinion on Mormons is nearly nonexistent, I’ve been getting attacked based on a misguided theory that I support Mormonism (and Satanism, apparently).

One does not hear Christians arguing that we are “traditional Jews” because we aren’t-we have Christ and the New Testament that distinguishes us from the Jews. So, if Christians do not claim to be Jews, it is entirely appropriate to question whether Mormons are “traditional Christians.” The question does not even extend to whether the Mormon beliefs are true or not.

Lancer on September 3, 2007 at 12:42 AM

On this I slightly disagree. Christianity stems from Judaism, and (as Mormons likely feel in reference to Christianity) Christians feels Christ came and completed the earlier religion.

After all, the first Christians were Jews, and it literally took an act of God to convince them that this religion was meant for the gentiles as well.

We don’t call ourselves Jews, but we do claim them as the roots of our religion and nearly count them as spiritual brothers. We do worship the same God either way.

Esthier on September 3, 2007 at 6:33 PM

Esthier,

Of course you are right regarding how Christians see Jews. However, my point in that paragraph was only that, while we see Christianity as stemming from Judaism, you do not hear Christians calling ourselves Jews. Christianity may be called the daughter of Judaism, but I have never heard anyone call it a branch of Judaism. It started out that way, but by the end of the Apostle Paul’s life, it had grown into something very different. One of the fundamental differences between Jews and Christians is that, while both religions accept the Hebrew Bible as Scripture, Christians also take the New Testament as Scripture. In this respect, the Mormons have done the same thing: They take the Christian Bible, but add the Book of Mormon.
As far as the issue of what, other than the Bible, are Christians to base our theology, I seriously doubt you will get an answer out of csdeven.

Lancer on September 3, 2007 at 7:03 PM

Christianity may be called the daughter of Judaism, but I have never heard anyone call it a branch of Judaism.

I get your point. The first Christians certainly called themselves Jews, but it didn’t take long for a division to take hold.

Though, the Christians did more than just adopt another book. We also dropped all the Jewish customs, including circumcision. Mormons do seem to have kept, at least currently, many traditions that Christians do, which would at least explain why they call themselves Christians.

Had the early Christians decided that keeping Jewish tradition was important, they might have done the same.

Esthier on September 3, 2007 at 7:20 PM

(and Satanism, apparently).

Esthier on September 3, 2007 at 6:33 PM

You’re a liar, Esthier.

Your words:

Following Satan is better than following nothing and criticizing everything like a self-righteous prick.

You stuck by those words.

Yes, you’d be better as a follower of Satan than as a prick.

You’re also a c–t.

Hey, you called me a prick. I figure we’re even.

Christoph on September 4, 2007 at 1:10 AM

You’re a liar, Esthier.

Try again Christoph.

Reread baldilocks’ story just one more time. Is it advocating racism simply because it prefers one form over another?

You’re alright with the story there, claiming it’s a valid view point but fail to see how it was written IN AGREEMENT WITH MINE, or rather, further explaining mine.

It’s only your own bias against me that has you believing I agree with Satanism.

I’ve tried to explain this to you, but you’re willfully ignorant when it comes to understanding that I don’t support Satanists.

Let me try one last time. I personally believe it’s better to shoot someone to death rather than torturing a person to death.

I don’t believe murder in any form is OK whatsoever. I condemn both of them just as I condemn pricks and Satanists; however, I think shooting is the lesser evil there.

That’s my last try to explain it. Next time I’ll just get baldilocks to say the same thing so you’ll read the comments without irrational anger.

And honestly, you’ve called me an idiot repeatedly; the cunt comment is no more insulting considering you’re just a screen name. If I cared at all what you think of me, I’d actually be as worthless as you believe me to be.

Esthier on September 4, 2007 at 11:46 AM

Comment pages: 1 5 6 7