Biblical and historical reasons why Mitt Romney is not a Christian

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by theway

I'm sorry I must have missed that definition of a Christian. Can I please get the official version of it, instead of your critic rant? No offense, but your opinion carries no credibility, seeing as though you have been consistently wrong on so many things, like my name ever being Richard.

---

I call you Richard because you speak as he did....sorry if it offends you. I will again repeat myself even though you claim whatever I say has no credibility.

Definitions of Christian (n)

1. believer in Jesus Christ as savior: somebody whose religion is Christianity
2. from teachings of Jesus Christ: based on or relating to a belief in Jesus Christ as the Son of God and the Messiah, and acceptance of his teachings, contained in the Gospels
3. relating to Christianity, or belonging to or maintained by a Christian organization, especially a church

This is the definition of what a Christian is or a religion that calls itself Christian. Now, answer me this. If a person claims to believe in and follows Christ BUT the Christ they say they believe in is NOT the TRUE Christ of the Bible, then can they be considered a Christian? I don't think you even read all of my previous post or you plain ignored it before you spouted off back to me.

How many of the Christians here have told you over and over again that Mormonism DOES NOT worship the true and living Jesus Christ of the Bible. JS made up your Jesus claiming him to be a created being, and the brother of Satan. “Blessed be the Lord God of Israel from everlasting to everlasting: and let all the people say, Amen. Hallelujah!” (Psalm 106:48).
Where in ALL the Bible does it defend your beliefs? Please let me know. And from now on before commenting back to someone, it would be nice if you read their whole post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by theway

You are correct... in the early church they were required to give all they had, I guess they were better at extracting the gold from their members than the LDS Church; we only get 10%.

---

They were never commanded to give everything and they were never commanded to ***he. ***hing was commanded under the law. But I am sure you already know this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neverending

So you think it is ok for the members of your church to live Communism? That is what the Law of Consecration was,

---

The law of consecration is not communism and there are some clear distingusihing differences just as cohabitation is not marriage. Similarities does not make something the same as I don't think you would call cohabitation marriage merely because a man and a woman are living together.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BigJulie

The law of consecration is not communism and there are some clear distingusihing differences just as cohabitation is not marriage. Similarities does not make something the same as I don't think you would call cohabitation marriage merely because a man and a woman are living together.

---

Oh Julie....have you not heard of Common Law Marriages? We have such a law here in Utah that once a couple have cohabitated for 2 years, the State considers them married. So, what do you call sharing everything in common and equally then?

Communism:
cl***less political system: the political theory or system in which all property and wealth is owned in a cl***less society by all the members of that society.

Does this sound familiar? So then the Law of Consecration was based on Communism where ALL things were owned in common by ALL members of the church. If this law was so wonderful, why are you not living it now?

I would suggest you go and read your D&C section 78:3-11. If you don't have the time nor the will here it is for you: "Section 78

Revelation given through Joseph Smith the Prophet, at Hiram, Ohio, March 1832 (see History of the Church, 1:255–57). The order was given of the Lord to Joseph Smith for the purpose of establishing a storehouse for the poor. It was not always desirable that the iden***y of the individuals whom the Lord addressed in the revelations should be known by the world; hence, in the publication of this and some subsequent revelations the brethren were referred to by other than their own names; (names changed to protect the innocent or the guilty). When the necessity had p***ed for keeping the names of the individuals unknown, their real names were thereafter given in brackets. Since there exists no vital need today to continue the code names, the real names only are now used herein as given in the original m****cripts.


1 The Lord spake unto Joseph Smith, Jun., saying: Hearken unto me, saith the Lord your God, who are ordained unto the high priesthood of my church, who have ***embled yourselves together;
2 And listen to the counsel of him who has ordained you from on high, who shall speak in your ears the words of wisdom, that salvation may be unto you in that thing which you have presented before me, saith the Lord God.
3 For verily I say unto you, the time has come, and is now at hand; and behold, and lo, it must needs be that there be an organization of my people, in regulating and establishing the affairs of the storehouse for the poor of my people, both in this place and in the land of Zion—
4 For a permanent and everlasting establishment and order unto my church, to advance the cause, which ye have espoused, to the salvation of man, and to the glory of your Father who is in heaven;
5 That you may be equal in the bonds of heavenly things, yea, and earthly things also, for the obtaining of heavenly things.
6 For if ye are not equal in earthly things ye cannot be equal in obtaining heavenly things;
7 For if you will that I give unto you a place in the celestial world, you must prepare yourselves by doing the things which I have commanded you and required of you.
8 And now, verily thus saith the Lord, it is expedient that all things be done unto my glory, by you who are joined together in this order;
9 Or, in other words, let my servant Newel K. Whitney and my servant Joseph Smith, Jun., and my servant Sidney Rigdon sit in council with the saints which are in Zion;
10 Otherwise Satan seeketh to turn their hearts away from the truth, that they become blinded and understand not the things which are prepared for them.
11 Wherefore, a commandment I give unto you, to prepare and organize yourselves by a bond or everlasting covenant that cannot be broken.

Julie, how then can your church not be living this law? For it is clearly written within your D&C that it was an everlasting covenant that could NOT be broken. Can you see how your church has strayed from what God commanded? Does this not bother you?

[QUOTE]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neverending

Oh Julie....have you not heard of Common Law Marriages? We have such a law here in Utah that once a couple have cohabitated for 2 years, the State considers them married. So, what do you call sharing everything in common and equally then?

---

Well, do you believe that God approves of living together then and then having the state recognize it as marriage?

The main difference are these as noted by a website:

Quote:

---

The two key differences are these:

First, Consecration is made voluntarily by covenant; Communism is initially imposed on individuals as Socialism by government.

Second, Consecration is based upon absolute faith and love of Christ. Communism is based on a society with no religion (opiate of the m***es), but is atheistic towards anything other than devotion to the state.

http://www.lds.net/forums/lds-gospel...socialism.html

---

Quote:

---

Julie, how then can your church not be living this law? For it is clearly written within your D&C that it was an everlasting covenant that could NOT be broken. Can you see how your church has strayed from what God commanded? Does this not bother you? [/COLOR]

---

Read up on what it means to be an everlasting covenant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neverending

Libby,
And IF you left the LDS Church, why do you continue to defend it? This is a poor example of a person who has left and I'd like to know whatcaused you to leave Mormonism and where you stand now as far as any religion. We who come to WM do so out of concern for Mormons, knowing that it teaches another gospel and leads people away from God. Just their teaching how they themselves can become a god by following ALL the laws and ordinances of their church is not in anyway Biblical, but how many Mormons are able to follow every law and ordinance? No one can be perfect, for there will be a moment when one will fail and then what?

---

I'm not really defending the church. I just think the church is sometimes attacked unfairly. Many of the arguments critics use, can very well be used against their own brand of Christianity. I am interested in truth. While it's, possibly, true that past LDS leaders did say some embarr***ing things (hard to know, since we didn't have tape recordings back then), it is not true that those things represent the church, today. Christians of all sects, over the centuries, have believed and practiced a lot of things they no longer practice...probably, the worst of which was the Inquisition. I can't think of anything Joseph Smith did that was worse than that.

I am no longer interested in the LDS Church, as far as being a member (for my own reasons), but I no longer believe LDS are "lost"..not anymore so than the rest of us, and I believe the LDS religion has redeeming value. But, that's not why I jumped into this conversation. I see critics (even ex-Mormons, who should know better) give very inaccurate representations of what the church, today, believes and teaches. One good example is issue of how Jesus was conceived. The LDS Church today considers that a "mystery". And, even for those who believe it was some kind of "pro-creation", they do not believe it was the kind of sex that humans have. I was taught that there is something LIKE pro-creation, in the Celestial Kingdom, but not likely to be what humans experience. Anyway, that's one example of an issue that, I think, gets very badly misrepresented. There are many more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Libby

The LDS Church today considers that a "mystery".

---

But that is not what LDS believe in the past as evidenced by many upper level LDS leaders. Why do you think that the leaders got it wrong?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Billyray

But that is not what LDS believe in the past as evidenced by many upper level LDS leaders. Why do you think that the leaders got it wrong?

---

Because they're human.

Why do you suppose the Pope and many other Christian leaders of that era, were so wrong about torturing and murdering, supposed, heretics (in the name of Jesus Christ). They were the mainstream Christians of their time (the "inspired ones")...how could they have been so wrong?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Libby

Because they're human.

---

They why trust anything that they say?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Billyray

They why trust anything that they say?

---

I don't, particularly, not unless I can confirm it, myself.

The Bible was also written by fallible humans. Why do you believe everything that is written there?

It's all a matter of faith, Billy. LDS believe Joseph Smith was sent by God. You believe the prophets in the O.T. were sent by God. You can't really prove that, anymore than LDS can prove JS. You can really only "prove it" to yourself, by means of the Spirit or whatever you have faith in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Libby

The Bible was also written by fallible humans. Why do you believe everything that is written there?

---

Because it is God's words to us.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Libby

I don't, particularly, not unless I can confirm it, myself.

---

Since LDS have prophets what prophecies have you confirmed?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Billyray

Because it is God's words to us.

---

How do you know?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Billyray

Since LDS have prophets what prophecies have you confirmed?

---

None. But, I do believe some of the general teachings are correct. One example...I am convinced that our souls are eternal and we did "pre-exist"...not exactly as LDS believe it, but generally speaking, I'd call that a "hit".

[quote=BigJulie;102152]

Quote:

---

Well, do you believe that God approves of living together then and then having the state recognize it as marriage?

The main difference are these as noted by a website:




Read up on what it means to be an everlasting covenant.

---

Whether God approves of a couple living together is not the POINT! Utah, which is the capital of the Mormon Church, the State has a law on its books that once a couple has been cohabitating for 2 years, they are them recognized by the State as MARRIED! So that does away with a couple not being married doesn't it?

I don't need to read up on what an "everlasting covenant" means? Everlasting means, it lasts forever!

1. (adj.) everlasting
lasting forever; eternal.

2. everlasting
lasting or continuing for an indefinitely long time:
the everlasting hills.

3. everlasting
incessant; constantly recurring:
the everlasting changes of season.

4. everlasting
wearisome; tedious:
his everlasting puns.

5. (n.) everlasting
the, eternal duration; eternity.

Was this enough definition for you? You tell me what everlasting means to you if this doesn't prove that an everlasting covenant is one that lasts forever, eternally!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Libby

None. But, I do believe some of the general teachings are correct. One example...I am convinced that our souls are eternal and we did "pre-exist"...not exactly as LDS believe it, but generally speaking, I'd call that a "hit".

---

Libby,
There is nothing within the Biblical scriptures that can prove we lived a pre-existant life. How can you believe in such a doctrine?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Libby

I am convinced that our souls are eternal and we did "pre-exist"...not exactly as LDS believe. . .

---

So you have co-existed with God forever and that God did not create you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Libby

I don't think so, since LDS prophets never claimed to speak for God 24/7. Not everything they spoke was revelation; Joseph made that clear.

Plus, I think people like John Calvin were pretty sure that they were being inspired by God, even though they didn't call themselves prophets. Many people, even today, believe that Calvin was inspired in his interpretation of the Bible. Same for Luther and Wesley and many others. My great great Grandfather was a follower of John Wesley, and he sure did believe he was inspired by God.

There is clearly a double standard being employed by critics of the LDS Church.

---

Libby : --- Hello. Not trying to be mean or hurt your feelings , but ... to put it plainly : You are wrong !

From Joseph Smith to Brigham Young ( and the Missouri-based Mormons , and most of the Mormon-splinter groups ,,, ) Mormons have said that the President of the L.D.S. group is a "Living Prophet". Matter o' fact ... in about the 1970's the M.M.s would come door-to-door and that was their standard question on the doorstep : ..." If there was a Prophet from God alive on the earth , wouldn't you want to know what he has to say ?..." If the person at the house would say "Yes I would." Then the M.M.s would schedule a meeting for later.

Now --- as to you mentioning John Calvin , Martin Luther , and John Wesley ...

( I think in Mystery novels/stories what you did is called a "red Herring"... :rolleyes: )

.... Neither of those three gents EVER claimed to be a Prophet ! None , nein , zip , nada , non , no , zero , goose eggs !
Never did they claim "Prpphet" status , nor did the people in the congregations / pews of the Churches/Chapels they taught & preached at ever thought those guys were "prophets"... and those 3 guys would have been :mad: if anyone said that about them.

I've read and listened to several Biographies of those gents , and they did not believe that there are modern-day prophets around . The only "prophets" that Calvin , Luther & Wesley were interested in were REAL prophets such as Isaiah , Jeremiah , Amos , Malachi , Joel , Hosea , Micah , and those gents found in the Hebrew Bible ( O.T. ) , the kind of prophets who spoke FOR God Almighty , and warned the people of sin , and falling away from God their maker. Real prophets make true prophecies.

Now --- howzabout we get back to the THREAD TOPIC ? ! ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neverending

Richard,
So you think it is ok for the members of your church to live Communism? That is what the Law of Consecration was, everyone to share equally but not everyone, for what of the President of the Church who lived in luxury, owned all the land up City Creek Canyon and owning the Lion House. Did you know BY charged people to go up the canyon to cut down trees? Yes, he most certainly did....great example of brotherly love....NOT! Pres. Monson lives in a condo worth over a million dollars and has a limo with a private driver. Seems he certainly is enjoying the spoils of the giving of your members. What would be wrong with living in a modest home and drive yourself where you need to go?

---

Oh Neverending... you have made yet another mistake in your long list of errors. To put it simply; Communism is a forced socialism, whereas The Law of Consecration, is a voluntary socialism. In fact the best form of government in the world is a form of socialism called a Theocracy. This will be implemented when the Lord comes again to rule on this earth personally.

In the future, please try to refrain from replying to subjects in which you know nothing about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neverending

I call you Richard because you speak as he did....sorry if it offends you. I will again repeat myself even though you claim whatever I say has no credibility.

---

Not true... you made it clear before that you called me Richard because you thought i was using a sock puppet. I have no respect for someone who can not admit to their mistakes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neverending

Definitions of Christian
believer in Jesus Christ as savior:

---

There you go... in using that broad brush you just included the LDS Church. When can I expect my discount Christian card?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by theway

whereas The Law of Consecration, is a voluntary socialism.

---

If the law of consecration was implemented could some LDS choose not to participate and still be a member in good standing and be on tract for exaltation?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Billyray

So you have co-existed with God forever and that God did not create you?

---

How about you answer my other question first. How do you know that every word in the Bible is from God?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Libby

How do you know that every word in the Bible is from God?

---

Because of the eye witness testimony of the life, death, and resurrection of Christ and through a spiritual witness. However we don't have the original m****cripts but rather we have copies of copies and thus we have variant readings within the NT m****cripts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Decalogue

Libby : --- Hello. Not trying to be mean or hurt your feelings , but ... to put it plainly : You are wrong !

From Joseph Smith to Brigham Young ( and the Missouri-based Mormons , and most of the Mormon-splinter groups ,,, ) Mormons have said that the President of the L.D.S. group is a "Living Prophet". Matter o' fact ... in about the 1970's the M.M.s would come door-to-door and that was their standard question on the doorstep : ..." If there was a Prophet from God alive on the earth , wouldn't you want to know what he has to say ?..." If the person at the house would say "Yes I would." Then the M.M.s would schedule a meeting for later.

Now --- as to you mentioning John Calvin , Martin Luther , and John Wesley ...

( I think in Mystery novels/stories what you did is called a "red Herring"... :rolleyes: )

.... Neither of those three gents EVER claimed to be a Prophet ! None , nein , zip , nada , non , no , zero , goose eggs ! Never did they , or the people in the congregations / pews of the Churches/Chapels they taught & preached at ever think those guys were "prophets"... and those 3 guys would have been :mad: if anyone said that about them.

I've read and listened to several Biographies of those gents , and they did not believe that there are modern-day prophets around . The only "prophets" that Calvin , Luther & Wesley were interested in were REAL prophets such as Isaiah , Jeremiah , Amos , Malachi , Joel , Hosea , Micah , and those gents found in the Hebrew Bible ( O.T. ) , the kind of prophets who spoke FOR God Almighty , and warned the people of sin , and falling away from God their maker. Real prophets make true prophecies.

Now --- howzabout we get back to the THREAD TOPIC ? ! ?

---

No, I am not wrong, nor did I claim that Calvin and other Church Fathers were "prophets". I think I said, specifically, that they were not. But, that doesn't keep people from reading and revering and teaching and believing their words, in regards to interpretations of the Bible. I have two large volumes of Calvin's works (The Ins***utes) that I read and studied, when I was interested in the Calvinist perspective and I know many, many Calvinists who study those books like they study the Bible. There are a gazillion books and cl***es on the subject of Calvinism...I have a small library of Calvinist books. So, you may not have been a "prophet", but he was and IS extremely influential, even to this day, in Reformed Christian circles. In the Reformed Church I attended, for two years, Calvin's writings were quoted just as often, if not moreso, as Joseph Smith is quoted in Gospel Doctrine cl***. Our Minister fairly often included a quote from Calvin, even in his main sermon.

The point is, Protestant Christianity has a "church history", as well, and it is not all neat and tidy (there are some terrible atrocities in the history of the Protestant Church), just as there are some potentially embarr***ing things in LDS church history. I think there are some pretty terrible atrocities in the Old Testament, plus very imperfect prophets, as well. Do those things make your church untrue? Does it make your church a "cult"?

And I am on topic. The topic, as always, on this board is "Why I am a Christian, but you are not".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Billyray

Because of the eye witness testimony of the life, death, and resurrection of Christ and through a spiritual witness. However we don't have the original m****cripts but rather we have copies of copies and thus we have variant readings within the NT m****cripts.

---

So, you were convinced, primarily, based on your intellect? Just the facts (as you perceive them)? How do you know that the evidence in that book is reliable? How do you know the information is true? It's all second and third hand information.

Btw, I'm not saying it isn't. Just asking..