December 30th, 2007
04:30 PM ET
4 years ago

Mysterious holiday card spotlights Romney's religion

A bogus holiday card was sent to some South Carolina Republicans. 

A bogus holiday card was sent to some South Carolina Republicans.

(CNN) – A holiday card that falsely claims to be from "the Romney family" and highlights Mitt Romney's Mormon faith was anonymously sent to Republican mailboxes across South Carolina earlier this week.

The source of the card is unknown.

View entire card [PDF]

The mailer, which says it is "Paid for by the Boston Massachusetts Temple," displays a quote from Mormon apostle Orson Pratt saying that God had multiple wives:

"We have now clearly shown that God the father had a plurality of wives, one or more being eternity by whom he begat our spirits as well as the spirit of Jesus, his first born, and another being upon the earth by whom he begat the tabernacle of Jesus, as his only begotten in this world," the quote reads.

A copy of the glossy brochure obtained by CNN offers holiday wishes from "the Romney family": "We wish you and your family a happy holiday season and a joyful New Year," it says.

The card focuses on the Republican presidential candidate's home state of Massachusetts, displaying a photo of the Mormon Temple in Boston as well as a snowy photo of the Public Garden in Boston.

The mailing also quotes from the first Book of Nephi, part of the book of Mormon, in which the Virgin Mary is described as "exceedingly fair and white."

Romney spokesman Will Holley condemned the card.

"It is sad and unfortunate that this kind of deception and trickery has been employed," Holley said. "There is absolutely no place for it in American politics."

– CNN Political Producer Peter Hamby


Filed under: Mitt Romney • South Carolina
soundoff (444 Responses)
  1. Colonel Danite

    CJ: Sorry, no. When Romney decided to run for President, he immidiately calculated that he needed to court the religious right. He has been making faith a central part of his campaign from day one. He has also tried his best to blur the differences between his LDS faith and evangelicals and to emphasise the commonalities in an effort to get their votes.

    His recent "faith" speech was simply his effort to try to get the religion issue back on his side or at least minimize the damage that Huckabee and others had caused to the Romney campaign. But while saying out of one side of his mouhth that his religion shouldn't be an issue in this campaign out of the other side, he was claiming that being religious was a requirement for democracy. His hypocrisy knows no bounds!

    Because Romney the the Republican party have made religiosity a central part of their campaigns, they and he are now reaping what they have sown. Romney now needs to explain why someone who believe in his own impending divininty should get the vote of someone who insists that there is only one eternal God and no others. That's fine for a theological discussion but ridiculous as an argument over who is to be the Leader of the Free World. The Karl Rove plan to court Evangelical Christians will now prove to be the catalyst for the destruction of the Republican coalition.

    December 31, 2007 03:55 pm at 3:55 pm |
  2. Dale E

    Cephas,
    I did read what you posted however you are not a prophet of the church and do not talked directly to God as does the LDS prophet. I put much more weight in what a Prophet of the church states than I would a news blogger such as yourself.

    David,
    Bravo! Your post is exactly the point. It is not Mormonism that is sinking Mitt. It is his incessant storytelling and changing his position on Marting Luther King, stance on abortion and gay rights (military). I thought John Kerry was a flopper... at least he fought in a war to protects us just as the brave souls are doing so in Iraq. Mitt has nothing but political experience in his pocket full of tricks.

    December 31, 2007 04:07 pm at 4:07 pm |
  3. C'mon!

    Romney is a liar that belongs to a heretical cult. Are we really going to play the Clinton game of what simple words mean? He said he "saw" his father march with MLK which is a "lie." Or are we going to redefine the definition of the word "lie"?

    December 31, 2007 04:11 pm at 4:11 pm |
  4. C'mon!

    I did not figure Romney being a Mormon as an important issue until reading the dishonest representations by the Mormon defenders on this blog.

    December 31, 2007 04:15 pm at 4:15 pm |
  5. RGiacobbe

    Welcome to the GOP frankenstein that Rove and Bush created, thank you very much. Even as a Goldwater Republican, I have no sympthay for Romney or anyone else caught in this net of sleaze and theocracy run amok. Its the proverbial chickens coming home to roost. Where were the rational, traditional Conservatives over the past 7 years while Rove and Bush destroyed MY party just to hold onto power?? They all get exactly what they deserve... which is Hillary in the White House. Maybe that will allow the real Conservatives to clean house of all these Elmer Gantry's and start over.

    December 31, 2007 04:32 pm at 4:32 pm |
  6. In Utah

    Although the method of this attack is clearly unethical, it nevertheless points to an issue relevant in this election. If a candidate was once a member of a racist organization such as the KKK or even a less extreme institution like a whites only country club, would we consider this an issue worth discussing? The Mormon church officially forbade blacks and other races of color from participating in many aspects of the church. This didn't change until 1978 when the church was expanding into Africa and South America and Romney was already in his 30s. The church believed (and still does) that people of color are dark skinned because of a punishment given to their wicked ancestors long ago. Furthermore the church states clearly that men only are the heads of families and the church, above the women. It seems to me that many people are avoiding these issues for fear of being labeled a religious bigot. Racism and sexism are relevant, whether religion is involved or not!

    December 31, 2007 04:34 pm at 4:34 pm |
  7. Bill Wilson

    As an SC Republican Primary voter I always get a kick out of how these Northeast media types come up with these silly things. In 2000 they spread a story about a supposed flyer that targeted McCain. Funny thing is no voters ever saw this mythological flyer. What a coincidence that the Northeast media was pimping McCain on everyone at the same time.

    I get multiple phone calls from Republican campaigns every single day. I get mailings from them many times a week. Every Republican campaign has signs up all over our county since we have picked the winner of the nomination here every year since 1980. I have not seen this dumb card nor has anyone else that I know. If it had been widely circulated we would have gotten it here because every R campaign knows that there are 5 Republican Primary voters living at this address.

    Y'all have fun with this made-up story now. We'll let you know who the nominee will be real soon– and the NY/DC media won't have anything to do with it. Even though they'll keep tryin'.

    December 31, 2007 05:35 pm at 5:35 pm |
  8. Carla

    For "Tim in Utah" and others who are getting their information from "The Journal of Discourses", you might want to see this:

    The Journal of Discourses

    The Journal of Discourses is not an official publication of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. It is a compilation of sermons and other materials from the early years of the Church, which were transcribed and then published. It includes practical advice as well as doctrinal discussion, some of which is speculative in nature and some of which is only of historical interest.

    Additional Information

    The content of the Journal of Discourses was transcribed, sometimes inaccurately, and published between 1853 and 1886 in England. The compilation contains some statements of doctrine as well as other materials of interest to Latter-day Saints who lived far from the center of the Church, including speeches given for a variety of occasions, funeral addresses, reports from returning missionaries, prayers, and the proceedings of a trial.

    The Journal of Discourses was produced under the guidance of those who transcribed the materials, including George D. Watt, David W. Evans, and George W. Gibbs.

    Skilled in the use of shorthand, George D. Watt had transcribed many conferences and sermons for the Deseret News. He received little pay for his work. Since the Deseret News was not generally available outside of the United States, Watt proposed to Brigham Young the idea of publishing these materials on a subscription basis. Such a plan would make the materials available to more Saints and allow Elder Watt to earn a living with his work. President Brigham Young supported the plan, and a letter from the First Presidency was included in the first volume encouraging Church members to cooperate in the "purchase and sale" of the journal.

    Questions have been raised about the accuracy of some transcriptions. Modern technology and processes were not available for verifying the accuracy of transcriptions, and some significant mistakes have been documented. The Journal of Discourses includes interesting and insightful teachings by early Church leaders; however, by itself it is not an authoritative source of Church doctrine.

    I too can cut and paste only I went to the LDS.org for this, not some pamphlet or anti-mormon publication. Absolutely NOWHERE are the quotes attributed to Brigham Young and others supported outside of the circulation of such afore mentioned anti-mormon crap!

    December 31, 2007 05:38 pm at 5:38 pm |
  9. AmericanVoter

    Previously, I was an ‘investigator’ (Mormon term for interested party) in the Church of LDS for a rather lengthy period of time. The people I met during were for the most part kind and generous, as you would find in most organized religions. LDS doctrine dictates that one not only accept Christ as your Savior, but Joseph Smith as a prophet of God. When attending services, 99% of testimonials regarded witnessing for Joseph Smith rather than Jesus. Alas, prayer and research led me to not accept Joseph Smith.

    Aside from Mr. Romney’s propensity for flip-flopping, my issue with him as a president is the knowledge that members of the church believe that God speaks directly (via the umin and thummin) with the modern-day prophet of their church. This accounts for many of the changes in Mormon doctrine over the years rather than “God is the same today, tomorrow and forever”. Those amendments in doctrine have sometimes been radical, ranging from changes in polygamy practices to acceptance of other races.

    Since Mitt is a faithful Mormon, he would be obligated to follow the supposed pronouncements of God through their prophet in all aspects of his life. Beliefs such as that make him a potentially dangerous to our country as a whole. I would rather see an atheist with a sound mind and good morals in control of our country than someone so heavily influenced by a single, totally human and imperfect, individual.

    As a proud American, I believe in an individual’s right to religious freedom; I’m not a hate monger and don’t wish to restrict their members rights to believe what they choose. However, in this instance this man is running for our president. Therefore, I feel within my rights and responsibilities to consider all factors and their potential effect on our country.

    December 31, 2007 06:10 pm at 6:10 pm |
  10. JT

    Well, suppose Joe Lieberman was running for president, and someone sent a Happy Holidays card from "the Lieberman family" and the "Connecticut synagogue" and you open it up to find Old Testament verses about how disobedient children should be stoned to death.

    Whether or not the quotes are from the O.T. are missing the point. Someone is lying in wait to deceive by making it look like they are from a camp that they are not. For this reason alone, this should be condemned.

    Now as for the cult thing, according to newsweek, LDS members will soon pass Judaism worldwide. Does that mean Judaism has to be viewed as a cult too? 'Cult" is an ugly word many evangelicals like to use to marginalize and dehumanize members of the LDS faith. To me, real cults die out. "Cult" is Jim Jones, David Koresh stuff. Evangelicals would probably define Islam and Buddhism as cults too. Sticks & stones.

    I wish a Scientologist would run for president. I'd like to know more about what they believe. Like why is it a religion and not just a philosophy, as it was started by a science-fiction author who never claimed divine inspiration or anything? Or a Jehovah's Witness so we could learn more about the Watchtower.

    Meanwhile I pray for a McCain-Obama election, where I'd be fine if either candidate won.

    December 31, 2007 07:15 pm at 7:15 pm |
  11. Tim in Utah

    to Cephas and the FBI!

    My family joined the church when I was three years old. I served a mission. I was married at the age of 21 in the Provo Temple. Sound Mormon enough to you insiders out there?!

    I have served as

    AP on my mission
    Stake Mission Leader
    Elders Quorum President
    Elders Quorum Counselor
    Elders Quorum Instructor
    Stake Young Men Presidency
    Sunday School President
    among others.......

    I did so all before my 28th birthday. In my late twenties I began to have concerns about church doctrine and began reading the actual history of the church, not what little was covered every Sunday (Todd Compton's "In Sacred Lonliness" about Joseph Smiths 33 wives and Grant Palmer's "An Insder's View of Mormon Origins" are very helpful). Both are active members in the church and neither was excommunicated for their writings. But it was enough for me to know the church is not what it purports to be.

    My wife remains very committed to the church. She knows how I feel as do each of my last four Bishops. I currently serve in the Primary where I attend to help and teach my disabled son's class.

    So I am an active, non-believing member of the church. You would be surprised how many of us are out there.

    December 31, 2007 07:21 pm at 7:21 pm |
  12. Republicans Against Romney

    As a member, in good standing, of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, I prefer to refrain from making judgments regarding Mitt Romney’s eternal salvation. I can, however, submit that Romney, in my view and based upon the intimate knowledge I have regarding Romney’s Latter-day Saint faith, is an unethical and dishonest politician. I cloud go on and on about the many dishonest and unethical things Romney has said and done as a politician. Suffice it to say, for Latter-day Saints, being honest in our dealings with our fellow man is considered a fundamental standard of behavior necessary to attend the temple and be a member in good standing. According to the late Bruce R. McConkie, the most renowned and highly respected Mormon theologian of the 20th century, “honesty is one of the characteristics exhibited by all who are worthy to be numbered with the saints of God. Honest persons are fair and truthful in their speech, straightforward in their dealings, free from deceit, and above misrepresentation or any other fraudulent action.” I have been utterly shocked and dismayed as I have witnessed Mitt Romney – arguably the most well-known Latter-day Saint in the United States – mock and disregard some of the most sacred and fundamental principles of his own faith for worldly gain and glory. I implore all good Christian men and women to abstain from voting for Mitt Romney. Those who do vote for Romney will share the responsibility for promoting a corrupt and dishonest man to the highest office in our land.

    http://republicansagainstromney.blogspot.com/

    December 31, 2007 07:26 pm at 7:26 pm |
  13. John

    Steve quoted "One God, one faith, one baptism" to justify Mormons not being Christian.

    So which baptism is it that's real? Catholic? Methodist? Church of Christ? 700 Club? Ted Haggart's group?

    Whoever did this may have been the same group that smeared McCain for having a "black baby." It worked in 2000, and neither Romney nor McCain will win SC this year. Don't SC voters get tired of these tactics?

    December 31, 2007 07:27 pm at 7:27 pm |
  14. marie thomson

    Huckster Huckabee just sunk even lower by instigating this nasty attack on Romney. These people can't even own up to their own stinking mailings now. They have to hide behind the temple in Boston for crying out loud. Add the Word COWARD to the Bible Belt Bigot and Hillbilly Huckster Huckabee's resume and that of his ministerial minions.

    Yes, I got one of those original nasty grams from our local evangelical minister filled with hateful deceipt, lies or half truths.

    December 31, 2007 08:39 pm at 8:39 pm |
  15. Dianne

    I agree with John and would be very interested in Steve's answer to his question. Steve quotes, "One God, one faith, one baptism." Which is it Steve? Maybe if Steve studied each of the many religions on the earth today he would find out that each and every one of them, with the exception of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, is a break off from another. Do any of you ever stop and wonder why there are so many people spouting off so much anti-mormon garbage out there? So many of todays religions take the time in their services to teach anti-mormon to their congregations and the libraries in their churches have so much anti-mormon literature. What do they feel so threatened by? I'm sure that Satan must be feeling very threatened by the truths that are found in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. You will not find true Latter-Day Saints trashing other religions. We believe that their is truth in all religions and that there are good people in all religions. We just believe that we have been blessed with the fulness of the gospel of Jesus Christ and offer these truths to any who are interested. We are not forced to believe these things. One of the greatest gifts our Heavenly Father has given us is the gift of free agency. We are free to choose for ourselves. As a female member of the Church I don't feel inferior to the men and I know that my salvation is dependent on my actions and not the actions of another. I receive nothing but respect from the brethren of the church. Our job is to love one another as our Saviour, Jesus Christ, has loved us. What a wonderful world this would be if we all did this. May each of you find the truth that brings you and yours peace and happiness in this life.

    December 31, 2007 11:35 pm at 11:35 pm |
  16. kathy from Sarasota

    Wow... talk about the male ego... the Mormon religion does nothing but serve Joseph Smith's ego and all the males that follow him. Disgusting... and the souls of millions will be lost because of this man. He is nothing more than an ordinary human being with the work of Satan behind him. To deny that the death of Christ COMPLETELY saves the soul if one believes in him is blasphemy. Mormons want to be considered Christians yet their religion contradicts the FUNDAMENTAL beliefs of Christianity!!! They deny that Christ is God!! And so therefor his death on the cross is not the saving grace that God has given us. That is NOT a Christian belief!!!!
    I've done research on the internet ( and that means getting BOTH sides of the story...not just visiting the official Mormon websites like many here advise to get the 'truth' about the Mormon religion ) and many here stoop to the level of accusing anyone who speaks against the Mormon religion as filled with hate, intolerance and bigotry... sorry but I don't hate anyone... I DO hate lies and falsehoods against our Lord, manipulation and the work of Satan .... people who are not Mormons but accuse others of intollerance, bigotry and hate, have no idea what they are defending.... You all are the ones who are ignorant and you need to DO SOME RESEARCH before you come to the defense of a satanic cult!!!! DO you want a man who lives by the following beliefs running your country!!!

    Christ's death on the cross only PARTIALLY saves the sinner.

    That they intend to be gods themselves some day, and are helping to earn their exaltation to godhood by talking to you.

    That they intend to have many wives in heaven, carrying on multiple sex relations throughout eternity, until they have enough children to populate their own earth, so they can be "Heavenly Father" over their own planet!

    That Jesus was really Lucifer's brother in the spirit world, and it was only due to a "heavenly council" vote that Jesus became our redeemer instead of Satan!!

    On their Salt Lake City Temple they prominently display an upside-down star which is a Satanic symbol known as the Goat's head!! Why??
    Tragically, many Mormons may not even be fully aware of the doctrines and history of their own church. The website http://www.macgregorministries.org/mormons/facts.html
    has much more information on what Mormons believe but won't tell you ( and will often lie about ). This site ENCOURAGES you to do your own research and for Mormons to refer to their own publications to verify the information on this site.

    December 31, 2007 11:56 pm at 11:56 pm |
  17. jessie, West Virginia

    Republican Against Romney–I think you are judging Mitt Romney wrong. And I think you are pretending to be a member of a Mormon faith. You said, you prefer not to "judge" him, but in this case you already have. You said, "I have been utterly shocked and dismayed as I have witnessed Mitt Romney – arguably the most well-known Latter-day Saint in the United States – mock and disregard some of the most sacred and fundamental principles of his own faith for worldly gain and glory." You my good friend, cannot bring any justification for attacking Mitt, as far as his "eternal salvation" is concerned. Your comment is more like a "Christian propaganda" an has nothing to do with the "real issues" that are happening in our country. My biggest point is-We are all not perfect–And nobody can pleased the world. If you expect Mitt to be perfect–then "you" must be perfect??

    January 1, 2008 01:00 am at 1:00 am |
  18. Cephas

    Dale E, you are correct I am not a Prophet. But neither are you qualified to interpret or even identify LDS Church Doctrine. I hope you don't go around telling folks you "understand" Mormons.

    BTW: I'll give you a point for the Prophet remark, you caught me off guard on that one.

    Tim – I appoligize for getting a little testy with my FBI remark. But the nasty tone of your post got under my skin. But my remaining comments still stand. I'm sorry you've experienced so much conflict, but don't feel obligated to spread it around. My basic premise boils down to this, you're confusing discourse for doctrine, postulation for principle and reflection for revelation (ok that last one didn't really fit but I was on a roll). In all of your study, folks such as yourself forget to allow for the fact that those you study are human. But often when you get right down to it, that is what folks like yourself are really steamed about, after all your digging, all your probing of the information freely handed you by the Church itself, you walk away bewildered that the early leaders of this Church were – Human – and not the supermen you grew up thinking they were. Sorry that that poses such a doctrinal crisis for you, but thats the way it is. Joesph Smith said it himself: "I am but a man, if you supposed any differently then I'm sorry to disappoint you" – Not sure that is a word for word quote but you get the picture. I've seen, read and/or at least purused most of the junk you've gone through and was left with one, I'll call it an unrelenting thought; "The restored Gospel of Jesus Christ is true, despite our best efforts to ruin it". I'll paraphrase Joesph Smith again: "I know it and I know that God knows I know it, therefore I CANNOT deny it." Hopefully one day you'll learn to discern what is and isn't doctrine. I hope so.

    January 1, 2008 01:05 am at 1:05 am |
  19. Dianne

    Kathy from Sarasota: Wow! Someone who hates no one so full of hate and untruths. May God bless you!!

    January 1, 2008 09:09 am at 9:09 am |
  20. Christian, GA

    http://www.evangelicalsforromney.com

    Go Mitt!!!

    January 1, 2008 09:55 am at 9:55 am |
  21. jessie, West Virginia

    Cephas and Tim – I stand an awe–filled with admiration to both of you my brother in Christ. I agree with you Cephas that the "early leaders were all "Human." However, That noble entity reflects to all both leaders and members of the past and even in the present times. Figuratively speaking, I would say that even back in the ancient times the leaders were all "human," that includes Adam. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; then, in the midieval times–Peter, James, John, Judas and all the apostleswere all human; save Jesus Christ only . We all know that our Saviour Jesus Christ is perfect, and in the same manner–He also built His Church. Indeed, the church is "perfect" but the members are not, but are "trying and working-on" to follow Christ admonition when he said, "be ye there perfect even as I and your Father in Heaven is perfect." Read, Eph. 2:19-20, Matt. 5:48, and Eph. 4:11-15. Well, sure sounds familiar, Huh! :) I served a mission in the Philippine, and it was the best part of my life–being a convert of the "restored church." I do believe that our Heavenly Father answers prayer–when "anybody" truly yearns with much "hunger and thirst" to know the "truth." Cephas thank you for the thought about what Joseph Smith has said: I know it and I know that God knows I know it, therefore I Cannot deny it." These also came to me, when my simple prayer was answered while kneeling "in the middle of the rice field." Have a wonderful day Tim and Chepas. :) God Speed...

    January 1, 2008 11:31 am at 11:31 am |
  22. jessie, West Virginia

    Tim and Cephas–Speaking of the above mentioned "Humans" of the old times–surely what I am trying to say was that we are all human being and that we are capable of making mistakes. This fundamental truth applies to Joseph Smith and the early leaders, and the present times as well. In 1John 1:6 says, "If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us." We all know that every ones faith is tried one way or the other. Peter said, "That the trial of your faith, being precious than of gold that perisheth, though it be tried with fire, might be found unto praise and honour and glory at the appearing of Jesus Christ:" Foremost to this–I humbly declare that I have a lot of respect and love to the prophet Joseph Smith beause He sealed his "Testimony" with his own blood. Let it be known to the world inspite of inhuman acts of arrogance, condemnation, and hatred towards us Mormons. Afterall, the Saviour said, "love thy neighbor as thyself as well as thy enemy." For Jesus said: If we love only those who loves us what reward have we?"

    January 1, 2008 12:03 pm at 12:03 pm |
  23. Paul

    The card quote from Orson Pratt turns out to be from a source that was repudiated by the Church:

    "One other thing. I find in this review ten lengthy quotations from the Seer which was published by Orson Pratt, yet the Seer by formal action of the First Presidency and Twelve Apostles of the Church was repudiated, and Elder Orson Pratt himself sanctioned the repudiation. There was a long article published in the Deseret News on the 23rd of August, 1865, over the signatures of the First Presidency and Twelve setting forth that this work–the Seer–together with some other writings of Elder Pratt, were inaccurate."
    (From a speech delivered June 9, 1907 and also recorded in B. H. Roberts, Defense of the Faith and the Saints, Vol.2, p.294)

    For those interested in seeing that official repudiation, it is found in Messages of the First Presidency, Vol.2, p.238 October 21st 1865.

    Why do some people expect Latter-day Saints to be perfect, and then when a Mormon apologizes for a mistake they decide they will not let it alone. Orson Pratt wrote a book trying to addres concerns in the hot-bed of Washington DC and it was repudiated in 1865, the again in 1907 and now I find myself doing it in 2008. Giv it a rest.

    I made a mistake (granted it was due to my bias) supposing that this Orson Pratt quote was false. Now that I discover that it is accurate, but very obscure and from a repudiated source. This should be an example of the kind of attack Mitt Romney would have to deal with if he chose to defend his Church from such weak-minded attacks. It is also a result of how extremely open the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is and has been to its teachings.

    Kathy, if you will not take my word for it I am sad, but as I Mormon I testify that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the third member of the Godhead. This is clear in the First Article of Faith that Joseph Smith wrote and the Church has always taught it. Hundreds of millions of Christians agree that Jesus is divine.

    January 1, 2008 12:57 pm at 12:57 pm |
  24. Cephas

    Kathy from Sarasota,

    There is more to discuss with you than there is time or space to do it in.

    1) Mormons don't mind discussing differences in faith. We believe very deeply that everyone deserves the right to worship how they see fit. We appreciate meaningful dialog about differences in faith. What we don't like is the demeaning, insulting tone and manner in which it is done, or in other words bigoted. The anti-mormon crowd prances around trying to claim the moral high ground and shouting down anyone who disagrees. That’s what we don't like.

    2) Please allow me to respectfully submit that your understanding of FUNDEMENTAL Christian beliefs may be somewhat limited. After the ascension of Christ and the death of the Apostles, 1st & 2nd Century Christians quickly split into multiple groups and things got a bit more than strange – but that’s another discussion. But one thing was pretty much common amongst the different Groups; Jesus Christ was considered a Prophet, the Messiah and even the Son of God. But rarely was he seen as God incarnate until the Council of Nicaea. And that decision was made by vote (A.D. 325 – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea). Mormons simply believe that their view of Christ is more consistent with that of the Bible and 1st Century Christians.

    3) In short most of the anti-mormon garbage to which you’ve obviously been exposed, relies upon the fact that the majority of folks don’t really know what the words Fundamental, Historical and Bible Based mean in regards to Christianity. Else it relies on the misrepresentation of doctrine and/or quote from past Mormon leaders.

    4) Lastly and I hope you don’t take this wrong, but 30 minutes spent online scouring the LDS Church’s websites looking for seemingly scandalous quotes and supposed “doctrine” doesn’t make one a Mormon Scholar.

    January 1, 2008 01:28 pm at 1:28 pm |
  25. Alex

    Regarding several comments:

    "..those whose skins are not white and fair may detect the odor of racism in the quotation."

    Wouldn't Mary, as a 0 century AD Jew in the region of Jerusalem, likely have a light complexion? But whatever her skin color may have been, and that aside, to suppose any observation of skin color of any person in itself necessarily negatively contrasts with others is absurd. If two people in a room have different skin colors, and someone points out that they have different skin colors, is that by itself racist? Does mere observation of differences between people constitute slander in itself? To say so has to outright invent a whole lot of bad context that doesn't even exist in singular, harmless statements.

    And regarding this:

    "..Of course, Mormonism came of age during a very racist time in American history and it is reflected in the books that Mormon leaders concocted back then. The Old Testament has some very creepy stuff in it too, but let's not start quoting chapter and verse."

    Why not quote chapter and verse? You have commented on the supposed racism which you yourself inject into a particular verse. This is the equivalent of Huckabee's saying that he won't say something but then saying it. And it isn't said only about mormon scripture – but also a book that wider Christianity supports – the Bible.

    Also, "concocted" is a statement of opinion given as fact. A person who believes Joseph Smith translated the Book of Mormon would not use the word "concocted", they might say "translated" To say "concocted" is to say he made it up, pulled stuff together to form it, or made it from nothing. It would be more direct and open to say, assuming it is even relevant to a political discussion, to say something more direct like "By the way, Joseph Smith didn't translate anything. He made it all up." Frankly, the rather inderect yet plain use of the word "concocted" smacks of an attitude that assumes everyone thinks Joseph Smith made it up, or that this is the only rational, right, or reasonable point of view. I hope you would be aware that this implicit assumption casually overlooks a differing point of view which millions of people hold, which frankly smacks of a whole lot of disrespect. Implicitly asserting that something is "just so", and against the religious views of others, is disrespectful of their right to hold that view. And that strong assumed bias is very ironic, considering these next statements:

    "Romney himself benefits because of the sympathy he is now getting as the victim of bigotry, so supporters of Romney may be behind it (and perhaps not known to Romney himself)."

    We would assume that someone asserting that others are a victim of bigotry or strong bias would make diligent effort to free their own points of view from disrespectful assumptions, or bigotry or strong bias. But even while bigotry is pointed out elsewhere it exists in the words of the one doing the pointing. Worse, it speculates that the source of the victimization is the victims themselves. Please draw up proof. Otherwise, drop the insulting speculation.

    January 1, 2008 06:46 pm at 6:46 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18