Video: “I know Mitt Romney is not himself Christian…”
posted at 9:30 am on August 30, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | regular view
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.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
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: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 ... 7 Next »
As usual, the all important cultural and social context is missing. But okay.
TinMan13 on August 30, 2007 at 1:25 PM
*sigh*
my point is every one says they are an authority on Christianity, but I see no one showing the basics of Jesus Christs own example.
let me see did he Stone the woman accused in adultery?
NO
so all these folks Railing on mormons are like the folks that bought said woman in front of Jesus.
OK there i am judging now happy?
-Wasteland Man.
P.S. and no I am NOT smarter than anyone here LOL, that too would be judgmental.
WastelandMan on August 30, 2007 at 1:27 PM
If you aren’t handling snakes during services, you aren’t a real Christian.
OKthanxbye.
Kristopher on August 30, 2007 at 1:27 PM
1 – “Can be” and not “will be”, requiring more effort, sacrifice, and obedience than most people are willing to perform.
2 – lol. You don’t know much about the how Mormons view females or their role in life/family. Not mocking you, but your statement is not reality.
Voidseeker on August 30, 2007 at 1:27 PM
Voidseeker – I think you just proved the point. More honest would be to say that they do not believe in the Christ that traditional, orthodox Christians do.
You have not addressed my questions above by the way. Few people ever do. Either my comments don’t show up, I am insignificant, or people dont like me.
I suspect the middle one. And I’m cool with that.
nailinmyeye on August 30, 2007 at 1:30 PM
Maybe someone should ask Mitt straight out if he’s a Christian. ‘Cuz if he is, he can just transfer to a less controversial denomination, and be a Presbyterian or something. He seems willing to make changes that improve his chances to be elected.
NellE on August 30, 2007 at 1:30 PM
I’m not sure that I follow you here. Missing from what? My post? Modern translations? The original manuscripts? Help me out.
nailinmyeye on August 30, 2007 at 1:30 PM
Unfortunately you don’t have a good idea of who actually wrote a majority of those manuscripts in the first place. Many ideas but no concrete identifiers. Save a few. You wouldn’t believe something written by someone anonymous today and yet it occurs to so few to question something written 3,000 years ago. Some anonymous person wrote the way the universe was created and even though it defies all logic … it must be true. Shrug.
frreal on August 30, 2007 at 1:31 PM
Best comment evah!
And, that’s probably one of the verses I would love to excise, were I translating with an agenda. But, there it is.
nailinmyeye on August 30, 2007 at 1:32 PM
Hey, I don’t pretend that I know each and every author. I don’t have to. However, I think that there is a better idea of the original texts, which is what I am talking about, than you suppose.
I am talking about the original manuscripts that have been accepted by the believing community since their writing.
Also, there is a pretty good idea of the authors of many of the books of the Bible, regardless of what you may have read from the Jesus Seminar.
nailinmyeye on August 30, 2007 at 1:35 PM
Seems to me that soooo many miss the Forest for all of the trees.
bridgetown on August 30, 2007 at 1:35 PM
I’m not attacking you, but speaking and reading a language is not the same thing as living in the society and culture. There are differences in intent between usages in formal and vernacular language between then and now. Therefore you cannot get a ‘literal’ translation (see my example of English/Spanish. Translations are very much open to interpretation).
TinMan13 on August 30, 2007 at 1:35 PM
Is there a vote? ‘I accept this, but not that.’
‘Overruled. We like that.’
‘Bbbbbut…’
TinMan13 on August 30, 2007 at 1:37 PM
For —- sakes, dude. Was Socrates a Christian?
Christoph on August 30, 2007 at 1:38 PM
I love this reasoning! This book says it is true, so IT MUST BE TRUE! Bwahahahahaa!!! Spoken like a true Nicaean!
And the dead sea scrolls revealed some disturbing passages as well. Passages that you Nicaeans don’t like to admit.
csdeven on August 30, 2007 at 1:39 PM
I never made such an assertion, but I did ask if Christ was a Christian. Was he?
Oh, and I’d say that So-crates wadn’t. Ain’t never heered of him in them years.
TinMan13 on August 30, 2007 at 1:39 PM
Sorry if I missed your questions – please give me a time stamp and I will be more than happy to address them. My apologies.
Voidseeker on August 30, 2007 at 1:40 PM
Christoph -
You seem to believe that only people that came after Christ were Christian. Is this correct?
Voidseeker on August 30, 2007 at 1:41 PM
It’s quite obvious to me there are a few posters here that maybe have college degrees, masters, and even phd’s and know absolutley nothing about the Mormon religion other than some old prejudiced stories floating around since the middle of the 19th century. Two at the start of this story are right2bright (not looking real right in this case nor to bright) and JasonG, the 2 have no truthful knowledge of the Mormons. I had to reply after reading down to JasonG’s comment and I’m sure there are more. These posts remind me of the dems eating each other in their debates. Take my word for it as a person raised in the Mormon church, later turned my back on all man made religions, the Mormons believe in ‘GOD’, ‘Jesus Christ’ and the Holy Ghost’ period.
Try and remember the mind is like a parachute, it works best when open.
oldernslower on August 30, 2007 at 1:42 PM
Dude I hate to Keep this thing going any more than it has to, but Please can you give some references to those dead sea scroll quotes that shake things up?
I’d be interested in seeing them! seriously!
-Wasteland Man.
WastelandMan on August 30, 2007 at 1:44 PM
I don’t think you are attacking me, I just honestly didn’t understand. But now that I do, I fully agree with you. Absolutely, there is societal, historical, and cultural contexts to be taken into in considering what a word or writing means.
In this case I would say that it is quite possible to get a literal translation – just look at almost any Greek-English interlinear New Testament. You will find a very wooden literal word-for-word translation.
As for interpretation, however, in Biblical studies that is the area of “exegesis” and “hermeneutics.” A significan aspect of biblical exegesis is the study of cultures, practices, societies, and especially the study of how words are used in a wide variety of Greek manuscripts from the time period in which the document was written (in the case of the New Testament anyway).
Is there such a thing as a “perfect” interpretation? That is a good question.
nailinmyeye on August 30, 2007 at 1:44 PM
Allahpundit, you’re such a comments whore. You post these religion stories just to watch the fur fly. For shame.
aero on August 30, 2007 at 1:44 PM
Two points:
1) I don’t care if Mitt? is a Mormon, or a Zoroastrian. At this point I can’t support him for a number of reasons, not the least of which is his flip-flopping on a number of issues as he decides to run for the Presidency.
2) As for the Dead Sea scrolls, both csdeven and NiceDeb are correct. The scrolls line up very nicely with the Septuagint. There were other writings found as well, but they were not included in the Septuagint as they were not seen as “divinely inspired”.
jdawg on August 30, 2007 at 1:44 PM
At least you’ve accepted that objectively we can determine that some people aren’t Christians.
Was Christ a Christian?
In the sense of modern usage, that he believed in Himself, that He rose from the dead, etc., then if He was the Messiah, I’d say He was, or more accurately, He’s God so a label like “Christian” is a bit moot.
Rather like saying was he a Judaean? Sure. And so much more.
If not, then He was either a fraud or a nut or both.
I don’t know which is true, but I lean toward fraud or not, but brilliant as so many are. However, less blatantly evil than Joseph Smith.
Perhaps this being nothing more than a matter of degree.
Christoph on August 30, 2007 at 1:44 PM
For God’s sake. I’m not “railing on Mormons”. All the Mormons I’ve ever known are wonderful people. As I’ve already stated, I would have no trouble voting for Romney if he ends up being the nominee. He may even be my first choice in the primaries, if Fred! doesn’t enter the race.
I’m just saying, their beliefs are not compatible with Christian beliefs in many very basic areas, and that most,if not all major Christian denominations don’t consider them to be Christian.
These are objective facts. They are not my opinion.
Nice Deb on August 30, 2007 at 1:45 PM
Voidseeker on August 30, 2007 at 1:41 PM
Christ was born a Jew. He lived a Jew. His disciples and apostles were all Jewish. Paul was a devout Jew. In the early days, “Christians” were actually Jews who were part of a sect called “The Way”.
jdawg on August 30, 2007 at 1:46 PM
No actually you are talking about a group of manuscripts that a group of men decided a thousand years ago was what you ought to believe. They assigned authorship to those books to give it credibility and here we are today. Some books made the cut. Some didn’t. Some books didn’t even make the cut that claimed divine inspiration. Curious though.
Interesting scholarship on the canonization process HERE.
frreal on August 30, 2007 at 1:46 PM
And you put that so much better than I.
Christoph on August 30, 2007 at 1:47 PM
Voidseeker on August 30, 2007 at 1:40 PM
My comment was here. I was just joking about not being liked!
Thanks
nailinmyeye on August 30, 2007 at 1:47 PM
Ana Marie Cox, see what you have wrought!
SouthernDem on August 30, 2007 at 1:48 PM
Hmmm. Interesting. Have you read anything about church history, or the formation of the New Testament, from anyone who is not a professed atheist? Something springs to mind about that, what was it called, oh yeah, bias argument.
nailinmyeye on August 30, 2007 at 1:52 PM
Then I am really Confused Deb.
If they are wonderful people then why all the hubris toward them? Why all the Hate in this thread?
Why all the Judgmental “I am better than you.” stuff. (Not that that is your argument bit others in this thread have said that.)
Also Mitt says Jesus Christ is his personal savior. NOW Even if thats misguided or comes with off the wall beliefs why does that make him less a Christian than anyone else?
-Wasteland Man.
WastelandMan on August 30, 2007 at 1:53 PM
Olbermann is the side of barn & this factoid is not a hit.
thuja on August 30, 2007 at 1:53 PM
Nothing compares to make one feel better whilst on the cross of Atheism.
Nothing against AP here as a blogger supreme or his religious freedom. I’m just say’in.
Mcguyver on August 30, 2007 at 1:55 PM
This is the bottom line:
We are electing a human being, not a God.
All this nitpicking over theology is really ludicrous. I make an exception for Muslims because Islam in incompatible with Democratic principles of individual freedom and liberty. That cannot be said about Mormons, Christians, or Jews.
Christoph,
You are an insufferable horses’ ass, and to paraphrase a famous debate, “You sir are no Rush Limbaugh”. Indeed, Estier has you nailed.
You are so “smart” that you spent an entire day this week saying how much you hate the police, what “bastards” they are and all sorts of other idiotic statements that can not be in any way described as “smart”.
To prove how “smart” you are today, how do you reconcile these two statements?
Christoph on August 30, 2007 at 11:03 AM
AND
Christoph on August 30, 2007 at 11:25 AM
Masscon,
I’ll get back to you…I did have to go out to an appointment, and if you weren’t a jackass you wouldn’t have the arrogance to think that the rest of the world is obligated to respond to you on your schedule.
Buy Danish on August 30, 2007 at 1:56 PM
You must have an interesting life. Not judging others. So how would you pick a babysitter? How do you pick a friend? When your child acts up, don’t punish him…that would be judgement. Choose the tattooed, “D” student who was kicked out of school for your babysitter, don’t want to judge her. Illegal alien killing some people, don’t judge them.
Where did you ever get the notion not to judge, yes I saw and know the passages…the question is do you know what those passages mean, do you understand the context? You think Christ never judged, so he never judged the other Rabbi’s teaching, he never judged the teaching of the heritics? How do you determine right from wrong if you can’t “judge”. Get it?…don’t misuse the bible to expound on foolish statements. There probably is a warning somewhere in there about that.
I’m surprised you didn’t throw in the other cliche (the one that I straighted AP out on), “turn the other cheek”.
And I think AP got the message about using the proper words with the illegal alien analogy. All of a sudden calling someone what they are makes sense.
right2bright on August 30, 2007 at 1:56 PM
You seriously misguided. You don’t get to decide who is and is not a Christian. Christianity is the following of Christ. Since you quote the bible as your qualifier, you have to accept that the bible is an abridgment of all the teachings up until the Council of Nicaea. A council that arbitrarily accepted and rejected teachings and scripture regardless of the truthfulness of them. So those who follow the bible are more accurately Nicaeans and not Christians.
And since the factual nature of the bible is in question, the definition of a real “Christian” must be left to God and not arrogant ignorant narcissistic idiot a$$holes like you.
csdeven on August 30, 2007 at 1:58 PM
Uh huh.
He’ll be getting if he’s getting in… what a lazy bastard of a would be POTUS!!
Mcguyver on August 30, 2007 at 2:00 PM
I’ve seen a few harsh things said of Romney because of his Mormonism, in this thread, which is unfortunate. But don’t lump me in with them.
Look, *Pepe Le Pew thinks he’s a cat. That’s fine, let him. But he’s not.
*disclaimer*
I am not saying that Mormons are skunks, but that there are these pesky little things called facts, okay?
Nice Deb on August 30, 2007 at 2:01 PM
More like a ‘comments-soliciting ho.’ See? Now we’re both going to have to attend rehab. :-) (Just funnin’ with you, AP. This thread needs some attempts at humor.)
baldilocks on August 30, 2007 at 2:02 PM
Dude – are you for real? Where do you get this stuff?
nailinmyeye on August 30, 2007 at 2:02 PM
That’s nice. Smear an entire culture of pastors and priests with a cynical conspiracy theory. Sounds like a bigoted view of Christianity. I’d like you to talk to my pastor about his lifestyle and motives. Lavish and fancy would not come close. You’ve been watching too much God TV.
The Nicean Council was a collection of leading Christian authorities of the time. They met to clarify the many theological beliefs being taught at the time. There were some 300 participants in the council. When it came time to determine what the theology of Christ was, it was 300-some to 2 or 3 in favor of the contents of the Nicean Creed. The LDS church clings to the be teachings of the two or three.
That is a pretty bold statement to say that these leaders had no divine guidance. What would prompt you to say that? The Holy Spirit is there to protect the body of Christ, the church, and the theology of Christ. The council was infused with the Holy Spirit to clarify the teachings.
Mallard T. Drake on August 30, 2007 at 2:03 PM
Hmmm. Interesting. Have you read anything about church history, or the formation of the New Testament, from anyone who is not a professed atheist? Something springs to mind about that, what was it called, oh yeah, bias argument.
nailinmyeye on August 30, 2007 at 1:52 PM
Absolutely. For every assertion I read the rebuttal. For every assertion I read the apologetic. It was part of my deconversion process. I read the whole bible and compared and contrasted each argument. I just finally reached a point where I said surely the creator of the universe KNEW I would question why he created the plants before he created the sun and surely that same creator of the universe would write a book that didn’t require apologetics and the need to explain why it was OK that God has his chosen people slaughter the suckling infants of his enemies and take pleasure in the dashing of the little ones with stones.
There is just too much stretching of the truth and too many scriptural assertions for which Christian apologetics simply cannot answer.
How many believers test their faith in the same way?
frreal on August 30, 2007 at 2:04 PM
I agree with you to a point Bad Candy on ROmney. He needs to be treated with respect as a candidate for the Presidency. Weather he be a born again Christian, a Hindu, a Jew or a whatever, they should all be treated equally in how one is treated and/or repected. However, the way the world is today, I think many of us are aware of the fact that “faith” drives one’s “politics”. With that in mind..people need to know who and what that person believes and basis his character on. This is where we come to a great misconception on Mitt Romney and his Mormon faith. The man is a very conservative person and seems to be a very nice man. However, if you’ve ever taken the time or trouble looking up their beliefs and who they perceive to be G_d..it has no resemblence whatsoever to the one true G_d we know in the Bible. I hear all the time..oh..what’s the big deal..his faith is basically the Christian faith only with some variation on doctrine. That is a falsehood…about as far as East is from West. People need to know who they are considering and they need to know about that person’s beliefs.
hotvol on August 30, 2007 at 2:07 PM
To prove how “smart” you are today, how do you reconcile these two statements?
Buy Danish, as usual you are off base.
There is not the slightest contradiction between those two statements.
I’m just shocked at how illogical you are.
I disagree with Mitt’s religion and its founder. That’s your first blockquote.
The second one is I believe an individual should have the right to use their own religious beliefs, and that includes me, to influence our decisions and choices.
There is no contradiction. At all. Nothing to reconcile. Explain how A contradicts B?
The fact I respect someone’s right to make choices based on their own religion doesn’t deny me the right to criticize their religion or make different choices than them based on different beliefs.
Obviously.
Turd.
Christoph on August 30, 2007 at 2:07 PM
I have no idea if you are one of these bigoted jagoffs, but if these so-called “Christians” would spend their time promoting their own, than a significant amount of energy demonizing Mormons, JW’s and the like, they would have a better chance at gathering quality membership. The problem is that the sheep of these “pastors” are being led away from the teachings of Christ whenever they engage in the bashing. There are many Christian churches that do not preach the hate. They preach compassion and understanding and that God, not them, will be the final judge.
I clearly understand Christianinty. You misunderstand where I am coming from.
csdeven on August 30, 2007 at 2:11 PM
Masscon,
Here ya go. Say you disagree with him if you want, but you cannot say that he didn’t accomplish anything.
And this is only what he did as a one term Governor. What he did with the broke, scandal-plagued Olympics was extraordinary.
He is superbly educated, having spent a year at Stanford, graduating at the head of his class at BYU, and securing a joint MBA/Law degree from Harvard.
He has an extraordinary capacity to solve problems and make difficult decisions. He knows how to govern, which is what an executive must be able to do. His work with Bain Capital was brilliant, and when called upon, he rescued the troubled Bain and Company and saved thousands of jobs in the process.
Now maybe you could tell us what it is that he didn’t do that you wanted him to do. Then we can discuss how realistic your expectations are or were.
Buy Danish on August 30, 2007 at 2:13 PM
There sure is an awful lot of angst on this thread. Personally I’m sick of Romney being hammered because he’s a Mormon. While I personally do not agree with the LDS church teachings, that has nothing to do with my non-support of Romney.
This type of angry rhetoric is exactly what the libs want – to see us all divided over religion.
Some of the comments here are frankly, beneath those of us who consider ourselves conservative. Being a conservative does not mean we have to follow any particular brand of religious teaching, be it Mormon, Evangelical, Baptist, Jewish, Hindu, whatever.
Y’all think we can get out of the mud here and discuss something really important?
jdawg on August 30, 2007 at 2:13 PM
Christian = monotheist
Mormon = polytheist
Can’t be any simpler. Mitt is a great guy (we know you love him), no one is dissing Mormon’s (they are just like every one else, some good, some bad). They just aren’t Christians, by any stretch of definition.
Her statement is accurate, not a put down, but accurate.
If you want to change the definintion of Christian, go ahead. The dems want to change the definition of an illegal alien. If you want to call a dogs tail a leg, then your dog has five legs…doesn’t make it right, but you always wanted a five legged dog so you have defined one.
right2bright on August 30, 2007 at 2:15 PM
Again blinders.
Of course their beliefs do not line up with those Christian denominations or the beliefs of the same. And again, that does not make them not Christian – it makes them Christians not like those denominations.
Back to what I missed:
A) I believe that the three exist.
B) Yes, and in purpose yes.
C) Yes, and no not one in substance. The bible has more than one occurrence of the beings being separate but active at the same time.
D) As above, no, not one God in three bodies, as I am able to read the bible for myself (unlike most people from the 5th century) and that idea seems absurd to me.
Of course you are not a member of the LDS church, but as I do not think of them as non-Christian have to disagree with the premise behind your question.
Voidseeker on August 30, 2007 at 2:16 PM
How gracious of you, since your earlier post pretty much said pastors and priests were in the business of lining their pockets by preaching “fear.” Hmmmmmm….is this like a Mitt flip-flop?
Mallard T. Drake on August 30, 2007 at 2:16 PM
Buy Danish, Mitt would make a great President because he has all the right personal qualities. I make that point clearly in the preceding thread.
My point here is he’s a Mormon, not a Christian.
And your 1:56 PM comment was totally nonsensical. You took two positions that clearly support each other, and asked me to explain the glaring contradiction between them.
The contradiction between believing people should be able to use religious belief to guide their individual choices and my criticizing Mitt’s religion.
Is your position that in order to support religious freedom you have to support the leaders and teachings of beliefs other than your own?
That’s your point?
Please tell me it isn’t.
Next thing you will say is I have to respect your freedom of speech by not criticizing you.
Christoph on August 30, 2007 at 2:18 PM
Hey folks, it’s all good. Now take a chill pill or pop a beer, sit back, relax, and drop your DvD of DOGMA into the DvD player and enjoy. Let Kevin Smith set your free!
May the God of your choice, Bless you. – KF
Wuptdo on August 30, 2007 at 2:19 PM
I mostly agree with you here, except he hasn’t even tried to prove his assertion with the Bible, be it failed or not (I tend to believe God had a hand in the whole picking books process and thus left it unfailed, but that’s irrelevant here). He claims the Bible supports him but yet can’t prove it.
If he could, then he’s at least sound less like a prick.
Feel free to put me in that category. Religion and dogma are all straight from hell.
If God wanted legalistic robots, He wouldn’t have made humans.
It’s easy to find plenty when it comes to Mormons. Their beginnings are strange, and South Park did an excellent job mocking them (though their best was the one on Scientology).
But the whole argument here stems from the idea that another person can judge another person’s heart and relationship with God. It’s extremely presumptive and makes no sense whatsoever.
Esthier on August 30, 2007 at 2:19 PM
I applaud. Seriously.
I question the same things, and I have reached different answers. Such as, the creation account is not something to be taken literally, as a scientific explanation that must conform to modern scientific rules – but rather a poetic expression the exclaims “God created,” regardless of the means, order, or timeframe. I agree – the imprecatory Psalms prove a difficulty to anyone considering faith in the God of the Bible. But, like I said, I have come to different conclusions – obviously.
And that’s cool. I respect your non-belief.
I would say, however, that every text ever written needs some kind of interpretation. From this comment, to Allah’s original post. There is apologetics, interpretation, and hermeneutics operating at every level.
nailinmyeye on August 30, 2007 at 2:20 PM
And this makes sense, my Christian acquaintance?
Why don’t you make a list of all the cases where following Satan is better than something else?
This should be interesting.
Christoph on August 30, 2007 at 2:24 PM
This whole thread is disturbing on so many levels.
How ’bout y’all just back away and take a breather?
jdawg on August 30, 2007 at 2:24 PM
Cheers. Thank you for providing very honest and succinct answers. I respect your answers and your beliefs.
Now, since those beliefs diverge significantly from traditional, orthodox Christianity (not to mention the issue of the Book of Mormon being the “Word of God”), how can we equate the two faith systems? I’m not asking whether one is right and one is wrong, just how they can be equated when their beliefs about the person and nature of God, the person and nature of Christ, and the person and nature of the Spirit (and the Trinity), are so widely divergent?
nailinmyeye on August 30, 2007 at 2:25 PM
Checking the scoreboard:
Atheists: 0
Christians: …high score, as usual.
WHOO-HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
TIME TO REPENT, HEATHERNS!
Dork B. on August 30, 2007 at 2:27 PM
Are you five?
If so, I’m impressed at your computer literacy and decent vocabulary.
Wouldn’t that include the two or three that you say Mormons agree with?
The truth is that everyone, from Baptists, to Pentecostals, to Lutherans, to Catholics, we all disagree with each other. The best we’ve got is the Bible and our interpretation of it, but much of the details, the things we get caught up in, matter very little in salvation.
Esthier on August 30, 2007 at 2:27 PM
Ugh.
Joseph Smith was a fraud.
The only equation is if Jesus was too. Which is hard to prove (unlike Smith) because it’s so long ago. Although on its face one could certainly view it as a tall tale.
Christoph on August 30, 2007 at 2:27 PM
csdeven:
Ok, well, tell me how you go about making a distinction between Christians, Mormons, and JW’s, when you are saying that there is not distinction?
I agree with you. But, how does one go about “promoting their own” when we are not supposed to see the distinctions between ourselves and others? I don’t want to demonize anyone. I do want to point out distinctions – much like I want to with republicans, rinos, and democrats.
nailinmyeye on August 30, 2007 at 2:28 PM
Dude, I don’t know what problem you had with that comment. I agree with you – though with slightly less inflammatory rhetoric (hopefully).
nailinmyeye on August 30, 2007 at 2:29 PM
Yes, and fraudulently made up a whole other book, including plagiarizing and copying spelling errors.
Your equation of these things shows your stupidity and your lack of seriousness regarding your own religion.
And in your criticism of me in the above post, you skipped over the fact where I completely devastated his nonexistent logic.
Christoph on August 30, 2007 at 2:29 PM
I’m going to refrain from attacking Esthier’s intelligence, because it is pointless. Her theory is rudeness is worse than following Satan, and this is her theory as a Christian, so I think Esthier’s belief system is what it is and I don’t share it.
Christoph on August 30, 2007 at 2:32 PM
Yes on how to worship, how to administer their churches or denominations, and other minor matters. But they all agree on the basics of Christian Theology: We are saved through Grace by the sacrifical death and the ressurection of Jesus Christ, the Son of God and the Son of Man. We believe in the one God: God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. That is what C.S. Lewis termed “mere Christianity.” The core beliefs.
Mallard T. Drake on August 30, 2007 at 2:33 PM
And you’re a well known ahole, Christoph.
Blake on August 30, 2007 at 2:34 PM
I did.
I don’t plan on qualifying that by saying, “oh, well, it would have been better if __________ had actually just been a prick instead.”
Of course you believe I’m wrong and believe that theology supports you, but you can’t prove it, making your opinion fairly worthless here.
Esthier on August 30, 2007 at 2:35 PM
I know that Anne Marie Cox is not herself human.
Thomas the Wraith on August 30, 2007 at 2:35 PM
Indeed, Blake, fair enough.
My central points, however, on this page are sound.
Christoph on August 30, 2007 at 2:36 PM
You stand by that statement?
That is your final answer?
Christoph on August 30, 2007 at 2:37 PM
Most people, most intelligent people, just prove the other person is wrong, something you refuse to do.
It’s so telling though that you’d jump right on the idea of attacking my intelligence as though that’s the only logical place go with the conversation.
I’m doing no such thing. I have not equated Mormons to Baptists. By reading this so ignorantly, you’ve completely missed my point.
But that’s not really news.
Esthier on August 30, 2007 at 2:39 PM
Buy Danish, Save the insults. How old are you?
You didn’t list ONE accomplishment he did while Governor. NOT ONE! Just as I had predicted. Your link is a “page cannot be displayed”, which pretty much sums up his political accomplishments. So when do you plan on listing anything he did AS GOVERNOR. Who cares about the Olympics, or how educated he is. The point is he did NOTHING for Massachusetts, and I expect nothing more from him if he gets elected president.
Now tell me ONE ACCOMPLISHMENT! I don’t even care about a non existent list. JUST NAME ONE!
Want a real Romney education, try this link. http://www.massresistance.org/docs/marriage/romney/record/
Masscon on August 30, 2007 at 2:40 PM
Really?
Someone better tell the Mormons, because they don’t seem to be aware of that. In fact, they sound sorta Christian.
Pablo on August 30, 2007 at 2:40 PM
Christoph, at least you get an A, better than failing.
I’m a Christian, and I kind of enjoy Christophs take. The most important point is that what was said by the chick is accurate, not a put down.
right2bright on August 30, 2007 at 2:41 PM
The late Christian philosopher Francis Schaefer said that the “Final Apologetical Argument for Christianity” is Love.
I have no interest in flame-throwing because Jesus Christ calls that “sin.”
Good point. Keeping one’s eyes and gaze on Christians (and that includes me and my faults as well) can be depressing. Keeping one’s eyes on the historical figure of Jesus of Nazareth is enlightening.
Good point.
But He did in his written Word years ago.
We know that atheism is false. We know that atheists cannot epistemically and metaphysically account for the immaterial laws of logic.
I realize Allah may have an interest in posting Mormon vs. Christian debates like these…
But this debate should never obscure the fact that atheism has far more serious philosophical problems of its own.
I just wish that professing Christians would remember that it is too easy to construct arguments demolishing another person’s position.
The real challenge is for sincere Christian believers to show and display (in our humble attitude) that Jesus Christ is our supreme Treasure, and that He Himself is of infinite value, compared to all the fleeting, temporal, false counterfeits this world tries to offer.
ColtsFan on August 30, 2007 at 2:41 PM
Us Mormons believe that. We believe in Jesus Christ, yet because our faith is slightly different than another Christian faith, we are somehow not Christians. Did you guys grow up near powerlines??? Seriously?
Free Constitution on August 30, 2007 at 2:41 PM
Well, there’s mandated health care. Not sure I’d be terribly proud of that, but I think he is.
Pablo on August 30, 2007 at 2:41 PM
Most, if not all other Christian denominations reject their basic tenets, and do not call them Christian.
Yet, you have deemed yourself qualified to go against this consensus, (which is based on a fair and objective reading of the Mormons’ stated beliefs), and pronounce them Christian, anyway.
I don’t know how to argue with that.
How about Quasi-Christian?
Nice Deb on August 30, 2007 at 2:41 PM
Perhaps every text written by a human, yes. But inspired text?
Thanks for the respectful discourse. I don’t hate believers of any faith. I just think they are wrong. Good thing my conservative politics haven’t been swayed.
frreal on August 30, 2007 at 2:42 PM
Yes, you’d be better as a follower of Satan than as a prick.
If you can prove me wrong, do so.
Esthier on August 30, 2007 at 2:43 PM
hotvol on August 30, 2007 at 2:07 PM
We need to know what they will do when they govern, or legislate, whatever the case may be. We do not need to no the intricacies of the peculiarities of their religious beliefs, as long as those beliefs do not run counter to the principles of our Representative Republic as set forth in the Declaration of Independence and validated with our Constitution and Bill of Rights.
If someone believes that our laws must be superseded by Sharia Law, and that a caliphate needs to be established in the United States, then that would disqualify them, but that goes beyond religion into political ideology.
When judging Romney (and it is fair to judge a candidate) one needs to look at his life, his accomplishments, and his vision for America.
Christophe,
You said, Telling people they can’t use their religious principles to make judgments is NOT respecting their religion or freedom of religion. and then proceeded be “disrespectful” of Romney’s religion.
Buy Danish on August 30, 2007 at 2:46 PM
The same is often said of Catholics. Most other denominations are very uncomfortable speaking to dead people and many other issues like that.
Esthier on August 30, 2007 at 2:47 PM
Your contention is that following Satan is worse than X, where X is anything else.
And this is your contention as a Christian.
But in this case, X is some admitted rudeness in a debate on the internet.
I would even know how to begin to prove that that isn’t worse than following Satan. I would think it’s self evident.
You should try that with your friend’s kids and see how popular you are.
Christoph on August 30, 2007 at 2:48 PM
This point may be moot if Fred announces today that he is running.
I could go for a Mormon Veep.
right2bright on August 30, 2007 at 2:48 PM
Which beliefs are you talking about? Mine or that of Mormons? I made no referance to the Book of Mormon, so I will assume that you mean the LDS church.
Again, you choose to see them as separate, not different. I am not sure how I can make that point any more clear.
Different.
You seem to be unable to see that just because a Christian faith is unlike yours that does not mean it is “Not Christain”. It only means that it is Christian not like yours.
Your beliefs are formed by what you were taught via translations of text written over 2000 years ago. To site just two examples of how translation affects things:
Mary and Joseph did not go to be “TAXED” they went to take part in a census. They went to be counted for population. Can you think of any reason a King would want to have TAX in the bible instead of “counted in a census”?
Turn the other cheek & offer him your scarf: Did you know there was Roman law about one smite to the face, and that certain Romans could ask for all clothing from a person except their scarf by law? Jesus was not saying give everything, he was telling people to obey the laws completely, and in fact to go beyond the letter of the law. Yet why would a King / church want the masses to think that Jesus was telling them to give up everything and suffer anything?
These are just some of the things in the Bible affected by its translation. But the largest effect ever felt by the Churches was the invention of the printing press and the steep drop in illiteracy. People being able to read the scriptures for themselves instead of being fed it by a small limited group of people at a church caused many changes in Christian denominations.
Voidseeker on August 30, 2007 at 2:48 PM
Esthier on August 30, 2007 at 2:47 PM,
Yet they do consider us to be Christians, no?
Nice Deb on August 30, 2007 at 2:49 PM
I pray to God for all of you, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
P.S. Even if you don’t want me to.
spc on August 30, 2007 at 2:49 PM
I just thought I’d post this about judging others, since so many people take one verse in the bible and twist it to condemn any judgement of any person.
Anyway as christians we are called to judge other christians.
quote:Matthew 7:1-6 “Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2 For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. 3 “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4 How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? 5 You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye. 6 “Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and then turn and tear you to pieces.
While vers 7:1 seems to condemn all judging, verses 2 through 5 clearly explain that all judging has to be held to a common standard, which is the word of God.
In 2 Corinthians 13:5 we are called to judge ourselves, in Leviticus 19:15 we are called to judge our neighbor, and further we are especally called to judge other christians
quote:1 Corinthians 5:9-13 I have written you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people- 10 not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world. 11 But now I am writing you that you must not associate with anyone who calls himself a brother but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or a slanderer, a drunkard or a swindler. With such a man do not even eat. 12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? 13 God will judge those outside. “Expel the wicked man from among you.”
Also Matthew 18:15-17 is another example of how the christians are supposed to stand in judgement of one anothers actions.
quote:Matthew 18:15-17 “If your brother sins against you, go and show him his fault, just between the two of you. If he listens to you, you have won your brother over. 16 But if he will not listen, take one or two others along, so that ‘every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.’ 17 If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector.
The church is not called to judge non belivers for their non-christlike behavior, but we are specifically called to judge a person who claims to be a beliver but their actions do not follow through. Unfortunately the modern church likes to judge those on the outside while ignoring sin inside the church. The justification is usually the words, “Who am I to judge? We all sin.” The Biblical answer to that needs to be, “We are believers struggling to not sin and for the purity of the church – and because God commanded it – we must judge.”
Darksbane on August 30, 2007 at 2:50 PM
Well explained. I simply meant freedom of religion.
I do NOT and nor do many religious people respect all religions equally.
I respect people’s right to choose their own religion and, if they happen to choose something I consider a cult started by a criminal, I reserve the right to express my opinion on that.
For sure. In the preceding thread, as I’ve said a few times, I give my reasons why I think Romney is one of the strongest potential Presidents and a very accomplished man on many levels.
Christoph on August 30, 2007 at 2:51 PM
Had to know it was coming. Alexa.com shows a drop in the last three months. Nothing like a family feud to get everyone coming back.
jeffNWV on August 30, 2007 at 2:51 PM
Sorta is right. What I don’t see there is anything about the divinity of Christ, which is, let’s just say, a sticking point.
nailinmyeye on August 30, 2007 at 2:52 PM
BUY DANISH!
I just looked at the address of your link to Romney Accomplishments. It’s from ( mittromney.com ) Did you REALLY think you were going to find any REAL political accomplishments on his own web site?
Let me ask you something. Serious Question. Where exactly do you live? Is it even remotely near Massachusetts? or are you just basing your pro Mitt opinion on what he has told you he’s accomplished on his web site?
Masscon on August 30, 2007 at 2:53 PM
Right, that’s exactly what I said.
First, I said being a self-righteous prick is worse than being a Satanist, not the other way around.
Second, the above comment has nothing to do with being rude. You can be a perfectly polite self-righteous prick and still be better off as a Satanist.
Third, still, you won’t prove me wrong. No surprise.
Esthier on August 30, 2007 at 2:53 PM
Reading all of these comments is almost a religious experience.
I expect everyone here yapping about religion to show up in Church this weekend. Or you are hypocrites.
Have a warm fuzzy day, co-religionists.
Doug on August 30, 2007 at 2:55 PM
You can? This is your Christian theological perspective?
Christoph on August 30, 2007 at 2:57 PM
You are, however, the one who posted the LDS statement of faith, which does mention that the Book of Mormon is considered the Word of God. So, you might see where I would conflate “your” beliefs with those of the “LDS.” Either way, my point is that they are different on the most fundamental of issues and hence cannot be equated. Christian denominations differ mostly on issues of practice – how to baptize, the nature of communion, etc. The LDS differes from traditional orthodox Christianity on fundamental issues of Christian theology.
And, I addressed translation above. Modern translations have come a long way since the KJV. I read my NT in English, and cross reference it with the Greek. When I am doing exegetical work, I work in the Greek.
Are you a Mormon? You sound like you have some missionary experience. Just curious.
nailinmyeye on August 30, 2007 at 2:58 PM
DANISH!
The Accomplishments! Where are they? What are they? My god man it sounds like your going to vote for this guy and you STILL can’t name one thing he did as a Governor. And you have the NERVE to question other peoples Intelligence.
Masscon on August 30, 2007 at 2:58 PM
As do Mormons, though the pope’s recent assertion makes me fear you may be wrong with that statement.
Esthier on August 30, 2007 at 2:58 PM
You should try that with your friend’s kid:
Whoa… I think, I think that would just make a great sermon.
Christoph on August 30, 2007 at 2:59 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 ... 7 Next »