The Book of Mormon: selected readings of what Mitt Romney believes

**The Lord's Sword** · 03-04-2012, 05:29 AM

Re: The Book of Mormon: selected readings of what Mitt Romney believes

What about the magic underwear?

Observations of Mormon Rules Concerning Their Sacred Underwear

(1) Mormons pledge allegiance to wearing sacred underwear in their temples.
(2) Temple Mormons view their sacred underwear with spiritual significance.
(3) Mormons can only purchase their sacred underwear through the LDS church.
(4) Mormons are to view their sacred underwear as a holy covenant with their god.
(5) Mormons are to wear their sacred underwear throughout their lives.
(6) Protection from evil and blessings is conditioned on their sacred underwear.
(7) Mormons must wear their sacred underwear at all times including work and play.
(8) However, Mormons may remove their sacred underwear for swimming.
(9) Wearing sacred underwear will keep Mormons modest.
(10)Mormons are reminded of their sacred covenants via their sacred underwear.
(11)Mormons look to their underwear for protection against temptations and evil.
(12)Mormons view their sacred underwear as a commitment to their god.

**Holyfield** · 03-04-2012, 08:15 AM

Re: The Book of Mormon: selected readings of what Mitt Romney believes

Mark Twain's thoughts on the Book of Mormon are good to read.

Mark Twain Meets the Mormons

http://www.salamandersociety.com/marktwain/

**Jeb Stuart Thurmond** · 03-08-2012, 05:38 PM

Re: The Book of Mormon: selected readings of what Mitt Romney believes

I'm still waiting for a Mormon to come along here and say it's a bad translation.

**Pastor Isaac Peters** · 03-08-2012, 05:50 PM

Re: The Book of Mormon: selected readings of what Mitt Romney believes

It's amazing what nonsense other people believe. I guess that's what happens when you put your trust in a ridiculous book of myths, "revealed" under highly questionable circumstances, instead of God's Word.

**Jeb Stuart Thurmond** · 03-08-2012, 06:01 PM

Re: The Book of Mormon: selected readings of what Mitt Romney believes

Originally posted by Jeb Thurmond View Post

D&C 89:9-13
9 And again, hot drinks are not for the body or belly...
12 Yea, flesh also of beasts and of the fowls of the air, I, the Lord, have ordained for the use of man with thanksgiving; nevertheless they are to be used sparingly;
13 And it is pleasing unto me that they should not be used, only in times of winter, or of cold, or famine.

Does Mitt Romney obey this? Because all we need is one picture of him eating a corn dog or whatever to prove that he's a irreligious phoney who doesn't want God to be pleased. Sure, if you're surviving the Utah winter in a log cabin, you're allowed a bit of meat - so that you don't starve.

Which one are you, Mitt Romney - a vegetarian or a fraud?

**Roberta** · 03-08-2012, 08:06 PM

Re: The Book of Mormon: selected readings of what Mitt Romney believes

Originally posted by Jeb Thurmond View Post

Does Mitt Romney obey this? Because all we need is one picture of him eating a corn dog or whatever to prove that he's a irreligious phoney who doesn't want God to be pleased. Sure, if you're surviving the Utah winter in a log cabin, you're allowed a bit of meat - so that you don't starve.

Which one are you, Mitt Romney - a vegetarian or a fraud?

He has great technique!

Attached Files

**Redeemed Papist** · 03-08-2012, 08:13 PM

Re: The Book of Mormon: selected readings of what Mitt Romney believes

I hadn't realised just how arbitrary and transparently made up on the spot by a bit of a control freak who thinks everyone should be like him the mormonic belief system is.

This fool who had the "revelation" obviously just had a set of ridiculously fastidious prejudices about just about every single thing and likes dictating what he prefers to everyone but knew the only way to get people on board was to bully them with the idea that God told him to do it and they would burn forever if they don't comply.

The beliefs simply don't stand up to scrutiny. What's staggering is that so many people jump on board just so they can feel superior to people who aren't mormons. Why are people so hateful?

We know it's not the word of God or it would be the King James Bible word for word, but these poor deluded fools, brainwashed from birth that the faith of their parents is beyond question, are sitting ducks for Satan.

It's hard, at times, seeing people ignoring the word of God.

**CreationistRoger** · 03-09-2012, 01:50 PM

Re: The Book of Mormon: selected readings of what Mitt Romney believes

Originally posted by Holyfield View Post

Mark Twain's thoughts on the Book of Mormon are good to read.

http://www.salamandersociety.com/marktwain/

while some may be true, my father introduced me to a backhand when caught reading that atheist trash Mark Twain. I encourage you to stay away from that sinful filth brother!

Yours in Christ, -Roger

**Dr Laurence Niles** · 03-09-2012, 02:20 PM

Originally posted by Redeemed Papist View Post

I hadn't realised just how arbitrary and transparently made up on the spot by a bit of a control freak who thinks everyone should be like him the mormonic belief system is.

This fool who had the "revelation" obviously just had a set of ridiculously fastidious prejudices about just about every single thing and likes dictating what he prefers to everyone but knew the only way to get people on board was to bully them with the idea that God told him to do it and they would burn forever if they don't comply.

The beliefs simply don't stand up to scrutiny. What's staggering is that so many people jump on board just so they can feel superior to people who aren't mormons. Why are people so hateful?

We know it's not the word of God or it would be the King James Bible word for word, but these poor deluded fools, brainwashed from birth that the faith of their parents is beyond question, are sitting ducks for Satan.

It's hard, at times, seeing people ignoring the word of God.

All to true, I'm afraid.

As a social scientheist I can tell you that 100% of people holding such bizarre (but deeply held) beliefs show strong evidence of hyper mentalism.

They infer agency far too much and feel compelled to write these insane rambling ls down in books (mostly because their brains and so frazzled they won't remember them).

The irony is that all their efforts (and resultant psychopathy) could be avoided by realising that the Truth(tm) is already at hand in the convenient form of the Bible (KJV1611).

Of course, it is often difficult to get them to stop flinging their business at the wall like dirty chimps to do much reading, anyway.

YIC
Posted via Mobile Device

**godgunsguts** · 06-23-2012, 01:02 AM

Re: The Book of Mormon: selected readings of what Mitt Romney believes

“I Will Be a Second Mohammed”

In the heat of the Missouri “Mormon War” of 1838, Joseph Smith made the following claim, “I will be to this generation a second Mohammed, whose motto in treating for peace was ‘the Alcoran [Koran] or the Sword.’ So shall it eventually be with us—‘Joseph Smith or the Sword!’ ”[1]
It is most interesting that a self-proclaimed Christian prophet would liken himself to Mohammed, the founder of Islam. His own comparison invites us to take a closer look as well. And when we do, we find some striking—and troubling—parallels.Consider the following.

Mohammed and Joseph Smith both had humble beginnings. Neither had formal religious connections or upbringing, and both were relatively uneducated. Both founded new religions by creating their own scriptures. In fact, followers of both prophets claim these scriptures are miracles since their authors were the most simple and uneducated of men.[2]
Both prophets claim of having angel visitations, and of receiving divine revelation to restore pure religion to the earth again. Mohammed was told that both Jews and Christians had long since corrupted their scriptures and religion. In like manner, Joseph Smith was told that all of Christianity had become corrupt, and that consequently the Bible itself was no longer reliable. In both cases, this corruption required a complete restoration of both scripture and religion. Nothing which preceded either prophet could be relied upon any longer. Both prophets claim they were used of God to restore eternal truths which once existed on earth, but had been lost due to human corruption.
Both prophets created new scripture which borrowed heavily from the Bible, but with a substantially new “spin.” In his Koran, Mohammed appropriates a number of Biblical themes and characters—but he changes the complete sense of many passages, claiming to “correct” the Bible. In so doing he changes many doctrines, introducing his own in their place. In like manner, Joseph Smith created the Book of Mormon, much of which is plagiarized directly from the King James Bible. Interestingly, the Book of Mormon claims that this same Bible has been substantially corrupted and is therefore unreliable. In addition, Joseph Smith went so far as to actually create his own version of the Bible itself, the “Inspired Version,” in which he both adds and deletes significant portions of text, claiming he is “correcting” it. In so doing he also changes many doctrines, introducing his own in their place.
As a part of their new scriptural “spin,” both prophets saw themselves as prophesied in scripture, and both saw themselves as a continuation of a long line of Biblical prophets. Mohammed saw himself as a continuation of the ministry of Moses and Jesus. Joseph Smith saw himself as a successor to Enoch, Melchizedek, Joseph and Moses. Joseph Smith actually wrote himself into his own version of the Bible—by name.
Both prophets held up their own scripture as superior to the Bible. Mohammed claimed that the Koran was a perfect copy of the original which was in heaven. The Koran is therefore held to be absolutely perfect, far superior to the Bible and superceding it. In like manner, Joseph Smith also made the following claim. “I told the Brethren that the Book of Mormon was the most correct of any book on earth, and the keystone of our religion, and a man would get nearer to God by abiding its precepts, than by any other book.”[3]
Despite their claim that the Bible was corrupt, both prophets admonished their followers to adhere to its teachings. An obvious contradiction, this led to selective acceptance of some portions and wholesale rejection of others. As a result, the Bible is accepted by both groups of followers only to the extent that it agrees with their prophet’s own superior revelation.
Both Mohammed and Joseph Smith taught that true salvation was to be found only in their respective religions. Those who would not accept their message were considered “infidels,” pagans or Gentiles. In so doing, both prophets became the enemy of genuine Christianity, and have led many people away from the Christ of the Bible.
Both prophets encountered fierce opposition to their new religions and had to flee from town to town because of threats on their lives. Both retaliated to this opposition by forming their own militias. Both ultimately set up their own towns as model societies.
Both Mohammed and Joseph Smith left unclear instructions about their successors. The majority of Mohammed’s followers, Sunni Muslims, believe they were to elect their new leader, whereas the minority, Shiite Muslims,look to Alī ibn Abī Ṭālib, whom they consider Divinely appointed, as the rightful successor to Muhammad, and the first imam. (Ali was the cousin and son-in-law of the Islamic prophet Muhammad). Similarly, the majority of Joseph Smith's followers, Mormons, believed their next prophet should have been the existing leader of their quorum of twelve apostles, whereas the minority, RLDS, believed Joseph Smith's own son should have been their next prophet. Differences on this issue, and many others, have created substantial tension between these rival groups of each prophet.
Mohammed taught that Jesus was just another of a long line of human prophets, of which he was the last. He taught that he was superior to Christ and superceded Him. In comparison, Joseph Smith also made the following claim.

“I have more to boast of than ever any man had. I am the only man that has ever been able to keep a whole church together since the days of Adam. A large majority of the whole have stood by me. Neither Paul, John, Peter, nor Jesus ever did it. I boast that no man ever did such a work as I. The followers of Jesus ran away from Him, but the Latter-day Saints never ran away from me yet.”[4] In light of these parallels, perhaps Joseph Smith's claim to be a second Mohammed unwittingly became his most genuine prophecy of all.
[1] Joseph Smith made this statement at the conclusion of a speech in the public square at Far West, Missouri on October 14, 1838. This particular quote is documented in Fawn M. Brodie, No Man Knows My History, second edition, (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1971), p. 230–231. Fawn Brodie’s footnote regarding this speech contains valuable information, and follows. “Except where noted, all the details of this chapter [16] are taken from the History of the [Mormon] Church. This speech, however, was not recorded there, and the report given here is based upon the accounts of seven men. See the affidavits of T.B. Marsh, Orson Hyde, George M. Hinkle, John Corrill, W.W. Phelps, Samson Avard, and Reed Peck in Correspondence, Orders, etc., pp. 57–9, 97–129. The Marsh and Hyde account, which was made on October 24, is particularly important. Part of it was reproduced in History of the [Mormon] Church, Vol. III, p. 167. See also the Peck manuscript, p. 80. Joseph himself barely mentioned the speech in his history; see Vol. III, p. 162.”
[2] John Ankerberg & John Weldon, The Facts on Islam, (Eugene, OR: Harvest House Publishers, 1998), pp.8–9. Eric Johnson, Joseph Smith & Muhammed, (El Cajon, CA: Mormonism Research Ministry, 1998), pp. 6–7.
[3] Documentary History of the [Mormon] Church, vol.4, pp.461.
[4] Documentary History of the [Mormon] Church, vol.6, pp.408–409.

**Pastor Ezekiel** · 08-26-2012, 02:52 AM

Re: The Book of Mormon: selected readings of what Mitt Romney believes

**Bjorn Jensen** · 08-26-2012, 05:38 AM

Re: The Book of Mormon: selected readings of what Mitt Romney believes

The Mormons (along with the Injuns) is the al-Qaida of America, the very first act of terrorism in America was commited by Mormons and Injuns together, and of course it was on 9/11, and the target was American real Christians so that they could have an America where it only lives Mormons and savage Injuns ruled under Mormon law

http://www.greaterthings.com/Topical/Mountain_Meadows_Massacre/911/

[That event, in its day, was abhorred by a shocked country, nearly as much as the world was horrified by the brutal events of 911, 2001. Lee, whose name became synonymous with the attack 144 years prior, was called "The Great Terror of the West."

Like the attack on America on 911, in its day the Mountain Meadows Massacre was justified by its perpetrators on fundamentalist religious grounds -- rationalizations that a civilized world, set aside from such indoctrination, finds abhorrent and patently evil.

Mormonism itself soon came to loath the very doctrine they once propounded, when the deed that was born of that doctrine was manifest in bloody horror before them, giving their collective conscience a hard slap.

That transformation did not happen suddenly, but it did take place, and to such an extent that not long afterward, behavior that at one time would be seen as evidence of faithfulness became grounds for removal from the Church. John D. Lee, who had enjoyed a son-like fealty with the Mormon Prophet, Brigham Young--even years after the deed--was eventually excommunicated and then executed, also at the instigation of President Young, who followed Lee by an untimely death of questionable circumstances less than six months later.

The Mormon doctrine of "blood atonement" stated that some crimes were so terrible they could only be repaired by the taking the life of the perpetrator; and that taking such a life was seen as a favor to the perpetrator.

On top of that, each of the more faithful Mormons who were considered righteous enough to receive ordinances in a Mormon temple took an oath to continually pray for the avenging of the blood of the prophet Joseph Smith, as part of their endowment.

The treatment of the Mormons in their removal from place to place, finally exiling them to the Rocky Mountains, is certainly a shocking tale in itself. Many thousands of Mormons died when driven from their homes under excruciating circumstances.

Now, coming through their midst, was a wagon train of people from a region where one of their beloved apostles, Pratt, had recently been killed in cold blood. It was also thought that some of the party had been involved in Joseph Smith's martyrdom. One report claims that a man on the wagon train actually boasted of being the one to pull the trigger of the gun that killed Joseph Smith.

The doctrine of blood atonement had ripened, the patience of the Saints had expired, and an oath of vengeance was waiting execution. Mountain Meadows Massacre was the result.

Because of the religious belief they had by then fostered, John D. Lee and others did not view themselves as murderers. Rather, they viewed themselves as carrying out the Lord's arm of vengeance.

But cruel experience has a way of exposing faulty doctrine to the light of reality and truth of conscience.

Murderers they were, and the deed they committed was an evil deed. The fact that the Mormons themselves had been victims of such evil did not give them license to return that evil. The law of "an eye for an eye" [comment] had long ago been superceded by a higher law of "love your enemy, do good to them that persecute you and despitefully use you," a law that was also part of Mormon doctrine.

It was that higher law that worked on the conscience of the Mormons, brought to their attention by their Christian neighbors and a world that watched on with horror.

Given the choice to adhere to their barbaric doctrine of blood atonement and be annihilated by it or to embrace the higher law given by Jesus Christ nearly 2000 years prior, they opted to trash the barbaric doctrine.

That much is to their credit.

But what is not to their credit is the dishonesty with which they remember this chapter of their history. Mormons generally refuse to believe that the Church leadership of the day had any culpability in the massacre. Two easily verifiable facts prove that the Church Authorities at least encouraged the deed by their doctrine: (1) blood atonement, (2) oath of vengeance of the blood of Joseph Smith.

"You and each of you do covenant and promise that you will pray and never cease to pray Almighty God to avenge the blood of the prophets upon this nation, and that you will teach the same to your children and to your children's children unto the third and fourth generation." (The Reed Smoot Case, vol. 4, pp. 495-496)

It resembles the Arab leadership that denies any responsibility for Osama Bin Laden. Yet their own diatribes are punctuated with statements that foster the Muslim terrorists of our day.

It took 20 years to bring John D. Lee to justice, sacrificed as the scapegoat for many others, including key leaders in the Church all the way up to Brigham Young, who should have also been tried and convicted for their role.

Indeed, the crimes committed against the Mormons in their exile to the West went virtually without punishment. The world meted a double standard. It reeled in horror when some of their own were victims of atrocity at Mountain Meadows; but it essentially ignored the atrocities heaped upon the Mormons.

Meanwhile, Mormon fundamentalism toned down, and they settled into a mode of increasing comfort and acceptance, sprinkled throughout the valleys of the West.

We probably won't see the Mormons admit any time soon to their collective guilt in the Massacre that took place 144 years prior to a parallel event that we now know as 911 in our recent collective conscience. But perhaps we can see the parallel as a beacon of hope regarding Muslim fundamentalism.

Perhaps with the stark horror of 911, they have gotten their thirst for vengeance out of their system, so that fewer and fewer of them will be supportive of such extreme measures.

If we can be more understanding of the pains they have endured, before and after 911, we have a better chance that they will not be pushed further into a corner of persecution so as to levy an atrocity even more ferocious than the attack of Sept. 11.

Meanwhile, the Mormons might consider practicing what they preach and repent of their culpability in the Mountain Meadows Massacre, beginning with a confession of guilt, rather than of continued cover up.

Their recent attempt to cover up actually resulted in the accidental unearthing of bones from the site.

Meanwhile their Christian friends can practice what they preach in turn, and forgive the Mormons for the terrible dead. And the Christians can likewise admit to their guilt in their horrendous treatment of the Mormons, and the Mormons can forgive the Christians.

Then, the Muslims might consider forgiving us, as we forgive them.

Then the scales of justice that are so far out of balance might begin to be satisfied, as mercy, rather than vengeance, meets the demands of justice.

"One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter." And as long as we follow a law of vengeance, seeking "an eye for an eye," terrorism will persist and even grow.

The parallel anniversaries of September 11 are a witness from the universe to the parallels between the deeds.

May we be wise, and learn.

Sincerely,

Sterling D. Allan

The Book of Mormon: selected readings of what Mitt Romney believes

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment