Mormons again gaining some attention

“There is a good chance that the main way a lot of leaders of the church will respond to the election of a Mormon to the presidency will be to stay as quiet and uninvolved in politics as possible and put as much daylight as possible between that president and the institutional church,” said Russell Arben Fox, a political scientist at Friends University in Wichita, Kan., and a Mormon writer. “They’re a global church and have responsibilities all around the world. For them to appear to be lining up behind a Mormon president and endorsing his policies would just be bad for the church.”

Despite their fears, Mormons acknowledge that Romney’s nomination will be a milestone like none before for the church.

With the American presidential election ahead the Mormons get some more attention because of Mitt Romney, the leading GOP candidate, and Jon Huntsman the second Republican candidate in the 2012 race who happens to be Mormon.

Some think it is Barack Obama, the nation’s first black president and a man who overcame several religious controversies — rumours that he’s a Muslim, concerns about his U.S.-bashing pastor in Chicago — who helped pave the way for nominees of other faiths.

“The American public is more sophisticated regarding religion than the prejudices witnessed from generations long past,” said conservative political commentator Kevin Patrick.

Jon Huntsman and Mitt Romney
Jon Huntsman and Mitt Romney

For Huntsman and Romney, their campaigns come at a significant time in public awareness of Mormonism.

On the entertainment front, Broadway’s “The Book of Mormon” and cable TV’s “Big Love” — however distorted their portrayal of the faith — have helped usher Mormonism into the mainstream, observers said.

On the political front, there are 14 Mormon members of Congress, making Washington’s climate hospitable to the idea of a Mormon president — or at least a Mormon GOP nominee.

“Being Mormon is only going to hurt them in a Southern evangelical base vote,” said Republican consultant Mike Edelman, who argued, however, that evangelicals would support Romney or Huntsman over Obama.

One major difference between the two is that Romney this year has shied away from discussing his faith, and Huntsman has insisted it’s just one of several religions that influence his life, fueling speculation that he could be distancing himself from the Church of Latter-Day Saints.

“Huntsman is reflective of contemporary trends in Mormonism,” said Matthew Bowman, associate editor of Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought.

Mitt Romney’s emergence as the front-runner for the Republican nomination has been a mixed blessing for Mormons. It has led to unprecedented interest in the Church of Latter-Day Saints or LDS Church and its members, but the dominant image of Romney—too wooden, too rich, too secretive about his faith, too white—has reinforced existing stereotypes about members of the faith.

But they are not the first Mormon candidates for president, because the father of the movement himself presented himself as a candidate.  Joseph Smith who claimed to have been visited by an angel of God who led him to the discovery of sacred gold-plated texts that became The “Book of Mormon,” ran an unorthodox campaign for president back in 1844, promoting a platform that went roughly this way: Make America a one-party state. Reduce Congress in size by two-thirds, allowing two senators per state, but just one House member per million people. Reduce Congressional salaries to two dollars plus room and board. (After all, he wrote, “that is more than the farmer gets and he lives honestly.”) Turn the jails into “seminaries of learning.” Re-establish the national bank. Make prisoners work on building roads or on any project “where the culprit can be taught more wisdom and more virtue; and become more enlightened…”

The reason why the golden plates or copies of the text on them are not available for examination is explained by saying that the angel had forbidden Joseph Smith to show them to anyone except those designated by the angel. After the translating work was done the angel is said to have taken them away. On those plates would have been the revelation of God. And Joseph Smith acted according to these words of God and as the angel directed him.

Jesus also would have appeared in the United States of America. As such he would also probably have spoken to many people over there, and they could have followed him.

The Book of Mormon English Missionary Edition ...
The Book of Mormon English Missionary Edition Soft Cover (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Joseph Smith wrote the Book of Mormon like an Authorised Bible version and got interested people around him. But his strange ideas brought controversions and agitations.

Long before he decided to run for president, the Mormon prophet had established a political life. Violently expelled from Missouri where the governor had issued an executive order authorizing the “extermination” or forced removal of the Mormon community, Smith and his followers settled in the rural town of Commerce, Illinois, and renamed it Nauvoo (Hebrew for “beautiful spot”). There, despite professed admiration for the Constitution as having been “divinely inspired,” he established himself as something of a supreme ruler. Indeed, Nauvoo was more like an independent theocracy than a republic, with Smith himself serving as mayor, chief judge, and major general of a private town militia.

Smith’s inspiration for seeking the presidency was the experience in Missouri. He had resented his community’s treatment there and petitioned President Martin Van Buren to intercede on the Mormons’ behalf. Van Buren declined. But the Mormon leader did have strong opinions on national issues as well and he published them under the title, “General Smith’s Views of the Powers and Policy of the Government of the United States.”

Smith had hoped to keep the polygamy in his church secret.

It was an 1878 Supreme Court decision that ultimately forced the church to abandon the practice of polygamy. In Reynolds v. United States, the justices unanimously asserted a distinction between belief and practice, between opinion and conduct, when it ruled that the Morrill Anti-Bigamy Act, which prohibited the practice of “plural marriage” in any U.S. territory (Abraham Lincoln signed the act into law in 1862), withstood the standards of the First Amendment, even though the plaintiff, George Reynolds, had argued that it was his religious “duty” as a Mormon to marry more than one woman. Following that, the Mormon Church leadership declared in 1890 that its followers should “refrain from contracting any marriages forbidden by the law of the land.”

By the mid-twentieth century, the Mormon faith had settled into a more traditional profile. Still, the church’s fantastic origins and racist history have dogged any Mormon looking to occupy national office, and if Gov. Romney’s popularity grows making him a the Republican answer against Barack Obama, we can expect that his Mormon roots will continue to be debated.

During a town meeting, supporter Betty Treen took the microphone to ask the former Massachusetts Governor point blank about his faith.

“I am for you, but I need to ask you a personal question: Do you believe in the divine saving grace of Jesus Christ?” A murmur could be heard in the crowd in the few seconds it took Romney to get the microphone back.

“Yes, I do,” Romney began, as the crowd erupted into applause led by home state governor Nikki Haley, who was on stage with the candidate she has endorsed.

“I would note there are people in our nation that have different beliefs; there are people of the Jewish faith, and people of the Islamic faith, and other faiths who believe other things, and our President will be President of the people of all faiths,” Romney said, again interrupted by applause.

A president for all faiths is not a bad thing. But Christians should be aware of certain beliefs in the Mormon faith, which could give enough signs to the believer how to react rightly. Now that the Mormons are receiving again some attention so they shall be eager enough to come back on the streets more openly again to proclaim what they say is the word of God.

But can the book of Mormon be a book given by God to His people? Is it for us an important book to be read?

To find out you are best to compare the Book of Mormon with the Bible.

The number one truth, listed in the LDS’ A Marvelous Work and a Wonder, revealed “through the instrumentality of the Prophet Joseph Smith” is “The true personality of God.” – p. 407, 1979 ed.

Or, as Joseph Smith himself wrote in his Lectures on Faith, p. 36,

“three things are necessary, in order that any rational and intelligent being may exercise faith in God unto life and salvation. First, the idea that he actually exists. Secondly, a CORRECT [Smith’s emphasis] idea of his character, perfection and attributes.”

Joseph Smith,  his followers, and the Mormons who come along the houses give the impression that it is important that  we know who the God is whom we must worship in truth (John 4:24) and what he expects of us. We are even given the warning that  otherwise we may not receive eternal life! (See 2 Thessalonians 1:8, 9 – KJV and Joseph Smith’s Inspired Version.) Ignorance will not be an excuse in the last day. How could anyone refuse to expend every effort in discovering all that can be known about the True God? (Proverbs 2:4, 5.)

When questions of historicity come up in Mormonism, the conversation often changes direction, from focusing on the historicity of the textual accounts to focusing on the historicity of the provenance of the text.

A very striking thing about The Book of Mormon is the frequent quotes or near quotes it makes from the Authorized or King James Version of the Bible, which was popular during the days of Joseph Smith.

The Book of Mormon has men who are supposed to have lived several hundred years before Christ using expressions that are found in the Greek Scriptures of the Bible, which Scriptures were written after the time of Christ. Paul’s expression at Hebrews 13:8 is used at least five times. He said: “Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.” (AV) Its first appearance in The Book of Mormon is at 1 Nephi 10:18, which was supposedly written more than 600 years before the days of the apostle Paul. It says: “For he is the same yesterday, to-day, and forever.”

The Book of Mormon has Jesus Christ not only appearing in the flesh to the people of North America after his resurrection and ascension. About 124 years before Jesus was born in Bethlehem, The Book of Mormon has people crying out: “O have mercy, and apply the atoning blood of Christ that we may receive forgiveness of our sins, and our hearts may be purified; for we believe in Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who created heaven and earth, and all things; who shall come down among the children of men.” (Mosiah 4:2) How can a people cry for forgiveness of sins by the atoning blood of Christ long before that blood was shed and at a time when God’s people were required to rely upon the animal sacrifices of the Law for atonement of sins?

A number of books in The Book of Mormon are dated before the coming of Christ, but they repeatedly talk about Jesus Christ, his sin-atoning sacrifice, his resurrection, his baptism in water, the baptism by the holy spirit, the salvation of man through Christ and the need of exercising faith in him in order to be saved. These things are mentioned with the great frequency that marks literary works produced after Jesus was killed and resurrected. Such statements about him become anachronisms in the time setting given them by The Book of Mormon. Being out of time-order, they conflict with the Bible, which places similar statements after Christ, not before his coming.

The Book of Mormon boldly asserts that God and Christ are one God. Alma 11:38, 39 says: “Now Zeezrom saith again unto him: Is the Son of God the very Eternal Father? And Amulek said unto him: Yea, he is the very Eternal Father of heaven and of earth.” Mormon 7:7 speaks about singing praises “unto the Father, and unto the Son, and unto the Holy Ghost, which are one God, in a state of happiness which hath no end.” The Book of Mormon has Jesus Christ flatly saying, at 3 Nephi 11:14, “I am the God of Israel, and the God of the whole earth, and have been slain for the sins of the world.”

But are you able to find such trinitarian sayings somewhere in the canon of the Bible? You may take any Roman Catholic Bible and even there you would not find any reference to a tri-une God in the Bible text itself?

Jesus Christ never claimed to be the “God of the whole earth” or the “God of Israel” or to be the “Creator of all things”. He always was very clear when he did miracles, that it was not he who did it whit his power, but His Father who authorised to do these actions in His name. Jesus was also clear in letting to know the people that they did not have to honour him, but that they should only give honour to the Only One God, his Father who is in heaven.

On this point The Book of Mormon contradicts the Bible. Instead of saying that the Father and the Son are one God, the Bible reveals the son as the person given by the force of God, placed in the womb of a young virgin. This man was to be the one who still had to come in the time of Moses and Jacob. It was a man who was going to die while God can not die. Though for Joseph Smith God  is also a man, while the Bible clearly tells us God is a spirit.

“God is a glorified and perfected man, a personage of flesh and bones. Inside his tangible body is an eternal Spirit (see D&C 130:22).” – p. 6, Gospel Principles, published by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1979 ed.

“The exact nature of the Holy Ghost – how He can be a personage of spirit dwelling in a spirit body – is not fully comprehended by mortal men. But we can understand that the Father and the Son are glorified men in whose image Adam was made. We can understand that they are separate individuals, physically distinct from each other, and, by considering certain statements found in the Bible, we can understand that both God the Father and His Son Jesus Christ have glorified resurrected bodies of flesh and bones. We read in Holy Writ: ‘And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.’ (John 17:3).” – p. 92, Why I Believe, G. E. Clark, 1952, Foreword by Mormon Apostle John A. Widtsoe.

“god [is] a spirit, and they who worship him must worship in spirit and in truth.” (John 4:24 MKJV)

Joseph Smith also used the name “Jehovah” more frequently than most members of “traditional” Christendom today.  He also puts a lot of importance on the name of a person. It would appear, then, that he recognized the importance of that personal name of the Creator of the universe as welll. And, although he often publicly acknowledged the personal name “Jehovah” (e.g. D&C 109:34, 42, 56, 68), he did not present “Elohim” as being a name, but being a title. (What it is.)  He  properly translated that Hebrew word or title (but not personal name) as “God” or “god”!

IF, as present day Prophets of the LDS Church teach, “elohim” really is the personal name of God, the Father, then Joseph Smith’s virtually ignoring it would have been a terrible error!

Jesus did find an end to his life on the wooden stake.  Jesus had also been clear that when he would return to the earth it would be at a moment he did not know yet, because only his Father knew. And that return would mean the End of Times.

So when Jesus would also have been in the United States, that would have meant the beginning of the End Times, though we are still in that time of tribulation.

Jesus is according the Bible also less than his Father and subject to the Father, who is the Only One God, even after his ascension to heaven. This is shown at 1 Corinthians 15:28, “But when all things will have been subjected to him, then the Son himself will also subject himself to the One who subjected all things to him, that God may be all things to everyone.”

Jewish liturgy was fulfilled in Jesus. The apostles wrote their accounts to show Jesus as the fulfilment of the Jewish faith, so that stories of Jesus would parallel the Old Testament accounts already used in the synagogues.

Rather than claiming to be God in the flesh, Jesus Christ pointed out his dependence upon the Father and his inferiority to him by saying: “I cannot do a single thing of my own initiative; just as I hear, I judge; and the judgement that I render is righteous, because I seek, not my own will, but the will of him that sent me.” (John 5:30).

There have been thousands of changes over the years in all of the LDS “Scriptures.” The Book of Mormon (BOM), for example, has suffered about 4000 changes since it was first published in 1830. Some of these changes that we will examine were major changes. The vast majority, however, were spelling/grammar/punctuation corrections.

Even these “minor” errors are significant. One of the special “Three Witnesses” for the BOM, Martin Harris, testified that the words which appeared on the “seer stone,” which Joseph Smith claimed to use to translate the golden plates into the BOM, wouldn’t even “erase” from that stone until they had been correctly written down on paper! {2}

It can be tempting to take the Book of Mormon just as an other Bible translation (as it is sometimes presented). People can find a lot of lengthy quotations from the Authorized Version in it. But several of the words, according to Smith would have been said in North America. For example, 3 Nephi 12:3-18, 21-28 and 31-45 are practically identical, verse for verse, with Matthew 5:3-18, 21-28 and 31-45 in the Authorized Version. This will also be found true when comparing 3 Nephi 13 with Matthew 6 as well as 3 Nephi 14 with Matthew 7. The type of similarities that comparison of these passages reveals would not have existed if Jesus had truly repeated these things to another people and they were written by different writers in a different language.

Many of Jesus’ statements recorded in the Bible can be found liberally sprinkled throughout The Book of Mormon, from those parts dated nearly 600 years before his birth to those dated over 400 years after his birth. What Jesus said about his sheep at John 10:9, 14, 16 is found, in part, at 1 Nephi 22:25, dated 588 years before Christ. Alma 31:37 uses Jesus’ words at Luke 12:22, although this book is dated 74 years before his birth. Jesus’ well-known expression at Matthew 16:19, where he tells Peter: “Whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven,” is found at Helaman 10:7, which says: “Behold, I give unto you power, that whatsoever ye shall seal on earth shall be sealed in heaven; and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” This is dated twenty-three years before the birth of Jesus. It should be of interest to mention here that what Peter said about Jesus at Acts 3:22-25 appears, with the exception of a few alterations, at 3 Nephi 20:23-25, as words that Jesus was supposed to have said A.D. 34 to people in North America, but its close resemblance to the Authorized Version of the Bible identifies its source.

Joseph Smith’s teachings indicate the so-called “lost” 10 tribes (which include the tribe of Ephraim) are still off in some unknown, isolated location in the far north (see Doctrine and Covenants Commentary, pp. 843, 844) – Therefore, modern Europeans and Americans are not their descendants.

The Church also establishes a connection for the Deaf between Nephites and Lamanites and American Indians. If limited geography theories of the Book of Mormon are correct, this connection may be unfortunate, particularly as it comes from a more official source than the hand motions that go along with “Book of Mormon Stories.”

Trent Stephens explains the difficulties with recent DNA-based criticisms (PDF). Ralph Olsen proposes a Malay setting for the Book of Mormon (PDF). (But in that case, what are we to make of the prophesied Columbus figure, etc.?)

Worth to compare:

Inclusive Exclusive

The Garden of Eden and the places where Adam offered sacrifices were placed in Missouri by Joseph Smith’s teaching which is also not according the Old writings to be found in the Middle East.  ( Adam will return to Missouri,at and near Adam-Ondi-Ahman according to Doctrine & Covenants 116 .)

However global the Church may be today, it certainly started out very America-centered, and retains much of that America-centeredness.

The American people may find in George Romney the “real American” though polygamy is the reason  he was born in Mexico.

+

“Let Us Reason” went deeper into the bible versus Mormon Book, but because it is not available any  more, we would like to recommend the reading of this article on Fromthesunrising’s Blog  The Book Of Mormons . also find some more writings in Reasoning From Scripture on the LDS.

++

Please do read:

  1. LDS’ God (“Elohim” & “Jehovah”)
  2. LDS’ change: Changing God’s Inspired Word
  3. Stick of Judah and Stick of Ephraim (or Joseph) – Ezekiel 37
  4. The Bible vs. the Book of Mormon
    Why I Believe, by Mormon writer George Edward Clark, pp. 122-123 states:“Now, if Joseph Smith were a false prophet, an impostor, and wrote the Book of Mormon himself, quoting verbatim whole chapters from the Bible, he would have been inconsistent with his teachings, for in his eighth Article of Faith he said, ‘We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly.’ Therefore, since he implied that our present King James version of the Bible is not all translated correctly, it is evident he would not copy what he professed was a mistranslation and embody that copy in a book which he purported to be a true record. The wording of those chapters, particularly the second chapter of Isaiah, differs greatly in the two books – one passage from each will suffice to illustrate:“‘And the mean man boweth down, and the great man humbleth himself: therefore forgive them not.’ (Isaiah 2:9)“‘And the mean man boweth not down, and the great man humbleth himself not, therefore forgive him not.’ (Book of Mormon – 2 Nephi 12:9)“It will at once be apparent that the latter translation has more clarity, is more consistent with itself, and bears witness of the fact that Joseph Smith did not copy the passage from the Bible, but suggests he translated it from God-inspired ancient records” – Bookcraft, Inc., Salt Lake City, 1952.

+++

  • Being Human (dougsdeepthoughts.wordpress.com)
    I am a Mormon. By that, I mean that I am a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. That’s the church that has drawn a whole heckuva lot of attention lately thanks to prominent members like Mitt Romney, Jon Huntsman, Jr., Harry Reid, and Bryce Harper. A lot of misconceptions are being cleared up thanks to all of this attention…people are finding out that we don’t have five wives, worship Joseph Smith, sacrifice animals in our temples, etc. People are finding out that Mormons are, in many ways, just average people who believe that God is still speaking to His children.
    +
    So as you continue to see more about Mormonism in the news, please remember that we are proud of our most faithful members…but at the same time, remember that we are human too.
  • The Brain Eating Cult of Mormonism (theageofblasphemy.wordpress.com)
    “The precipitous mountain pass that led the [Mormon] pioneers down into the Salt Lake Valley and still is the route of access from the east on Interstate 80, was first explored by my great-grandfather, Parley P. Pratt,” Mitt Romney cheerfully writes in “Turnaround,” the airport bookstore leadership manual he wrote in 2004 while governor of Massachusetts.
    +
    some Mormons have a tendency to compare themselves to the Jews — members of the church even refer to non-­Mormons as “Gentiles.” (“I understood a little better what my Jewish friends encounter,” Romney writes in “Turnaround,” after receiving anti-­Mormon hate mail.)
    +
    The Mormonism of the 19th century bears little resemblance to Mitt Romney’s Mormonism. Mitt Romney’s Mormonism is the impossibly cheery “Donny and Marie” variety, not the armed apocalyptic homesteading cult member variety. Tolstoy — referring to the scrappy/crazy 19th century version — called Mormonism “the American religion,” and he decidedly did not mean that as a compliment. But the modern church still deserves the title. It’s the Coca-­Cola religion, with a brand that denotes a sort of upbeat corporate Americanness, considered cheesy by elites but undeniably popular in pockets of the heartland and abroad.
  • Richard Mouw, Evangelical Leader, Says Engaging Mormons Isn’t Just About Being Nice (huffingtonpost.com)
    Richard Mouw never intended to start a riot within the evangelical community by saying his fellow believers had “sinned against Mormonism.” But that’s exactly what happened.
    +
    Today, evangelicals have been forced to confront their views of Mormonism even more directly and publicly because of Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign.In October, Dallas pastor Robert Jeffress, a Southern Baptist, called Mormonism a cult and said he therefore would never vote for a Latter-day Saint. Since Romney presumably secured the Republican nomination, Jeffress reluctantly admitted he would vote for Romney over Obama, because of the Mormon candidate’s stance on abortion.
  • Now that Romney is invoking Mormonism to woo voters, isn’t it time we had a frank discussion about Mormonism? (americablog.com)
    Why is discussing Mitt Romney’s Mormonism off limits when Mitt Romney is using his Mormonism to woo evangelical voters?  Either his being a Mormon is relevant or it’s not; it’s off limits, or it’s not.  It’s clearly not off limits to Mitt Romney.
  • ‘Sister Wives’ Speak On Romney, Hanukkah And Practice Of Polygamy (huffingtonpost.com)
    With Gov. Romney the clear favorite to win the Republican nomination, the question of a Mormon president in the White House will be a hot topic this election season. One of the most prominent displays of Mormonism is TLC’s popular reality show “Sister Wives,” in which an openly polygamist, Fundamentalist Mormon family shares their life and faith with the world.While The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has officially rejected polygamy, the Brown family openly continues with the practice.
  • Mormons gird for campaign (staradvertiser.com)
    As 20,000 Mormons streamed from the church conference center, a ragtag group of protesters stood across the street shouting that the Latter-day Saints were going to hell. Mormon families, who had gathered here for two days of speeches and spiritual guidance called General Conference, ignored the hecklers or laughed and kept walking.
    +
    The Latter-day Saints have been running a multimillion-dollar series of ads, called “I’m a Mormon,” since 2010, to dispel stereotypes by telling the stories of individual Mormons. To avoid any appearance that the ads were meant to help Romney, the church didn’t buy ad time in Iowa and some other markets with early primaries, said Michael Purdy, an LDS national spokes­man. At the General Conference last month, led by the highest authorities of the church, there was no mention of the election across the pulpit.
  • Romney, Mormons brace for mean campaign (kshb.com)
    Organized in 1830, Latter-day Saints were persecuted from their earliest days for their doctrine and support for polygamy, which Mormons renounced in 1890. A mob assassinated founder Joseph Smith in 1844, sending Mormons fleeing into the unsettled Mountain West. Theological differences with other faith groups — about scriptures, the nature of God and heaven — provided fodder for anti-Mormon bias over the years. Christian groups challenged the Mormon assertion that the church is part of traditional Christianity. One such group, the Utah Lighthouse Ministry, operates just a few miles from Temple Square, the Salt Lake City complex at the heart of the faith.

  • Romney, Mormons brace for a mean political season (hosted.ap.org)
    even with a resilience built over nearly two centuries as outsiders, church members are anxious about what’s ahead. Republican Mitt Romney is about to become the first Mormon nominee for U.S. president on a major party ticket. That will give them a chance like no other to explain their tradition to the public, but the church’s many critics will have a bigger platform, too. And the vetting will take place amid the emotion of what may well be a nasty general election.
    +
    “People who have opposed Mormonism forever will use this as an opportunity,” said Robert Millet, a religion scholar at Brigham Young University who co-founded a pioneering evangelical-Mormon dialogue. “I don’t know if we’re ready for this kind of deluge.”
    +

    Steve Shaw, a political scientist at Northwest Nazarene University and co-author of “The Presidents and Their Faith,” compares this election to the 1960 campaign of John F. Kennedy, who confronted religious bias to become the first Roman Catholic president. Kennedy’s election marked a move for Catholics more firmly into the American mainstream, a potential shift for Mormons as well in 2012. When Romney became the presumptive nominee last month, the liberal-leaning Mormon blog, “By Common Consent,” posted an article titled, “Excited about Romney, Despite Myself.”

    “If Mr. Romney is elected, when he is sworn into office in January 2013, the history of Mormonism in this country clearly would enter a new chapter,” Shaw said.

  • Romney, Mormons brace for a mean political season (boston.com)
    Christian groups with a competing emphasis on evangelizing worry about a flood of Mormon converts if Romney prevails over President Barack Obama. With 14.4 million members, the church is among the fastest-growing in the world, supported by a full-time missionary force of about 55,000 young people.
  • Romney, Mormons brace for a mean political season (kansascity.com)
    “I honestly look forward to having the public see an LDS member live life in full public view,” said Alison Moore Smith, a Mormon Republican from Lindon, Utah, and founder of the blog MormonMomma.com. “While many (Mormons) are worried about the heightened scrutiny, most seem to have a ‘finally they will see what we’re really like’ attitude.”

  • Mitt Romney Already Trying To Convert Christians To Mormonism? (truelogic.wordpress.com)
    Mitt Romney stated about Paul Ryan’s budget that it was ” A Marvelous Work of Wonder”.  Mormons love the word “marvelous.” It was one of Joseph Smith’s favorite words.The bible used the word Marvelous 24 times while the book of mormon used it 50 times, yet the bible is almost 5 times larger than the book of mormon.
  • Mormons who fear Mitt – Mormon Church – Salon.com (mbcalyn.com)

    “I would not vote for him just because he is Mormon. I want to know what he is going to do for the people.  I want to see the compassion.”

    Gladys Knight is not voting for Mitt Romney. In a recent interview with BET the famed singer, herself a Mormon, said she wants to see the GOP front-runner “talk about something else besides the money.” Knight’s ambivalence about Romney is shared by at least a handful of her fellow Latter-day Saints.
    +
    Mormonism’s political monoculture may well be shrinking the gene pool of potential converts who will remain comfortable in LDS pews. To be relevant — that is, likable — in the 21st century, Mormons will need to find a way to appeal to a broader segment of American society: women, gays and even Democrats.

    Mitt Romney could make that effort more difficult.

  • Can A Cult Member Be President Without Cult Influence?(currentopinionsofnews.wordpress.com)Yes, it is my belief, as it is with many others, that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is a cult.  I have had friends who were Mormons, and they (all Mormons) are as strange as Scientologists, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and any other cult you can think of.

    The question is–can Romney be President and lead without interference from the Mormon church and/or his religious beliefs?  I fear not.  As a cult member, Romney is heavily brainwashed, just like all cult members, and I fear their loyalties lie more with their cults than with our nation.
    +
    The new season of “Sister Wives” premiers on Sunday, May 13 at 9 p.m. EST.

     

  • LDSWatch.org Issues First “Dangerous” Rating for Novel, Declares Potential to Negatively Affect Mormon Candidates (prweb.com)
    LDSWatch.org tracks and assesses appearances of Mormons in popular fiction. Our “dangerous” rating means that the fictional content is both believable and provocative enough to alter people’s perceptions of Mormons. The novel End of Grace seems to instill or confirm suspicions that the Mormon Church is controlled by power hungry men who regularly resort to violent actions to advance church position. Readers could easily have their opinions of the Mormon Church and its people lowered. This in turn may well affect how they view and cast votes for Mormon political candidates.
Advertisements

5 thoughts on “Mormons again gaining some attention

  1. […] Mormons again gaining some attention (https://christadelphians.wordpress.com) “There is a good chance that the main way a lot of leaders of the church will respond to the election of a Mormon to the presidency will be to stay as quiet and uninvolved in politics as possible and put as much daylight as possible between that president and the institutional church,” said Russell Arben Fox, a political scientist at Friends University in Wichita, Kan., and a Mormon writer. “They’re a global church and have responsibilities all around the world. For them to appear to be lining up behind a Mormon president and endorsing his policies would just be bad for the church.” + Wat betreft Korte inhoud van lezingen: Bijgeloof en feesten de Mormonen (polygamie, de aard en zingeving van hun vredelievendheid, hun stichter, wat ze wel en niet mogen, Amerikaanse impact…) […]

    Like

  2. […] In case you consider every minority group a cult, then yes you can see in the whole history that many groups which started small, like the followers of Jesus where called a cult (The Way), but as soon as they got more money and political power they became integrated in the normal system and where even taken as the normal standard. As such history has seen growing the Lutherans, Calvinists or recently the Mormons. […]

    Like

Geef een reactie - Give a reaction

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s