Showing posts with label Mormons. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mormons. Show all posts
Wednesday, December 26, 2007
The God Makers 2, part 5
This is the last video in the God Makers 2 series. I hope you have enjoyed them for their informational value. Tomorrow, I will post all five video's on one post for easy access to all at one link.
God bless
Brian
The God Makers 2, part 4
Have you seen the previous three parts yet? They can be found in my posts on Wed, Thurs and friday!
There will be a part 5 on sunday!
The God Makers 2, part 3 UPDATE!
Please be sure to watch the previous two parts before viewing this video. They are found in the previous two posts.
Is it starting to make sense yet? Is there a reason to believe that if Mitt Romney was elected, that the Mormon Church would not be involved??
Part 4 will be posted on Saturday morning! I hope you are enjoying the information coming out of these videos.
I just found this on the internet dated Dec 27. makes for interesting reading. Send me your comments on it!
The God Makers 2, part 2
If you have not watched part one yet, please scroll down to yesterday's post before viewing this one. Tomorrow, I will post part 3!
If any mormons out there feel that I am misrepresenting your religion and faith, please feel free to comment. Unfortunately, (for the mormons) everything is documented in their own sources, so it would be hard to accuse me of making it up to make them look bad. My desire is not to make anyone look bad. My desire is to make all mormons look INTO THE BIBLE to see what it has to say about their religion. Don't just read those verses that you have been taught to read by your church, but read the whole of the Bible. Read it in context. Understand who is being talked to at any given time. Go to a Christian bookstore (When I was a mormon, I never stepped foot inside one, I wish I had!!!) and read what it said about Mormonism (you will find it under the heading of CULTS).
The God Makers 2, part 1
I have several videos coming up in the next few days of The God Makers. Please come back to watch the rest of the series in the next few days.
I hope Christmas was not a "let down" for you. Remember that we celebrate the birth of Christ and that the only "let down" is when we fail to please HIM!
Monday, December 24, 2007
The Mountain Meadow Massacre -- (Mormons)
You can read about The Mountain Meadow Massacre here!
Also, go back and read my earlier post on the Mormon stance of blood atonement here.
Don't just take my word on this and don't just take the Hollywood account either but do some research for yourself and come to an educated evaluation. You will be amazed, as I was, in how power-hungry the mormons are. If Mitt Romney is elected President of the United States, you can be sure he will surround himself with other Mormons.
ON A HAPPY NOTE --
MERRY CHRISTMAS TO ALL AND TO YOUR FAMILIES AS WELL. MAY THE BIRTH OF JESUS (THE BIBLICAL JESUS AND NOT LUCIFER'S BROTHER) BE AN OCCASION FOR YOU TO RE-EVALUATE YOUR WALK WITH HIM. REPENT OF YOUR SINS AND PUT YOUR FAITH AND TRUST IN HIM! GOD BLESS, BRIAN
Sunday, December 23, 2007
Mormons belief in shedding of their own blood for remission of sins!

Can you see my car in this picture? It is just under the large snowflake at the top of the left-center part of the picture. You really have to look hard to see it!
"There are sins that men commit for which they cannot receive forgiveness in this world, or in that which is to come, and if they had their eyes open to see their true condition, they would be perfectly willing to have their blood spilt upon the ground, that the smoke thereof might ascend to heaven as an offering for their sins; and the smoking incense would atone for their sins, whereas, if such is not the case, they will stick to them and remain upon them in the spirit world.
"I know, when you hear my brethren telling about cutting people off from the earth, that you consider it is strong doctrine; but it is to save them, not to destroy them...."And further more, I know that there are transgressors, who, if they knew themselves, and the only condition upon which they can obtain forgiveness, would beg of their brethren to shed their blood, that the smoke thereof might ascend to God as an offering to appease the wrath that is kindled against them, and that the law might have its course. I will say further; I have had men come to me and offer their lives to atone for their sins.
"It is true that the blood of the Son of God was shed for sins through the fall and those committed by men, yet men can commit sins which it can never remit.... There are sins that can be atoned for by an offering upon an altar, as in ancient days; and there are sins that the blood of a lamb, or a calf, or of turtle dove, cannot remit, but they must be atoned for by the blood of the man."
(Sermon by Brigham Young published in the Mormon Church's Deseret News, 1856)
-----February 8, 1857 sermon
"Now take a person in this congregation who has knowledge with regard to being saved... and suppose that he is overtaken in a gross fault, that he has committed a sin that he knows will deprive him of that exaltation which he desires, and that he cannot attain to it without the shedding of his blood, and also knows that by having his blood shed he will atone for that sin and be saved and exalted with the Gods, is there a man or woman in this house but what would say, 'shed my blood that I may be saved and exalted with the Gods?'
"All mankind love themselves, and let these principles be known by an individual, and he would be glad to have his blood shed. That would be loving themselves, even unto an eternal exaltation. Will you love your brothers and sisters likewise, when they have committed a sin that cannot be atoned for without the shedding of their blood? Will you love that man or woman well enough to shed their blood? That is what Jesus Christ meant....
"I could refer you to plenty of instances where men have been righteously slain, in order to atone for their sins. I have seen scores and hundreds of people for whom there would have been a chance... if their lives had been taken and their blood spilled on the ground as a smoking incense to the Almighty, but who are now angels to the Devil... I have known a great many men who have left this Church for whom there is no chance whatever for exaltation, but if their blood had been spilled, it would have been better for them....
"This is loving our neighbor as ourselves; if he needs help, help him; and if he wants salvation and it is necessary to spill his blood on the earth in order that he may be saved, spill it....if you have sinned a sin requiring the shedding of blood, except the sin unto death, would not be satisfied nor rest until your blood should be spilled, that you might gain that salvation you desire. That is the way to love mankind."
(Sermon by President Brigham Young, delivered in the Mormon Tabernacle, printed in the Deseret News, February 18, 1857)
John D. Lee on Blood Atonement (from his confession)
In his confession, Lee offered a chilling account of one instance of blood atonement in early Utah:
"Rasmos Anderson was a Danish man who came to Utah... He had married a widow lady somewhat older than himself... At one of the meetings during the reformation Anderson and his step-daughter confessed that they had committed adultery... they were rebaptized and received into full membership. They were then placed under covenant that if they again committed adultery, Anderson should suffer death. Soon after this a charge was laid against Anderson before the Council, accusing him of adultery with his step-daughter. This Council was composed of Klingensmith and his two counselors; it was the Bishop's Council. Without giving Anderson any chance to defend himself or make a statement, the Council voted that Anderson must die for violating his covenants. Klingensmith went to Anderson and notified him that the orders were that he must die by having his throat cut, so that the running of his blood would atone for his sins. Anderson, being a firm believer in the doctrines and teachings of the Mormon Church, made no objections... His wife was ordered to prepare a suit of clean clothing, in which to have her husband buried... she being directed to tell those who should inquire after her husband that he had gone to California.
"Klingensmith, James Haslem, Daniel McFarland and John M. Higbee dug a grave in the field near Cedar City, and that night, about 12 o'clock, went to Anderson's house and ordered him to make ready to obey Council. Anderson got up... and without a word of remonstrance accompanied those that he believed were carrying out the will of the "Almighty God." They went to the place where the grave was prepared; Anderson knelt upon the side of the grave and prayed. Klingensmith and his company then cut Anderson's throat from ear to ear and held him so that his blood ran into the grave.."As soon as he was dead they dressed him in his clean clothes, threw him into the grave and buried him. They then carried his bloody clothing back to his family, and gave them to his wife to wash... She obeyed their orders.... Anderson was killed just before the Mountain Meadows massacre. The killing of Anderson was then considered a religious duty and a just act. It was justified by all the people, for they were bound by the same covenants, and the least word of objection to thus treating the man who had broken his covenant would have brought the same fate upon the person who was so foolish as to raise his voce against any act committed by order of the Church authorities."
"I know, when you hear my brethren telling about cutting people off from the earth, that you consider it is strong doctrine; but it is to save them, not to destroy them...."And further more, I know that there are transgressors, who, if they knew themselves, and the only condition upon which they can obtain forgiveness, would beg of their brethren to shed their blood, that the smoke thereof might ascend to God as an offering to appease the wrath that is kindled against them, and that the law might have its course. I will say further; I have had men come to me and offer their lives to atone for their sins.
"It is true that the blood of the Son of God was shed for sins through the fall and those committed by men, yet men can commit sins which it can never remit.... There are sins that can be atoned for by an offering upon an altar, as in ancient days; and there are sins that the blood of a lamb, or a calf, or of turtle dove, cannot remit, but they must be atoned for by the blood of the man."
(Sermon by Brigham Young published in the Mormon Church's Deseret News, 1856)
-----February 8, 1857 sermon
"Now take a person in this congregation who has knowledge with regard to being saved... and suppose that he is overtaken in a gross fault, that he has committed a sin that he knows will deprive him of that exaltation which he desires, and that he cannot attain to it without the shedding of his blood, and also knows that by having his blood shed he will atone for that sin and be saved and exalted with the Gods, is there a man or woman in this house but what would say, 'shed my blood that I may be saved and exalted with the Gods?'
"All mankind love themselves, and let these principles be known by an individual, and he would be glad to have his blood shed. That would be loving themselves, even unto an eternal exaltation. Will you love your brothers and sisters likewise, when they have committed a sin that cannot be atoned for without the shedding of their blood? Will you love that man or woman well enough to shed their blood? That is what Jesus Christ meant....
"I could refer you to plenty of instances where men have been righteously slain, in order to atone for their sins. I have seen scores and hundreds of people for whom there would have been a chance... if their lives had been taken and their blood spilled on the ground as a smoking incense to the Almighty, but who are now angels to the Devil... I have known a great many men who have left this Church for whom there is no chance whatever for exaltation, but if their blood had been spilled, it would have been better for them....
"This is loving our neighbor as ourselves; if he needs help, help him; and if he wants salvation and it is necessary to spill his blood on the earth in order that he may be saved, spill it....if you have sinned a sin requiring the shedding of blood, except the sin unto death, would not be satisfied nor rest until your blood should be spilled, that you might gain that salvation you desire. That is the way to love mankind."
(Sermon by President Brigham Young, delivered in the Mormon Tabernacle, printed in the Deseret News, February 18, 1857)
John D. Lee on Blood Atonement (from his confession)
In his confession, Lee offered a chilling account of one instance of blood atonement in early Utah:
"Rasmos Anderson was a Danish man who came to Utah... He had married a widow lady somewhat older than himself... At one of the meetings during the reformation Anderson and his step-daughter confessed that they had committed adultery... they were rebaptized and received into full membership. They were then placed under covenant that if they again committed adultery, Anderson should suffer death. Soon after this a charge was laid against Anderson before the Council, accusing him of adultery with his step-daughter. This Council was composed of Klingensmith and his two counselors; it was the Bishop's Council. Without giving Anderson any chance to defend himself or make a statement, the Council voted that Anderson must die for violating his covenants. Klingensmith went to Anderson and notified him that the orders were that he must die by having his throat cut, so that the running of his blood would atone for his sins. Anderson, being a firm believer in the doctrines and teachings of the Mormon Church, made no objections... His wife was ordered to prepare a suit of clean clothing, in which to have her husband buried... she being directed to tell those who should inquire after her husband that he had gone to California.
"Klingensmith, James Haslem, Daniel McFarland and John M. Higbee dug a grave in the field near Cedar City, and that night, about 12 o'clock, went to Anderson's house and ordered him to make ready to obey Council. Anderson got up... and without a word of remonstrance accompanied those that he believed were carrying out the will of the "Almighty God." They went to the place where the grave was prepared; Anderson knelt upon the side of the grave and prayed. Klingensmith and his company then cut Anderson's throat from ear to ear and held him so that his blood ran into the grave.."As soon as he was dead they dressed him in his clean clothes, threw him into the grave and buried him. They then carried his bloody clothing back to his family, and gave them to his wife to wash... She obeyed their orders.... Anderson was killed just before the Mountain Meadows massacre. The killing of Anderson was then considered a religious duty and a just act. It was justified by all the people, for they were bound by the same covenants, and the least word of objection to thus treating the man who had broken his covenant would have brought the same fate upon the person who was so foolish as to raise his voce against any act committed by order of the Church authorities."
read about the Mountain Meadows Massacre of 1857 (Sept 11th)
the last paragraph of the story says this:
In 1998, Gordon B. Hinckley, President of the Church of Latter-day Saints, visited Mountain Meadows. He found himself embarrassed at the dilapidated condition of monument at the site and committed the Church to building a proper memorial. "We owe [the dead] respect," Hinckley declared, "that land is sacred ground." On September 11, 1999, a new monument was dedicated at Mountain Meadows. President Hinckley, in the afternoon sunshine, told the assembled crowd: "[The past] cannot be recalled. It cannot be changed. It is time to leave the entire matter in the hands of God."
And such is the mormon stance on much of their past. Their prophets have lied and committed polygamy in the name of God. They have given false statements on who God is and they have been passed over as not speaking for God. I tell you that not a single one of the mormon prophets speak for God! In the days of old, (OT times) prophets pointed towards Christ. Now that Jesus has come and died on the cross there is no need for further revelation. We have all the information we need!
special thanks as all of the above information was taken from: http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/mountainmeadows/atonement.html
(except for the last paragraph and the picture at the top of page. Did you see my car in the picture? NO? good, it's not there! it was there but I covered it up because that was in the past and I can't rely on the fact it was once there so if I can't see it now, it must not have ever been there!)
Thursday, December 20, 2007
Mormons and polygamy
I apologize on how long this is, but it is very good!
Why would the Mormon church denounce polygamy if the Mormon founders taught and practiced polygamy? (taken from wikipedia)
Answer
As The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints settled in the Utah Territory, they began to participate in national politics. The general opinion of the rest of the United States was that the practice of plural marriage was offensive. On July 8, 1862, President Abraham Lincoln signed the Morrill Anti-Bigamy Act into law, which forbade the practice in US territories. President Lincoln told the church that he had no intentions of enforcing it if they would not interfere with him, and so the matter was laid to rest for a time. Nevertheless, the rhetoric continued, and polygamy became an impediment to Utah being admitted to the United States. This was not a concern to Brigham Young, however, who preached in 1866 that if Utah will not be admitted to the Union until it abandons polygamy, "we shall never be admitted."[8]
In February of 1882, George Q. Cannon, a prominent leader in the church, was denied a seat in the House of Representatives due to his polygamous relations. This revived the issue in national politics. One month later, the Edmunds Act was passed, amending the Morrill Act by revoking the right of polygamists to vote or hold office, and allowing them to be punished without due process. Even if people did not practice polygamy, they would have their rights revoked if they confessed a belief in it. In 1887, the Edmunds-Tucker Act seized control of the church and further extended the punishments of the Edmunds Act of 1882. In July of the same year, the U.S. Attorney General filed a suit to seize the church and all of its assets.
Following the aforementioned passage of the Edmunds-Tucker Act in 1887, the Church found it difficult to operate as a viable institution. Among other things, this legislation disincorporated the Church, confiscated its properties, and even threatened seizure of its temples. Many scholars believe that in order for Utah to become a state in the union the United States government demanded that the LDS church discontinue the practice of polygamy, which was not only morally repugnant to the rest of the nation but feared by political leaders as a way for the church to gain power in numbers.
After visiting with priesthood leaders in many settlements, President Woodruff sought to obtain "divine confirmation" to pursue a course that seemed to be agonizingly more and more clear. As he explained to Church members a year later, the choice was between continuing to practice plural marriage and thereby losing the temples, " OR ceasing plural marriage in order to keep the temples and continue performing the essential ordinances for the living and the dead. President Woodruff hastened to add that he had acted only as the Lord directed: "I should have let all the temples go out of our hands; I should have gone to prison myself, and let every other man go there, had not the God of heaven commanded me to do what I do; and when the hour came that I was commanded to do that, it was all clear to me."
While nearly all Church leaders in 1890 regarded the Manifesto as inspired, there were differences among them about its scope and permanence. Some leaders were understandably reluctant to terminate a long-standing practice that was regarded as divinely mandated. As a result, a number of plural marriages were performed over the next several years by those felt the manifesto was only given to satisfy the government. Not surprisingly, rumors of such marriages soon surfaced, and beginning in January 1904, testimony given in the Smoot hearings made it clear that plural marriage had not been completely extinguished.
The ambiguity was ended in the General Conference of April 1904, when President Joseph F. Smith issued the "Second Manifesto," an emphatic declaration that prohibited plural marriage and proclaimed that offenders would be subject to church discipline. They declared that any who participated in additional plural marriages, and those officiating, would be excommunicated from the church. Those disagreeing with the second manifesto included apostles Matthias F. Cowley and John W. Taylor who both resigned from the Quorum of the Twelve. Cowley retained his membership in the church, but Taylor was later excommunicated.
In 1943, the First Presidency discovered apostle Richard R. Lyman was cohabitating with a woman other than his legal wife. As it turned out, in 1925 Lyman had begun a relationship which he defined as a polygamous marriage. Unable to trust anyone else to officiate, Elder Lyman and the woman exchanged vows secretly. By 1943, both were in their seventies. Lyman was excommunicated on November 12, 1943 at age 73. The Quorum of the Twelve provided the newspapers with a one-sentence announcement, stating that the ground for excommunication was violation of the Law of Chastity, which any practice of post-Manifesto polygamy constituted.
They didn't denounce it as a morally reprehensible thing to do, but rather encouraged members to obey the law, realizing that the church couldn't survive if they were all in hiding. :) Members in Mexico, where there was no law against it, continued to practice polygamy for a time.
Now for the good stuff! In an article published back in 1881 (article is below!) by John Lalor (?-1899)
UTAH
UTAH, a territory of the United States. Its area was a part of the first Mexican cession (see ANNEXATIONS, IV.); and at the organization of the territory, by the act of Sept. 9, 1850 (see COMPROMISES, V.), it contained 220,196 square miles. Since its organization it has been largely reduced by portions which have been taken from it and added to Colorado, Nebraska, Nevada and Wyoming. It is now a compact, nearly square territory of 84,476 square miles. Its population, by the census of 1880, was 143,963, so that it is the most populous of the territories, if we except the District of Columbia. Its capital is Salt Lake City, and its governor (1880-84) is Eli H. Murray.
III.285.1
—The American territorial system (see TERRITORIES) is essentially and altogether an adjunct to the federal system. A more complete antipode to the mercantile colonial system of a century ago could hardly be stated or imagined. The American territory is practically under the absolute control of congress; and yet it is never thought of except as on the way to self-governing statehood. It is useless, indeed, is worse than useless, unless it is considered as an inchoate state. And yet here is a territory, already containing the full voting power of a congressional district, whose possible statehood not only is unconsidered, but would be considered only as a worse peril to American institutions than its present absolute government. The territory of Utah is the anomaly of the American system; and the question of its proper treatment is one of the most serious and perplexing problems of American politics. It has two distinct aspects, that of Mormon polygamy, and that of the Mormon hierarchy. In considering them, two features of the American system must be constantly kept in view. 1. The subjects of marriage and divorce are exclusively state concerns. Congress may forbid polygamy in a territory, but, as soon as the territory becomes a state, its legislature acquires entire control of marriage within its jurisdiction. If any of the present state legislatures should abolish their penal laws against bigamy, and either expressly or tacitly permit plural marriages, there is no power outside of the voters of the state which could intervene. 2. Once a state, always a state. When a state once secures the power of self-government, whether by surprise, by secret purchase, or after deliberate consideration, no power can legally revise the action of congress in the admission: even congress is unable to reconsider its action, and the state is equally unable to forfeit its position, except by expressly abandoning its statehood and expressly demanding a return to a territorial condition. (See RECONSTRUCTION.) Mr. S. G. Fisher, as cited below, some twenty years since stated and advocated what he considered as the right of congress to expel a state, or the right of a state to secede with the express permission of the same congressional authority which admitted it: but this view has never been accepted. One of the fundamental provisions of the constitution is, that not even an amendment shall be passed to deprive any state, without its consent, of its equal suffrage in the senate. The population of a state may diminish to almost nil, or its moral conditions may be shocking to the rest of the country, but its statehood must continue as long as it demands it.
III.285.2
—Mormon Polygamy. The growth and conditions of this institution have been elsewhere stated. (See MORMONS.) The revised statutes of the United States prohibit polygamy in the territories, and jurisdiction of offenses against the prohibition is in the federal courts of the territories, with a power of writ of error, by act of June 23, 1874, from the United States supreme court to the supreme court of the territory. This was found ineffectual from the difficulty of obtaining evidence; and the stringent "Edmunds Act" was passed March 22, 1882. (as noted in the first part of this blog!)
III.285.3
—The provisions of the Edmunds act are, in general, as follows: 1. The offense of bigamy (U. S. Rev. Stat., § 5352) is restated, and made punishable by fine and five years' imprisonment. 2. Cohabitation with more than one woman is made a misdemeanor, punishable by fine and six months' imprisonment. 3. Jurymen may be challenged for being guilty of bigamy or of unlawful cohabitation, or for believing it right to commit such offenses. 4. The president is authorized to grant amnesty for past offenses. 5. The issue of Mormon marriages up to Jan. 1, 1883, is legitimated. 6. Bigamy, polygamy and unlawful cohabitation are made bars to voting and to eligibility for election or appointment to any office under the territory or the United States. 7. All the registration and election offices of Utah are declared vacant. 8. Five commissioners are to be appointed by the president, with exclusive power to appoint subordinates for the purpose of registering voters, conducting elections, receiving or rejecting votes, canvassing and returning votes, and issuing certificates. 9. More opinion as to the right of bigamy or polygamy is not to be a bar to a seat in the legislature.
III.285.4
—The first election held under the provisions of the Edmunds act resulted in an almost exclusively Mormon legislature, devoted to the maintenance of the corporate right of the church of latter-day saints to hold and enjoy its wealth. It is very evident, that, while polygamy is to be retained as a distinguishing mark for a peculiar people, it is to be practiced only by those who have an exclusively ecclesiastical ambition, and that the church will always take care to have monogamists ready to care for its political interests. No one can suggest any further step in the direction of the Edmunds act, except to make opinion a bar to a seat in the legislature. And that would mean the temporary abolition of legal government for Utah, and the relegation of government functions to the moral control of the church, through its unofficial courts of arbitration.
III.285.5
—As a final remedy, it has been proposed to adopt an amendment to the constitution, prohibiting polygamy in the United States, and empowering congress to enforce the prohibition. An amendment to that effect was introduced at the opening of congress in December, 1883, but has not yet been acted upon. It may be that such an amendment, with appropriate legislation to back it, might solve the problem and make it safe to admit Utah as a state. But considerable caution should be felt in coming to this conclusion after our experience with the fourteenth and fifteenth amendments. They were supposed, at the time of their passage, to be so carefully framed that they had transferred the protection of the civil rights of the enfranchised negro race to congress. But the supreme court has decided, in effect, that these civil rights were primarily under the protection of the states; that a diminution of the power of the states must be express to be valid; that these amendments gave to congress only a veto power over unconstitutional state legislation; and that individual offenses are still in the domain of the states. Why may not the proposed anti-polygamy amendment meet the same fate? Suppose that Utah is admitted after the amendment is passed; and that her legislature as carefully refrains from passing laws permissive of polygamy as from punishing polygamy by individuals. May we not then find that the sixteenth amendment is as much of a practical delusion as its two predecessors? And it will then be too late, it must be remembered, to return Utah to a territorial condition. Surely the hazard of such a chance is too great to be taken.
III.285.6
—The only alternative seems to be to limit the sphere of the states by words that can not be mistaken or evaded, and to add to the powers of congress that of exclusive legislation, by general laws only, on the subjects of marriage and divorce within the United States. Utah might then be admitted with absolute safety, for no legal argument could emasculate such an amendment. Bigamy and polygamy would then be federal crimes; and no marriage would be valid, or its issue legitimate or capable of inheritance ab intestato, unless the marriage had been contracted according to the forms prescribed by a federal statute. Growth of population, wealth and culture in Utah would only increase the force of the influences, material and moral, which would aid the amendment to enforce itself. This remedy, succeeded by the immediate admission of Utah as a state, seems to the writer the only remedy for polygamy in the territories which holds out a fair promise of final and permanent success. It is open to the objection that a two-thirds majority in both houses of congress, or simple majorities backed by the president, might force free-love on the United States. But, if that time should ever come, all would be lost; and our posterity would be too busily engaged in guarding fundamental interests to have time to spare for Utah. The danger is on a par with that of the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus; and is only one of a class of dangers which a democratic republic must meet and surmount or die.
III.285.7
—The Mormon Hierarchy. Federal officials, who have honestly endeavored to execute federal laws in Utah, are almost unanimously of opinion that a greater danger than polygamy is in the Mormon hierarchy, supported by the immense resources of rigidly exacted tithes, bulwarked by the fanatical obedience of the people, and willing, if it could see its way clear, to turn secret into open rebellion. Governor Murray, late in 1883, gave very forcible expression to this view in a newspaper interview, and urged strongly that the whole territory should be placed under an absolute military despotism until the hierarchy should be crushed out. One who has not been upon the spot must speak with diffidence upon such a subject. But, from all the information open to reach, it seems probable that this view is only the natural outcome of unsuccessful contest, and that the fate of the Mormon hierarchy is conditioned by that of Mormon polygamy in the following fashion—Polygamy seems to be primarily purposed to make the Mormons a "peculiar people," to give them a sense of homogeneity which the other elements of their "faith" will not supply, and thus to secure an obedience founded on faith rather than on force. Secondarily, it has divided the Mormon leaders into polygamists, with church ambitions, and monogamists, with political ambitions. To the polygamists are given the present and future honors of the church, and the pleasure and profit of managing an enormous church revenue, without responsibility of accounting, except to the hierarchy. To the monogamists are assigned the present political honors of the territory, and the future political honors of the possible state. It is plain, from the results of the Edmunds act, that the monogamists, though at present of a humbler rank, are not only important, but absolutely essential, to the polygamists. Without the political auxiliaries, the hierarchy would be powerless; with them, it can endure patiently, labor, and wait with hope. To cut off the political auxiliaries would be to cut off hope. It seems to the writer, then, that the mistake has been in aiming all operations at the polygamists, while every blow fell harmless on the monogamous shield before them. The true policy would be to strike at the monogamists, to push them into a compulsory choice between their allies and their own hopes of political preferment. What blow would do so more effectually than the passage of the marriage and divorce amendment, followed by the admission of Utah as a state? If a record of conviction for bigamy, or for aiding a bigamous marriage, is to be a bar to office-holding, to citizenship, and even to voting, how long will political leaders, in the hot conflicts of real state politics, hold to an organization which can not even provide them with votes? Whichever side the church takes, it must bring votes in its hands. Mormonism is a democracy of revelation, in which a revelation is tested by its general acceptance. A new monogamous revelation would thus be the inevitable result of the gift of statehood, if we could give it safely; and such a revelation would only result in the disappearance of the Mormons as a "peculiar people," and the downfall of the hierarchy. Separate the political monogamists from the ecclesiastical polygamists by the marriage and divorce amendment; fling the apple of discord among them by granting statehood and introducing state politics; and it seems evident that the problem of the hierarchy will be found to be only an outgrowth of the problem of polygamy, and that they stand or fall together.
III.285.8
—It is not intended to make polygamists and ecclesiastical leaders exactly coincident classes. Some of the ecclesiastical leaders are certainly monogamists, but they are exceptions.
III.285.9
—Authorities will be found under MORMONS. See 9 Stat. at Large, 453 (act of Sept. 9, 1850); Fisher's Trial of the Constitution, 173.
ALEXANDER JOHNSTON.
III.285.10
Why would the Mormon church denounce polygamy if the Mormon founders taught and practiced polygamy? (taken from wikipedia)
Answer
As The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints settled in the Utah Territory, they began to participate in national politics. The general opinion of the rest of the United States was that the practice of plural marriage was offensive. On July 8, 1862, President Abraham Lincoln signed the Morrill Anti-Bigamy Act into law, which forbade the practice in US territories. President Lincoln told the church that he had no intentions of enforcing it if they would not interfere with him, and so the matter was laid to rest for a time. Nevertheless, the rhetoric continued, and polygamy became an impediment to Utah being admitted to the United States. This was not a concern to Brigham Young, however, who preached in 1866 that if Utah will not be admitted to the Union until it abandons polygamy, "we shall never be admitted."[8]
In February of 1882, George Q. Cannon, a prominent leader in the church, was denied a seat in the House of Representatives due to his polygamous relations. This revived the issue in national politics. One month later, the Edmunds Act was passed, amending the Morrill Act by revoking the right of polygamists to vote or hold office, and allowing them to be punished without due process. Even if people did not practice polygamy, they would have their rights revoked if they confessed a belief in it. In 1887, the Edmunds-Tucker Act seized control of the church and further extended the punishments of the Edmunds Act of 1882. In July of the same year, the U.S. Attorney General filed a suit to seize the church and all of its assets.
Following the aforementioned passage of the Edmunds-Tucker Act in 1887, the Church found it difficult to operate as a viable institution. Among other things, this legislation disincorporated the Church, confiscated its properties, and even threatened seizure of its temples. Many scholars believe that in order for Utah to become a state in the union the United States government demanded that the LDS church discontinue the practice of polygamy, which was not only morally repugnant to the rest of the nation but feared by political leaders as a way for the church to gain power in numbers.
After visiting with priesthood leaders in many settlements, President Woodruff sought to obtain "divine confirmation" to pursue a course that seemed to be agonizingly more and more clear. As he explained to Church members a year later, the choice was between continuing to practice plural marriage and thereby losing the temples, " OR ceasing plural marriage in order to keep the temples and continue performing the essential ordinances for the living and the dead. President Woodruff hastened to add that he had acted only as the Lord directed: "I should have let all the temples go out of our hands; I should have gone to prison myself, and let every other man go there, had not the God of heaven commanded me to do what I do; and when the hour came that I was commanded to do that, it was all clear to me."
While nearly all Church leaders in 1890 regarded the Manifesto as inspired, there were differences among them about its scope and permanence. Some leaders were understandably reluctant to terminate a long-standing practice that was regarded as divinely mandated. As a result, a number of plural marriages were performed over the next several years by those felt the manifesto was only given to satisfy the government. Not surprisingly, rumors of such marriages soon surfaced, and beginning in January 1904, testimony given in the Smoot hearings made it clear that plural marriage had not been completely extinguished.
The ambiguity was ended in the General Conference of April 1904, when President Joseph F. Smith issued the "Second Manifesto," an emphatic declaration that prohibited plural marriage and proclaimed that offenders would be subject to church discipline. They declared that any who participated in additional plural marriages, and those officiating, would be excommunicated from the church. Those disagreeing with the second manifesto included apostles Matthias F. Cowley and John W. Taylor who both resigned from the Quorum of the Twelve. Cowley retained his membership in the church, but Taylor was later excommunicated.
In 1943, the First Presidency discovered apostle Richard R. Lyman was cohabitating with a woman other than his legal wife. As it turned out, in 1925 Lyman had begun a relationship which he defined as a polygamous marriage. Unable to trust anyone else to officiate, Elder Lyman and the woman exchanged vows secretly. By 1943, both were in their seventies. Lyman was excommunicated on November 12, 1943 at age 73. The Quorum of the Twelve provided the newspapers with a one-sentence announcement, stating that the ground for excommunication was violation of the Law of Chastity, which any practice of post-Manifesto polygamy constituted.
They didn't denounce it as a morally reprehensible thing to do, but rather encouraged members to obey the law, realizing that the church couldn't survive if they were all in hiding. :) Members in Mexico, where there was no law against it, continued to practice polygamy for a time.
Now for the good stuff! In an article published back in 1881 (article is below!) by John Lalor (?-1899)
UTAH
UTAH, a territory of the United States. Its area was a part of the first Mexican cession (see ANNEXATIONS, IV.); and at the organization of the territory, by the act of Sept. 9, 1850 (see COMPROMISES, V.), it contained 220,196 square miles. Since its organization it has been largely reduced by portions which have been taken from it and added to Colorado, Nebraska, Nevada and Wyoming. It is now a compact, nearly square territory of 84,476 square miles. Its population, by the census of 1880, was 143,963, so that it is the most populous of the territories, if we except the District of Columbia. Its capital is Salt Lake City, and its governor (1880-84) is Eli H. Murray.
III.285.1
—The American territorial system (see TERRITORIES) is essentially and altogether an adjunct to the federal system. A more complete antipode to the mercantile colonial system of a century ago could hardly be stated or imagined. The American territory is practically under the absolute control of congress; and yet it is never thought of except as on the way to self-governing statehood. It is useless, indeed, is worse than useless, unless it is considered as an inchoate state. And yet here is a territory, already containing the full voting power of a congressional district, whose possible statehood not only is unconsidered, but would be considered only as a worse peril to American institutions than its present absolute government. The territory of Utah is the anomaly of the American system; and the question of its proper treatment is one of the most serious and perplexing problems of American politics. It has two distinct aspects, that of Mormon polygamy, and that of the Mormon hierarchy. In considering them, two features of the American system must be constantly kept in view. 1. The subjects of marriage and divorce are exclusively state concerns. Congress may forbid polygamy in a territory, but, as soon as the territory becomes a state, its legislature acquires entire control of marriage within its jurisdiction. If any of the present state legislatures should abolish their penal laws against bigamy, and either expressly or tacitly permit plural marriages, there is no power outside of the voters of the state which could intervene. 2. Once a state, always a state. When a state once secures the power of self-government, whether by surprise, by secret purchase, or after deliberate consideration, no power can legally revise the action of congress in the admission: even congress is unable to reconsider its action, and the state is equally unable to forfeit its position, except by expressly abandoning its statehood and expressly demanding a return to a territorial condition. (See RECONSTRUCTION.) Mr. S. G. Fisher, as cited below, some twenty years since stated and advocated what he considered as the right of congress to expel a state, or the right of a state to secede with the express permission of the same congressional authority which admitted it: but this view has never been accepted. One of the fundamental provisions of the constitution is, that not even an amendment shall be passed to deprive any state, without its consent, of its equal suffrage in the senate. The population of a state may diminish to almost nil, or its moral conditions may be shocking to the rest of the country, but its statehood must continue as long as it demands it.
III.285.2
—Mormon Polygamy. The growth and conditions of this institution have been elsewhere stated. (See MORMONS.) The revised statutes of the United States prohibit polygamy in the territories, and jurisdiction of offenses against the prohibition is in the federal courts of the territories, with a power of writ of error, by act of June 23, 1874, from the United States supreme court to the supreme court of the territory. This was found ineffectual from the difficulty of obtaining evidence; and the stringent "Edmunds Act" was passed March 22, 1882. (as noted in the first part of this blog!)
III.285.3
—The provisions of the Edmunds act are, in general, as follows: 1. The offense of bigamy (U. S. Rev. Stat., § 5352) is restated, and made punishable by fine and five years' imprisonment. 2. Cohabitation with more than one woman is made a misdemeanor, punishable by fine and six months' imprisonment. 3. Jurymen may be challenged for being guilty of bigamy or of unlawful cohabitation, or for believing it right to commit such offenses. 4. The president is authorized to grant amnesty for past offenses. 5. The issue of Mormon marriages up to Jan. 1, 1883, is legitimated. 6. Bigamy, polygamy and unlawful cohabitation are made bars to voting and to eligibility for election or appointment to any office under the territory or the United States. 7. All the registration and election offices of Utah are declared vacant. 8. Five commissioners are to be appointed by the president, with exclusive power to appoint subordinates for the purpose of registering voters, conducting elections, receiving or rejecting votes, canvassing and returning votes, and issuing certificates. 9. More opinion as to the right of bigamy or polygamy is not to be a bar to a seat in the legislature.
III.285.4
—The first election held under the provisions of the Edmunds act resulted in an almost exclusively Mormon legislature, devoted to the maintenance of the corporate right of the church of latter-day saints to hold and enjoy its wealth. It is very evident, that, while polygamy is to be retained as a distinguishing mark for a peculiar people, it is to be practiced only by those who have an exclusively ecclesiastical ambition, and that the church will always take care to have monogamists ready to care for its political interests. No one can suggest any further step in the direction of the Edmunds act, except to make opinion a bar to a seat in the legislature. And that would mean the temporary abolition of legal government for Utah, and the relegation of government functions to the moral control of the church, through its unofficial courts of arbitration.
III.285.5
—As a final remedy, it has been proposed to adopt an amendment to the constitution, prohibiting polygamy in the United States, and empowering congress to enforce the prohibition. An amendment to that effect was introduced at the opening of congress in December, 1883, but has not yet been acted upon. It may be that such an amendment, with appropriate legislation to back it, might solve the problem and make it safe to admit Utah as a state. But considerable caution should be felt in coming to this conclusion after our experience with the fourteenth and fifteenth amendments. They were supposed, at the time of their passage, to be so carefully framed that they had transferred the protection of the civil rights of the enfranchised negro race to congress. But the supreme court has decided, in effect, that these civil rights were primarily under the protection of the states; that a diminution of the power of the states must be express to be valid; that these amendments gave to congress only a veto power over unconstitutional state legislation; and that individual offenses are still in the domain of the states. Why may not the proposed anti-polygamy amendment meet the same fate? Suppose that Utah is admitted after the amendment is passed; and that her legislature as carefully refrains from passing laws permissive of polygamy as from punishing polygamy by individuals. May we not then find that the sixteenth amendment is as much of a practical delusion as its two predecessors? And it will then be too late, it must be remembered, to return Utah to a territorial condition. Surely the hazard of such a chance is too great to be taken.
III.285.6
—The only alternative seems to be to limit the sphere of the states by words that can not be mistaken or evaded, and to add to the powers of congress that of exclusive legislation, by general laws only, on the subjects of marriage and divorce within the United States. Utah might then be admitted with absolute safety, for no legal argument could emasculate such an amendment. Bigamy and polygamy would then be federal crimes; and no marriage would be valid, or its issue legitimate or capable of inheritance ab intestato, unless the marriage had been contracted according to the forms prescribed by a federal statute. Growth of population, wealth and culture in Utah would only increase the force of the influences, material and moral, which would aid the amendment to enforce itself. This remedy, succeeded by the immediate admission of Utah as a state, seems to the writer the only remedy for polygamy in the territories which holds out a fair promise of final and permanent success. It is open to the objection that a two-thirds majority in both houses of congress, or simple majorities backed by the president, might force free-love on the United States. But, if that time should ever come, all would be lost; and our posterity would be too busily engaged in guarding fundamental interests to have time to spare for Utah. The danger is on a par with that of the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus; and is only one of a class of dangers which a democratic republic must meet and surmount or die.
III.285.7
—The Mormon Hierarchy. Federal officials, who have honestly endeavored to execute federal laws in Utah, are almost unanimously of opinion that a greater danger than polygamy is in the Mormon hierarchy, supported by the immense resources of rigidly exacted tithes, bulwarked by the fanatical obedience of the people, and willing, if it could see its way clear, to turn secret into open rebellion. Governor Murray, late in 1883, gave very forcible expression to this view in a newspaper interview, and urged strongly that the whole territory should be placed under an absolute military despotism until the hierarchy should be crushed out. One who has not been upon the spot must speak with diffidence upon such a subject. But, from all the information open to reach, it seems probable that this view is only the natural outcome of unsuccessful contest, and that the fate of the Mormon hierarchy is conditioned by that of Mormon polygamy in the following fashion—Polygamy seems to be primarily purposed to make the Mormons a "peculiar people," to give them a sense of homogeneity which the other elements of their "faith" will not supply, and thus to secure an obedience founded on faith rather than on force. Secondarily, it has divided the Mormon leaders into polygamists, with church ambitions, and monogamists, with political ambitions. To the polygamists are given the present and future honors of the church, and the pleasure and profit of managing an enormous church revenue, without responsibility of accounting, except to the hierarchy. To the monogamists are assigned the present political honors of the territory, and the future political honors of the possible state. It is plain, from the results of the Edmunds act, that the monogamists, though at present of a humbler rank, are not only important, but absolutely essential, to the polygamists. Without the political auxiliaries, the hierarchy would be powerless; with them, it can endure patiently, labor, and wait with hope. To cut off the political auxiliaries would be to cut off hope. It seems to the writer, then, that the mistake has been in aiming all operations at the polygamists, while every blow fell harmless on the monogamous shield before them. The true policy would be to strike at the monogamists, to push them into a compulsory choice between their allies and their own hopes of political preferment. What blow would do so more effectually than the passage of the marriage and divorce amendment, followed by the admission of Utah as a state? If a record of conviction for bigamy, or for aiding a bigamous marriage, is to be a bar to office-holding, to citizenship, and even to voting, how long will political leaders, in the hot conflicts of real state politics, hold to an organization which can not even provide them with votes? Whichever side the church takes, it must bring votes in its hands. Mormonism is a democracy of revelation, in which a revelation is tested by its general acceptance. A new monogamous revelation would thus be the inevitable result of the gift of statehood, if we could give it safely; and such a revelation would only result in the disappearance of the Mormons as a "peculiar people," and the downfall of the hierarchy. Separate the political monogamists from the ecclesiastical polygamists by the marriage and divorce amendment; fling the apple of discord among them by granting statehood and introducing state politics; and it seems evident that the problem of the hierarchy will be found to be only an outgrowth of the problem of polygamy, and that they stand or fall together.
III.285.8
—It is not intended to make polygamists and ecclesiastical leaders exactly coincident classes. Some of the ecclesiastical leaders are certainly monogamists, but they are exceptions.
III.285.9
—Authorities will be found under MORMONS. See 9 Stat. at Large, 453 (act of Sept. 9, 1850); Fisher's Trial of the Constitution, 173.
ALEXANDER JOHNSTON.
III.285.10
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
Old fashioned lady...
The past several post have been pretty hard on Mormons and on Saddleback and Willow Creek. While I do not want to lessen the importance of reaching them with the Truth of God's Word, I want to take one day to just relax and share some humor with you. I hope you enjoy it.
This story deals with a rather old fashioned lady, who was planning a couple of weeks vacation in Florida. She also was quite delicate and elegant with her language. She wrote a letter to a particular campground and asked for reservations. She wanted to make sure the campground was fully equipped but didn't know quite how to ask about the "toilet" facilities. She just couldn't bring herself to write the word "toilet" in her letter. After much deliberation, she finally came up with the old fashioned term "Bathroom Commode," but when she wrote that down, she still thought she was being too forward. So she started all over again; rewrote the entire letter and referred to the Bathroom Commode" simply as the "B.C.". Does the campground have its own "B.C.?" is what she actually wrote.
Well, the campground owner wasn't old fashioned at all, and when he got the letter, he couldn't figure out what the lady was talking about. That "B.C." really stumped him. After worrying about it for several days, he showed the letter to other campers, but they couldn't figure out what the lady meant either. The campground owner finally came to the conclusion that the lady must be asking about the location of the local Baptist Church. So he sat down and wrote the following reply:
This story deals with a rather old fashioned lady, who was planning a couple of weeks vacation in Florida. She also was quite delicate and elegant with her language. She wrote a letter to a particular campground and asked for reservations. She wanted to make sure the campground was fully equipped but didn't know quite how to ask about the "toilet" facilities. She just couldn't bring herself to write the word "toilet" in her letter. After much deliberation, she finally came up with the old fashioned term "Bathroom Commode," but when she wrote that down, she still thought she was being too forward. So she started all over again; rewrote the entire letter and referred to the Bathroom Commode" simply as the "B.C.". Does the campground have its own "B.C.?" is what she actually wrote.
Well, the campground owner wasn't old fashioned at all, and when he got the letter, he couldn't figure out what the lady was talking about. That "B.C." really stumped him. After worrying about it for several days, he showed the letter to other campers, but they couldn't figure out what the lady meant either. The campground owner finally came to the conclusion that the lady must be asking about the location of the local Baptist Church. So he sat down and wrote the following reply:
"Dear Madam: I regret very much the delay in answering your letter, but I now take pleasure of informing you that the "B.C." is located nine miles north of the camp site and is capable of seating 250 people at one time. I admit it is quite a distance away if you are in the habit of going regularly but no doubt you will be pleased to know that a great number of people take their lunches along, and make a day of it..... They usually arrive early and stay late. The last time my wife and I went was six years ago, and it was so crowded we had to stand up the whole time we were there. It may interest you to know that right now, there is a supper planned to raise money to buy more seats. They plan to hold the supper in the middle of the B.C., so everyone can watch and talk about this great event. I would like to say it pains me very much, not to be able to go more regularly, but it is surely not for lack of desire on my part. As we grow older, it seems to be more and more of an effort, particularly in cold weather. If you decide to come down to the campground, perhaps I could go with you the first time you go, sit with you, and introduce you to all the other folks. This is really a very friendly community!
Friday, December 7, 2007
Mitt Romney on his faith
By MATT STUART (from ABC News) (blue print = my comments about red print)
Dec. 6, 2007
"If I am fortunate to become your president, I will serve no one religion, no one group, no one cause and no one interest. A president must serve only the common cause of the people of the United States," Romney said a crowd of 400 to 500 people at the George H.W. Bush Library at Texas A&M University.
Do you suppose that King David would have said that? Why not serve your beliefs? If a person is going to go contrary to his beliefs, then his beliefs are worthless.
'I Believe in My Mormon Faith'
With some voters suggesting they have qualms about a Mormon president, Romney said he shares "moral convictions" with Americans of all faiths.
If he believes in his Mormon faith, then why would he share moral convictions with all faiths? The Mormon church teaches that all religions are wrong! That they were all apostate. That was supposedly the reason why Joseph Smith was told to begin the new church.
Demystifying the Mormon Faith"I believe in my Mormon faith and I endeavor to live by it," Romney said. "My faith is the faith of my fathers. I will be true to them and to my beliefs."
and yet, one of the first comments he makes is "I will serve no one religion." If he is really going to be true to his fathers and to his beliefs, then by definition, he MUST serve his religion.
Nonetheless, he said his faith doesn't define his candidacy.
"A person should not be elected because of his faith, nor should he be rejected because of his faith." Romney said.
I can agree that a person should not be elected just because of his faith. There are many self-proclaiming Christians out there who cannot be trusted. But as far as being rejected "because" of his faith, sure, we have the right to do that. He is in a cult. Would we want David Koresh (sp?) if he were still alive to run for president. No way! We have to realize that little children look up to the President of the United States, and to have a Mormon in the White House would give validation to his religion (validation that the Mormon religion so desperately wants!). As Christians, we have a responsibility to watch out to make sure that people are not being led astray.
"Let me assure you that no authorities of my church, or of any other church for that matter, will ever exert influence on presidential decisions. Their authority is theirs, within the province of church affairs, and it ends where the affairs of the nation begin," Romney said.
As a Christian, you will not have a chance to influence Mitt on decisions regarding abortion (which he has flip-flopped on)
I don't know about you, but "my" God is sovereign! And as far as the affairs of the nation is concerned (no, I am not talking about the Bill Clinton affair!) God should be the ruling force. Now, more than ever before, our nation is in need of God leading the way! (oh, wait, Mitt thinks he is going to be a god someday! uh oh!)
Romney Invokes Founding Fathers
He decried those who would remove from public life "any acknowledgment of God," and he said that "during the holiday season, nativity scenes and menorahs should be welcome in our public places."
Wait a minute, didn't he say that his religion would play no part in government?
Romney took a hard line on questions about the doctrines of his religion, stating, "There are some who would have a presidential candidate describe and explain his church's distinctive doctrines. To do so would enable the very religious test the founders prohibited in the Constitution."
For the Romney-friendly audience, the most enthusiastic response came when Romney praised the founding fathers: "And so together they prayed, and together they fought, and together, by the grace of God they founded this great nation."
The difference is this...
Jesus is the Son of God and Jesus IS God. Jesus is not a brother of Lucifer as Mormons teach!
Romney: 'No Candidate Should Become a Spokesman for His Faith'
While Romney had underscored that he's "not gonna be giving a JFK speech," some of the speech seemed to echo the sentiment laid down by President Kennedy, and Presidents Lincoln and Jefferson before him.
But we should stand up for what we believe in. Our lives should be a living testimony of Jesus living within us. Again, it is not the brother of Lucifer living within us. It is God!
"When I place my hand on the Bible and take the oath of office, that oath becomes my highest promise to God," Romney said.
Hey Mitt, is that only if the Bible is interpreted correctly (which Mormons would teach that they are the only ones able to properly interpret it!)
As he has done many times before on the stump, Romney reiterated that "no candidate should become a spokesman for his faith. For if he becomes president he will need the prayers of the people of all faiths."
This just goes to show you that he does not know the Bible at all. Because God does not hear the prayers of the unrighteous and the unbelievers!
Notably, Romney stated today that his "church's beliefs about Christ may not all be the same as those of other faiths."
MAY not be the same. He knows better than to say that. According to his own religion, all religions are apostate. The Jesus of the Bible is not a created being. He was not born by an angel having actual intercourse with Mary. He knows that HIS church teaches that Jesus and Lucifer were brothers. Mitt is lying or is not at all familiar with his own church teachings. Since he was a Bishop in the church, I would have to conclude that he is most likely lying! We do not need that in the White House leading our country!
While not contradictory, Romney has previously focused on his claim that religions in American flow from the same "Judeo-Christian" tradition, rather than cite the differences of his church.
Again, NO! This is not from the same Judeo-Christian tradition. It is not even close.
Some criticized Romney for trying to tie his Mormon religion too closely to that of evangelicals and other Christians.
Of course, he wants to be elected President of the United States. without the support of Christians he will not be able to do it.
Romney also sought to emphasize the "nation's symphony of faith," and assured "any believer in religious freedom, any person who has knelt in prayer to the Almighty, has a friend and ally in me."
Any person who has knelt in prayer to the Almighty (Muslims??) Or is he trying to be like Bill Hybels, Rick Warren and many others who have signed the contract with the Muslims apologizing to them.
Romney's campaign has claimed for months that if he was going to give a speech, he likely wouldn't do so until after the primaries should he gain the nomination.
While the campaign vehemently denies there is any connection, the most significant change in the Republican field in the last two weeks is certainly the rise of former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee in Iowa, where a recent ABC News poll showed Huckabee tied for first with Romney.
Huckabee, a Baptist minister, also recently released a new television ad in Iowa touting himself as a "Christian leader," putting the issue of religion front and center in the earliest of the early states.
In a subtle jab, Romney said Monday that, "I think that a candidate or a president that tried to make his religion a defining a feature of his campaign or of his term in office would tend to divide the nation rather than bring us together."
The nation would become divided if the President turns out to be something other than what he portrayed himself to be during the primaries. As Mitt worries about his faith being "against" him, he is upset that Huckabee is BOLD in proclaiming his faith!
Whether related or not, the speech certainly comes at the moment Romney has clearly lost momentum in Iowa, failing to capture supporters after Sen. Sam Brownback's departure from the race and draw those conservative voters disappointed in former Sen. Fred Thompson's campaign.
Faith on the '08 Trail
Much has been made of Romney's Mormon religion throughout the campaign. While reporters covered the topic extensively, his faith was also frequently questioned on the campaign trail.
Before his presidential campaign even officially began, Romney told ABC News' Terry Moran in January that he thought "the American people respect individuals of faith," and that "when you take the oath of office, your highest responsibility is to follow the Constitution and the rule of law."
People do have respect for any person who truly believes in something with a passion. But when push comes to shove, a (true-Bible-believing) Christian will not support a cult member.
Soon after, a February ABC News/Washington Post poll found that a third of Americans were less likely to vote for a candidate who was Mormon.
When Romney surprised the Republican field by posting a whopping $20.1 million in first-quarter fundraising, many noted that Romney's second-highest fundraising state was Mormon-dominated Utah.
Does this surprise you?
It's also been reported that Romney's top fundraising zip code is 84604 — Provo, Utah, the home of the most notable Mormon school, Brigham Young University.
Does this surprise you? And he tells you that his religion will have no influence on America?? You can bet his own church/religion has other ideas about that!
Despite Romney's rising to lead in the Iowa polls by early August, the question of "the speech" remained. Romney told The Associated Press in July that it was "more likely than not" that he would give a speech at some point.
He's got the flip-flopping down to a science!
On Nov. 10, Romney was speaking at a house party in Holderness, N.H., when he admitted that he "liked the idea" of giving a "special speech" on his religion, but that "the political advisers tell me, 'No, no, no, its not a good idea — draws too much attention to that issue alone.' But I sorta like the idea anyway, and will probably do it at some point."
Romney tried to downplay his comments, even going so far as to say, "there's no news on this," but speculation continued.
Wouldn't it be interesting to see how many of his advisers are Mormons??
Though his faith remains a serious topic for Romney, and a serious issue for some Republican voters, Romney has also made a point of making light of the prejudice against the Mormon faith throughout his campaign.
While speaking at the Republican Jewish Coalition in Washington in October, Romney asked why the Mormon religion "scares people so badly." Romney quipped, "I'm probably the wrong guy to ask. But my neighbors might know."
One of the stigmas attached to the Mormon religion is the practice of polygamy, which the church forbade in 1890. At a campaign stop in Laconia, N.H., last month, Romney was speaking on the importance of his family when he said, "I love my wife and my five sons and their five wives."
Romney stopped, and smirking, added, "Wait a second. Let me clarify that. They each have one."
Yeah, that's a funny one. But what about the fact that Joseph Smith and Brigham Young both had many wives and some of them were little girls??? Is that funny?
You want more information on Mormonism? go to: http://time2changechurches.blogspot.com/2007/11/33-facts-mormons-wont-tell-you-when.html
and also go to:
http://time2changechurches.blogspot.com/2007/11/mormo-and-mormons.html
I am not trying to tell people who to vote for. In America, we have the freedom to vote for whomever we want. I am just wanting to inform people who do not know about Mormonism. I didn't know a thing about it until I actually got into Mormonism. After three years, I got out. I am very well learned on the teachings of Joseph Smith Jr, Brigham Young and the apostles. I am very familiar with the Doctrine and Covenants, Pearl of Great Price, The Book of Mormon, and the Ensign. I am very familiar with the teachings of the Apostles (so I do not take things "out of context") but the most important thing that I am familiar with is this...
The Bible -- The Word of God -- The innerancy of Scripture
Below is a copy of a comment that a mormon sent me on one of my other posts:
You are such a bigot that it simply amazes me in this day and age...why? Because you seem to single out and attack only one church. Why? Because you're afraid...and because you're ignorant. You live inside the four walls of your glass cathedral and lap up every lie you're told with hardly ever giving an honest moment of individual thought to any of it. You're so busy attacking the beliefs of others that you gloss over or outright ignore the gaping holes in your own. In spite of all this, the LDS church continues to grow. And THAT is what frightens you the most! The LDS is growing so fast, that it is literally taking away funds from your own pocket. That is what it truly is about. I'm here to say that the majority of those who have been to your blog never come back. Why? Because you truly are a bigot, and we can all see right through you. I know that I will never be back. But I will pray for you.
Here is my reply --
You are such a bigot that it simply amazes me in this day and age...why? Definition of a bigot is one who is intolerant of another persons beliefs.
Okay, maybe so. But as a Christian, I do not have to tolerate a religion that is not a Christian but CLAIMS to be. I do not want people to go to hell.
Because you seem to single out and attack only one church. Why?
Actually, if you read all of my posts, you will see that I pick on Christian churches as well as mormons. I am against ANY church that claims to be Christian but does not follow biblical guidelines.
Because you're afraid...and because you're ignorant.
Afraid? Not afraid of anything since I have Christ in my life.
You live inside the four walls of your glass cathedral and lap up every lie you're told with hardly ever giving an honest moment of individual thought to any of it.
No one told me any lies other than the actual church that I mention in this post. I was a member of the LDS church and I do know EXACTLY what they teach. I can back up every comment with Mormon doctrine. Plus, I am not in a four wall, glass cathedral.
You're so busy attacking the beliefs of others that you gloss over or outright ignore the gaping holes in your own.
And yet, you provide no Scripture to back up what you are saying. I would be happy to dialogue with you on the false teachings of mormonism. I will also be happy to share with you biblical Scripture to back it all up.
In spite of all this, the LDS church continues to grow. And THAT is what frightens you the most!
Numbers do not validate anything other than many people are being led astray. Jesus said that few will enter the gates of heaven.
The LDS is growing so fast, that it is literally taking away funds from your own pocket. That is what it truly is about.
They are not taking a single cent out of my pocket. I am an evangelist and not behind the pulpit of a church. My goal is to reach the lost the way Jesus did.
I'm here to say that the majority of those who have been to your blog never come back.
Wrong!! I am able to keep track of who is visiting my blog. And you have no idea of the response I get. All Christians have been very supportive and I have Mormon friends who read the blog to and are investigating the claims I am making. That is all I ask you to do. Investigate the claims and see for yourself if they are true. I do not want you to go to hell.
Why? Because you truly are a bigot, and we can all see right through you.
I am a concerned Christian that truly cares about my mormon friends. I want them to be saved.
I know that I will never be back. But I will pray for you.
That is fine. I will be praying for you too.
As anyone can see, attacks such as this one show a lack of reasoning. Mormons do not want to face the facts of Scripture. They turn to name calling in some cases. I pray that if there are other mormons reading this (and I know there are), that you will read all of the blogs. Read Mormo and the Mormons, 33 things a Mormon will not say to you, and Pastors beware and Mormonism Taught.
Dec. 6, 2007
"If I am fortunate to become your president, I will serve no one religion, no one group, no one cause and no one interest. A president must serve only the common cause of the people of the United States," Romney said a crowd of 400 to 500 people at the George H.W. Bush Library at Texas A&M University.
Do you suppose that King David would have said that? Why not serve your beliefs? If a person is going to go contrary to his beliefs, then his beliefs are worthless.
'I Believe in My Mormon Faith'
With some voters suggesting they have qualms about a Mormon president, Romney said he shares "moral convictions" with Americans of all faiths.
If he believes in his Mormon faith, then why would he share moral convictions with all faiths? The Mormon church teaches that all religions are wrong! That they were all apostate. That was supposedly the reason why Joseph Smith was told to begin the new church.
Demystifying the Mormon Faith"I believe in my Mormon faith and I endeavor to live by it," Romney said. "My faith is the faith of my fathers. I will be true to them and to my beliefs."
and yet, one of the first comments he makes is "I will serve no one religion." If he is really going to be true to his fathers and to his beliefs, then by definition, he MUST serve his religion.
Nonetheless, he said his faith doesn't define his candidacy.
"A person should not be elected because of his faith, nor should he be rejected because of his faith." Romney said.
I can agree that a person should not be elected just because of his faith. There are many self-proclaiming Christians out there who cannot be trusted. But as far as being rejected "because" of his faith, sure, we have the right to do that. He is in a cult. Would we want David Koresh (sp?) if he were still alive to run for president. No way! We have to realize that little children look up to the President of the United States, and to have a Mormon in the White House would give validation to his religion (validation that the Mormon religion so desperately wants!). As Christians, we have a responsibility to watch out to make sure that people are not being led astray.
"Let me assure you that no authorities of my church, or of any other church for that matter, will ever exert influence on presidential decisions. Their authority is theirs, within the province of church affairs, and it ends where the affairs of the nation begin," Romney said.
As a Christian, you will not have a chance to influence Mitt on decisions regarding abortion (which he has flip-flopped on)
I don't know about you, but "my" God is sovereign! And as far as the affairs of the nation is concerned (no, I am not talking about the Bill Clinton affair!) God should be the ruling force. Now, more than ever before, our nation is in need of God leading the way! (oh, wait, Mitt thinks he is going to be a god someday! uh oh!)
Romney Invokes Founding Fathers
He decried those who would remove from public life "any acknowledgment of God," and he said that "during the holiday season, nativity scenes and menorahs should be welcome in our public places."
Wait a minute, didn't he say that his religion would play no part in government?
Romney took a hard line on questions about the doctrines of his religion, stating, "There are some who would have a presidential candidate describe and explain his church's distinctive doctrines. To do so would enable the very religious test the founders prohibited in the Constitution."
For the Romney-friendly audience, the most enthusiastic response came when Romney praised the founding fathers: "And so together they prayed, and together they fought, and together, by the grace of God they founded this great nation."
The difference is this...
Jesus is the Son of God and Jesus IS God. Jesus is not a brother of Lucifer as Mormons teach!
Romney: 'No Candidate Should Become a Spokesman for His Faith'
While Romney had underscored that he's "not gonna be giving a JFK speech," some of the speech seemed to echo the sentiment laid down by President Kennedy, and Presidents Lincoln and Jefferson before him.
But we should stand up for what we believe in. Our lives should be a living testimony of Jesus living within us. Again, it is not the brother of Lucifer living within us. It is God!
"When I place my hand on the Bible and take the oath of office, that oath becomes my highest promise to God," Romney said.
Hey Mitt, is that only if the Bible is interpreted correctly (which Mormons would teach that they are the only ones able to properly interpret it!)
As he has done many times before on the stump, Romney reiterated that "no candidate should become a spokesman for his faith. For if he becomes president he will need the prayers of the people of all faiths."
This just goes to show you that he does not know the Bible at all. Because God does not hear the prayers of the unrighteous and the unbelievers!
Notably, Romney stated today that his "church's beliefs about Christ may not all be the same as those of other faiths."
MAY not be the same. He knows better than to say that. According to his own religion, all religions are apostate. The Jesus of the Bible is not a created being. He was not born by an angel having actual intercourse with Mary. He knows that HIS church teaches that Jesus and Lucifer were brothers. Mitt is lying or is not at all familiar with his own church teachings. Since he was a Bishop in the church, I would have to conclude that he is most likely lying! We do not need that in the White House leading our country!
While not contradictory, Romney has previously focused on his claim that religions in American flow from the same "Judeo-Christian" tradition, rather than cite the differences of his church.
Again, NO! This is not from the same Judeo-Christian tradition. It is not even close.
Some criticized Romney for trying to tie his Mormon religion too closely to that of evangelicals and other Christians.
Of course, he wants to be elected President of the United States. without the support of Christians he will not be able to do it.
Romney also sought to emphasize the "nation's symphony of faith," and assured "any believer in religious freedom, any person who has knelt in prayer to the Almighty, has a friend and ally in me."
Any person who has knelt in prayer to the Almighty (Muslims??) Or is he trying to be like Bill Hybels, Rick Warren and many others who have signed the contract with the Muslims apologizing to them.
Romney's campaign has claimed for months that if he was going to give a speech, he likely wouldn't do so until after the primaries should he gain the nomination.
While the campaign vehemently denies there is any connection, the most significant change in the Republican field in the last two weeks is certainly the rise of former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee in Iowa, where a recent ABC News poll showed Huckabee tied for first with Romney.
Huckabee, a Baptist minister, also recently released a new television ad in Iowa touting himself as a "Christian leader," putting the issue of religion front and center in the earliest of the early states.
In a subtle jab, Romney said Monday that, "I think that a candidate or a president that tried to make his religion a defining a feature of his campaign or of his term in office would tend to divide the nation rather than bring us together."
The nation would become divided if the President turns out to be something other than what he portrayed himself to be during the primaries. As Mitt worries about his faith being "against" him, he is upset that Huckabee is BOLD in proclaiming his faith!
Whether related or not, the speech certainly comes at the moment Romney has clearly lost momentum in Iowa, failing to capture supporters after Sen. Sam Brownback's departure from the race and draw those conservative voters disappointed in former Sen. Fred Thompson's campaign.
Faith on the '08 Trail
Much has been made of Romney's Mormon religion throughout the campaign. While reporters covered the topic extensively, his faith was also frequently questioned on the campaign trail.
Before his presidential campaign even officially began, Romney told ABC News' Terry Moran in January that he thought "the American people respect individuals of faith," and that "when you take the oath of office, your highest responsibility is to follow the Constitution and the rule of law."
People do have respect for any person who truly believes in something with a passion. But when push comes to shove, a (true-Bible-believing) Christian will not support a cult member.
Soon after, a February ABC News/Washington Post poll found that a third of Americans were less likely to vote for a candidate who was Mormon.
When Romney surprised the Republican field by posting a whopping $20.1 million in first-quarter fundraising, many noted that Romney's second-highest fundraising state was Mormon-dominated Utah.
Does this surprise you?
It's also been reported that Romney's top fundraising zip code is 84604 — Provo, Utah, the home of the most notable Mormon school, Brigham Young University.
Does this surprise you? And he tells you that his religion will have no influence on America?? You can bet his own church/religion has other ideas about that!
Despite Romney's rising to lead in the Iowa polls by early August, the question of "the speech" remained. Romney told The Associated Press in July that it was "more likely than not" that he would give a speech at some point.
He's got the flip-flopping down to a science!
On Nov. 10, Romney was speaking at a house party in Holderness, N.H., when he admitted that he "liked the idea" of giving a "special speech" on his religion, but that "the political advisers tell me, 'No, no, no, its not a good idea — draws too much attention to that issue alone.' But I sorta like the idea anyway, and will probably do it at some point."
Romney tried to downplay his comments, even going so far as to say, "there's no news on this," but speculation continued.
Wouldn't it be interesting to see how many of his advisers are Mormons??
Though his faith remains a serious topic for Romney, and a serious issue for some Republican voters, Romney has also made a point of making light of the prejudice against the Mormon faith throughout his campaign.
While speaking at the Republican Jewish Coalition in Washington in October, Romney asked why the Mormon religion "scares people so badly." Romney quipped, "I'm probably the wrong guy to ask. But my neighbors might know."
One of the stigmas attached to the Mormon religion is the practice of polygamy, which the church forbade in 1890. At a campaign stop in Laconia, N.H., last month, Romney was speaking on the importance of his family when he said, "I love my wife and my five sons and their five wives."
Romney stopped, and smirking, added, "Wait a second. Let me clarify that. They each have one."
Yeah, that's a funny one. But what about the fact that Joseph Smith and Brigham Young both had many wives and some of them were little girls??? Is that funny?
You want more information on Mormonism? go to: http://time2changechurches.blogspot.com/2007/11/33-facts-mormons-wont-tell-you-when.html
and also go to:
http://time2changechurches.blogspot.com/2007/11/mormo-and-mormons.html
I am not trying to tell people who to vote for. In America, we have the freedom to vote for whomever we want. I am just wanting to inform people who do not know about Mormonism. I didn't know a thing about it until I actually got into Mormonism. After three years, I got out. I am very well learned on the teachings of Joseph Smith Jr, Brigham Young and the apostles. I am very familiar with the Doctrine and Covenants, Pearl of Great Price, The Book of Mormon, and the Ensign. I am very familiar with the teachings of the Apostles (so I do not take things "out of context") but the most important thing that I am familiar with is this...
The Bible -- The Word of God -- The innerancy of Scripture
Below is a copy of a comment that a mormon sent me on one of my other posts:
You are such a bigot that it simply amazes me in this day and age...why? Because you seem to single out and attack only one church. Why? Because you're afraid...and because you're ignorant. You live inside the four walls of your glass cathedral and lap up every lie you're told with hardly ever giving an honest moment of individual thought to any of it. You're so busy attacking the beliefs of others that you gloss over or outright ignore the gaping holes in your own. In spite of all this, the LDS church continues to grow. And THAT is what frightens you the most! The LDS is growing so fast, that it is literally taking away funds from your own pocket. That is what it truly is about. I'm here to say that the majority of those who have been to your blog never come back. Why? Because you truly are a bigot, and we can all see right through you. I know that I will never be back. But I will pray for you.
Here is my reply --
You are such a bigot that it simply amazes me in this day and age...why? Definition of a bigot is one who is intolerant of another persons beliefs.
Okay, maybe so. But as a Christian, I do not have to tolerate a religion that is not a Christian but CLAIMS to be. I do not want people to go to hell.
Because you seem to single out and attack only one church. Why?
Actually, if you read all of my posts, you will see that I pick on Christian churches as well as mormons. I am against ANY church that claims to be Christian but does not follow biblical guidelines.
Because you're afraid...and because you're ignorant.
Afraid? Not afraid of anything since I have Christ in my life.
You live inside the four walls of your glass cathedral and lap up every lie you're told with hardly ever giving an honest moment of individual thought to any of it.
No one told me any lies other than the actual church that I mention in this post. I was a member of the LDS church and I do know EXACTLY what they teach. I can back up every comment with Mormon doctrine. Plus, I am not in a four wall, glass cathedral.
You're so busy attacking the beliefs of others that you gloss over or outright ignore the gaping holes in your own.
And yet, you provide no Scripture to back up what you are saying. I would be happy to dialogue with you on the false teachings of mormonism. I will also be happy to share with you biblical Scripture to back it all up.
In spite of all this, the LDS church continues to grow. And THAT is what frightens you the most!
Numbers do not validate anything other than many people are being led astray. Jesus said that few will enter the gates of heaven.
The LDS is growing so fast, that it is literally taking away funds from your own pocket. That is what it truly is about.
They are not taking a single cent out of my pocket. I am an evangelist and not behind the pulpit of a church. My goal is to reach the lost the way Jesus did.
I'm here to say that the majority of those who have been to your blog never come back.
Wrong!! I am able to keep track of who is visiting my blog. And you have no idea of the response I get. All Christians have been very supportive and I have Mormon friends who read the blog to and are investigating the claims I am making. That is all I ask you to do. Investigate the claims and see for yourself if they are true. I do not want you to go to hell.
Why? Because you truly are a bigot, and we can all see right through you.
I am a concerned Christian that truly cares about my mormon friends. I want them to be saved.
I know that I will never be back. But I will pray for you.
That is fine. I will be praying for you too.
As anyone can see, attacks such as this one show a lack of reasoning. Mormons do not want to face the facts of Scripture. They turn to name calling in some cases. I pray that if there are other mormons reading this (and I know there are), that you will read all of the blogs. Read Mormo and the Mormons, 33 things a Mormon will not say to you, and Pastors beware and Mormonism Taught.
Sunday, November 25, 2007
Remember my chains!

"Remember my chains" is one line of Scripture that has always intrigued me. There is something so simple and yet so powerful in that one line that has a way of challenging me and encouraging me at the same time. It is part of a personal plea from Paul in the final part of his letter to the Colossians.
When you go through difficult times...
Remember my chains.
When life seems to be bringing you down...
Remember my chains.
When you are not sure what the future holds...
Remember my chains!
Check this out ~~
I grew up as a church-going young child (I used to call myself a Christian but until recently, I have changed my thoughts on that!). When I was 14 years old, my parents gave me the option of going to church or staying home. I decided to stay home! I went the next 14 years, not going to church, but always feeling like I was going to heaven based on the fact that I "believed" in Jesus. When I was about 25 years old, I was working at Hardee's Restaurant as a manager. I was not making much money so I decided to take the exam to get hired by the US Postal Service as a mailman. I went to take the test and prior to the actual exam they let you take a practice exam. I took that exam and completely bombed on it. I didn't get any of the answers right! They then took that exam away from us and gave us two more minutes to study and practice. When it came time for the actual exam, I was able to go through the whole thing and I scored a 100% on it! I was the only one to get a perfect score. I was at the top of the list to be hired. I waited and waited and nothing was happening. After about a year I decided to go back to school. I went over to Bradley University to see about getting into mechanical engineering. I was accepted to attend there. I was supposed to put my deposit down for my dorm on August 31, 1985. On Aug 30th, I received a phone call from the Post Office saying I had been hired. I had to make a decision. Do I take the government job with the good pay or do I go to school for four years and make even more money down the road. I took the security of the Post Office job! After spending a year as a part-time carrier I decided to transfer to Arizona for an opportunity to work full-time. I went to work in South Phoenix and was living in Tempe, Az. I didn't know anyone out there so I got involved in coaching little league baseball. My second year out there, I met Cole (an 11 year old boy). He asked me if I could take him, his older sister and his little brother to church because his parents were going to be out of town. I said I would. When I went to church, everyone treated me so nice and I decided to join the church. It was a Mormon Church. I knew nothing about that religion. They said words that seemed to be Christian. I had heard about salvation, Jesus, God, the Trinity, Holy Spirit. My knowledge was only that of a 14 yr old. I got completely involved in the church. I ended up being the Youth secretary in charge of finances for youth camps. I read my Book of Mormon faithfully every day. I abstained from drinking Pepsi (I cheated some times!!) I was in the church for three years. I started having some questions about what they were teaching. Some things did not make sense. How could God discriminate against people with dark skin? That didn't sound like the God I grew up with. Common sense told me that man did not live on the moon and on the sun (even though that is what was taught by Joseph Smith and Brigham Young). I did not believe that I could be a god myself. I was single and was made to feel like I was less of a person because I was not married and would not be able to have spirit children when I die. (I will say that Cole and his family always loved me even though I was not a whole-hearted mormon). On my third year in Mormonism, me and Cole and his family all went to the Temple in Mesa to watch an Easter pageant. There was a group of concerned-christians there handing out gospel tracts on mormonism. As soon as it hit my hand, Cole's mom grabbed it from me and said, "don't look at that, it is from the devil." I never saw what it said. Later that year, around the end of the first week of October 1990, my heart rate went down to 26 beats per minute. It stayed that way for six weeks! I went to the hospital and to doctors and specialists and none of them could tell me what was happening to me. They all said I was the healthiest dying person they had ever seen. I was sleeping 17 hours everyday! Six weeks of sleeping 17 hours each and every day! My heart, my lungs, my brain (debatable!), my blood were all excellent. They could find nothing wrong with me. The mormon elders would come over every night and lay hands on me and pray ~~ "in the name of Joseph Smith and Jesus Christ, we heal you." They would repeat that every single night. Nothing worked! I felt like I was going to die. It finally got to the point where I got so scared and frustrated that I threw my Book of Mormon down on the floor and cried out to Jesus to save me. The very next day, I woke up completely healed. That was on Thanksgiving Day of 1990! My heart has been normal ever since that time. Doctor's never did figure out what was wrong with me. So the next day, I went to a Christian bookstore. It was the first time I had been in one, and what did I see under the heading of "Cults"? Mormonism!! I bought every book I could lay my hands on. For the first time since joining the Mormon church, I was able to read Scripture and it all came alive to me. I could see where Joseph Smith had twisted the truths of the Bible. I decided to go to a United Methodist Church (I grew up in the UMC). I finally was in a service that I remembered from my childhood. As the next baseball season started, I met a boy on my team and I ended up dating his mom. We were engaged to be married in November of 1991 (I know, kind of quick, but I had been single so long!). In October of 1991, I receive a phone call from Rey (the boy on the team) and he said to me -- "he's back!" It seems her exboyfriend had moved back in with her and they were sleeping together. I asked her about it and she said she didn't think it was any of my business. I kind of disagreed with her! I called the wedding off. I was mad at her and at women in general. I was a new christian and this was not supposed to happen to me. I held on to this pain for over a month and a half. Finally in January of 1992, I gave all of my pain over to God and asked him to bring someone else into my life. In October of 1992, he did. I met my son. He was on my mail route as I was delivering mail. He had just turned 9 years old. It is a long story but a wonderful story. Around this time, I had an exposed nerve on my wisdom tooth. The pain was more than you can even imagine. I was bouncing off of the walls. I got in my car at 4am and started driving. Not knowing where I was going, I was screaming at God asking him to stop the pain. I was yelling at Him for not helping me. I finally pulled over at a phone booth and looked up dentists in the phone book. I found one that was just one mile down the road. I sat in the car still screaming at God because it seemed as though the pain was getting worse. When I was finally able to open my eyes enough to see, I drove to the dentist office. I pulled into the empty parking lot of the dentist office. There was one light on in the building. I walked up to the building and was able to walk inside. I found the doctor's name on the board and saw he was up on the second floor. I took the elevator up and as it opened up, it opened up to the room with the light on. The dentist was sitting in his chair drinking coffee and reading the newspaper at 4:30am in the morning! I banged on the door and he let me in. He took care of me and as I was leaving, i asked him why he was there so early in the morning. He said his wife's car broke down the night before and she had to take his car out of town so she dropped him off four hours early so she could leave. Here just one mile earlier, I was screaming at God and complaining that He wasn't helping me and yet, the night before, he had already put into motion events that would take care of my need at the time I needed it most! Remember my chains! As for the boy on my route -- I ended up adopting him as a single man and we moved from Arizona to Illinois. I am white and he is Hispanic and I love him with all my heart. He is now 24 years old and has two little boys (3 yrs and a 5 month old). I love them and his wife, Sarah. They are such a blessing to me. After moving back to Illinois, I got into the ministry. I felt God was calling me. I went back as a student pastor. I had to finish my associates degree while working at a church. I met a girl who was just out of high school. She was very depressed and almost suicidal. We became friends. After lots of phone conversations she finally got her life back on track. One month before I started in the ministry, my dad died suddenly. He was my very first funeral that I ever did. As a pastor, I told a lot of jokes. Let me rephrase that, I told way too many jokes behind the pulpit followed by way too many stories. I had a lady come up to me and ask me if I was going to talk about homosexuality. I said I wasn't. She asked me not to because her son was visiting at our church that day and she did not want to offend him. I didn't say a word about it in the service. I never saw the young man again. I lost my chance to witness properly to him about the need to repent of his sins. I never felt right about that. Remember my chains. After a couple of years, we moved to a larger church. Again, I was telling my jokes (just had to be funny!). During this whole time of my ministry, I was an unrepentant sinner. I was living a lie. I did not tell people about God's Law and the need to repent of their sins. I only gave the "feel good" messages. I can honestly tell you that I was not saved as a pastor. I was the equivalent of an emergent pastor, of a Rick Warren or Bill Hybel type of pastor. I had to entertain the masses! Look at how popular I can be!!!! I was about to serve a new church in Iowa when my son and I decided to move back to Galesburg, IL to visit my mom. She was not doing well. The car was not running, the yard had not been mowed for over 7 weeks, and her plumbing was messed up. I called the church and told them that I was going to take care of my mom. I still was not saved but was still calling myself a solid christian because I believed in Jesus (this time around, now that I was not a mormon!). My first day on the job at a local grocery store was 9/11/01. The tragic events of that day will be remembered forever. When I went to work, everyone was in a state of shock. I was able to minister to people about God's love. I went through some very difficult times in my life during the following years. By living a life that had no repentance, I was destined to fall apart. I must have hit rock bottom. I felt unloved by the world and desperately wanted to get that feeling back. I attended church over the next few years and saw things that bothered me. I could see my "feel good" messages were not working. I didn't feel good. Remember my chains! Finally, after hitting rock bottom, I somehow came across Way of the Master and heard a recording of Hell's Best Kept Secret. That changed my life forever. For the first time in my life, I could see just how exceedingly sinful I really was and that I was headed for hell. I was a pastor that was headed for hell. I was a christian that was headed for hell. I was a very good guy that was headed for hell. God's law was preached. I was a liar, a thief, an adulterer and on top of that, I was also a covetous person, a murderer (hate), a person that dishonored my parents. I had not put God first in my life, I worshiped a god that was not the God of the Bible (I always figured that God would not send me to hell for my sins), I blasphemed the name of the Lord by being a terrible example of a Christian to my family and I never kept the Sabbath Day holy. I broke all ten of the Commandments. There was no way out, I was headed for hell. I cried when I finally "got it" that Jesus completely paid the price by dying on the cross for my sins. I finally repented of my sins. truly repented of my sins. I still sin once in a while, but the change is so drastic from where I used to be it is unreal. I now get out and seek to reach the lost. I have witnessed to over 350 people since the beginning of the year. I plan to more than double that next year. Remember my chains!
Life is finally good. I did a revival this past October and was totally persecuted by pretty much every church and even within my own church that I was attending. I count it as joy. Satan never had to worry about me when I was a pastor because I was not doing anything to bring people to God. I was creating false converts. Now that Satan is shooting his arrows at me, I can see that he is worried about me now. I count that as a tremendous joy! Remember my chains. Why did I write this long personal story? I want you to look back on your own life. Can you see where God opened and closed doors to you? Can you see any growth in your spiritual life? Can you see Satan actively going after you? Is Satan worried about the works you do for Christ sake? Remember my chains and remember your own chains. God is in control. He will not lose any of his children. He will gather them to himself! Rejoice in the truth of God's Word. Rejoice in His promises. Remember His chains!
Saturday, November 24, 2007
The Ten Suggestions...

The words -- Ten Commandments, sounds like such harsh words, so judgmental! Maybe we need to soften it a little bit by calling it the Ten Suggestions. And while we are at it, lets rephrase some of the "suggestions."
1. God loves you, so why won't you take some time to love Him back?
2. God will help you "prosper" so go to church and "make some money!" but don't bow down to any wooden idols, okay? but if you want to be a god, you can!! (just ask Tom Cruise or any other scientologist or Mormon)
3. God loves you, won't you please stop using His name as a cuss word? Please????
4. God created the world in six days! Isn't that awesome? You need to work six days too, okay?
5. God loves you and if your parents are two homosexuals or two lesbians, that's okay, because all that matters is that they love you like God loves you and you need to love them too.
6. Now put that gun down. we don't want to kill anyone. If you hate someone, just try to put yourself in their shoes for a second. Good boy!!
7. Just because you see people having sex on TV is no reason for you to do it. If you see people making a million dollars selling ice cream, would you do it too?
8. If someone takes something that is yours, just do an OJ and go get it back! But do it lovingly!
9. We aren't supposed to tell lies, okay?
10. If you want what your neighbor has, all you have to do is pray about it and God will give it to you!
UUUUUGGGGGHHHHHHH!!!!!!
It makes me sick to hear the way today's contemporary church has fallen apart! We don't want people to feel offended so we sugar-coat God's Word. We are not doing anyone a favor by doing that. I love some of my Mormon friends. It kills me to think that they are headed to hell because they are following a Jesus that is not the Jesus of the Bible. They are being led astray by false teaching and they are blinded by the truth. Please, please, please -- Chris B, Kim, Cole, and Josh and Van, I pray that your eyes be opened to what Scripture says. Please read my blogs on Mormonism and do not let your lifetime in the LDS Church cloud your judgment. I love you all so much and I do not want to see you head to hell. Please also, do not look at today's contemporary church and feel that is an example of what Joseph Smith said when he said "all" churches were apostate. God's Word tells us that His Word will live on forever and will NEVER fail. There are many good churches and many good Godly preachers (such as John MacArthur), but unfortunately, Satan has infiltrated the contemporary church with his lies (much the same way he has been involved in Mormonism). You want the truth? Look below...
The Ten Commandments
1. You shall have no other god's before me (this does not say that there actually are "other god's" it just means don't have something that takes His place)
2. You shall not make for yourself any graven image (you show not bow down to false idols - much the way Catholics worship Mary and the Pope. Much the way Mormons worship Joseph Smith)
3. You shall not take the Lord's Name in vain (you shall not blaspheme the name of God. You shall not, in God's Name, proclaim another gospel and call it Christianity!)
4. You shall remember the Sabbath Day to keep it holy (I know how LDS people keep Sundays holy, but if you are worshiping a god that is not of the Bible, you are wasting your time on who you give worship too)
5. You shall honor your father and your mother (only to the point that it does not contradict the Bible. Jesus said that if you are not willing to leave your father and your mother for His sake, then you are not worthy to enter heaven!)
6. You shall not kill (Jesus said that to hate is as bad as murder. There are Christians and Mormons both who are guilty of this one. They hate the other group.)
7. You shall not commit adultery (Jesus said that anyone who looks with lust is guilty of adultery in their heart. With the pressure of women to make it to heaven as eternally pregnant women, they have to rely on a temple worthy man to get them to heaven. Guys are looking to women because it is important for them to sire as many children as possible to be pleasing to God)
8. You shall not steal (don't take that which is not yours)
9. You shall not lie (or bear false testimony)
10. You shall not covet (or desire what your neighbor has)
The Bible tells us that no one has kept the first of the Ten Commandments and that we are guilty of breaking all of the commandments if we break just one of them. You are headed for hell by breaking His Commandments. What do you need to do to go to heaven? It is not have several babies (that is "works" based! salvation is a free gift), it is not do temple work (that is also "works" based!), it is not tithing (again, "works" based), it is not going to church ("works" based), it is not abstaining from certain foods ("works"). It is solely putting your trust and faith in Jesus Christ to save you. Repent and be obedient to His Word as you have been saved by grace and not of works. You might say that to repent is to do "works." No, when you are saved, you are given the "fruit of repentance." Again, I ask that you read the part of Mormo and the Mormons and also the 33 things mormons won't tell you. If you want me to provide you with documentation on what I am saying, I will. It will come straight from the Doctrine and Covenants (not taken out of context but shown in its entirety) as well as out of The Ensign, the Book of Mormon and most importantly THE HOLY BIBLE. The Bible is correct and is translated correctly as being God's Word. When you only look at one line of Scripture and try to make it mean something that it doesn't, you are defiling the Word of God. You are creating a God to suite your needs (which is breaking the 2nd of the Ten Commandments). I have had someone tell me that the 33 things were all lies and that I was a liar. You know me well enough to know that what I am saying is true. For all of the people around the world who are reading this...
Please keep our Mormon friends in your prayers. Please keep our churches in your prayers as too many of them have fallen away from biblical preaching. And please, get out of your house today and go and reach the lost the way Jesus did -- PROCLAIM THE TRUE GOSPEL!!
There is only ONE WAY to heaven and that is through the shed blood of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ! Sorry, Oprah, you are headed to hell if you don't acknowledge your sins to God and accept Jesus as your Lord and Savior. Sorry, Tom, you are headed to hell if you don't put aside your own theology and realize that Jesus is the Word of God made flesh.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)

