CNN's view of prophecy within "Mormonism"


Vort
 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest Scott
8 minutes ago, Vort said:

I do not disagree with you.

That said, I can see why this might be done. Even though so-called "Christian" sects have heaped abuse and hatred on our heads, they haven't normally gone much further than nasty talk. (At least not in the last 100+ years.) And most of that nastiness has come from a relatively few folks who have dedicated themselves to combating "cults", as they define them. In contrast, the CNNs of the world do not seek merely to belittle our religion; they seek to curtail our liberties. When everyone hates you but some people are less abusive than others, you tend to look at the less abusive as being more friendly. (Yes, that's hyperbole, but I think it captures the essence of what's going on.)

I don't think I'd say that is just a little nasty talk.   Some conservative Christians have actively tried to stop temple construction, for example.   While some people wanted to stop temple construction due to rational reasons such as traffic or loss of tax revenue, some churches have made attempts to stop temple construction in certain cases.  The Billings Montana temple is an example.  There were people attempting to curtail the temple construction due to what I would consider to be valid concerns (property values, traffic, etc.), but there were also churches who also tried to curtail it that went beyond simple protest, but trying to gain favor from local politicians.

Something similar happened with the temple at Carmel Indiana as well.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Scott
20 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

I’m also going to put my mod hat on for just a moment and note that while I get the point some are trying to make in showing that a lot of mainstream Christians really don’t like us—this forum does have rules about linking to or quoting anti-Mormon material, even if it’s merely in a demonstrative “look-what-people-are-saying-about-us!” context.  I would respectfully invite all parties to consider their comments in this thread to date, and edit as they deem appropriate.

It's hard to show the point I was making without showing specific examples, but I will find a way to edit the comments while still trying to get the point across.

I put them in white ink so they are invisible on the forum unless someone copies and pastes them.   Would this be an acceptable compromise?   If not, you're the moderator and I will delete or edit anything you wish to see edited further.   

PS, I just looked at the rules and while your mod hat is on, what is your stance on the below rule?

Third Hour will allow political discussion, also long as all posts remain neutral with respect to partisan politics and candidate campaigns for public office. You may not use the site to show support, endorse, oppose or sanction any candidate. In addition, all posts must be respectful and sensitive to readers of all political beliefs and backgrounds. Any post that violates any of the above conditions will be dealt with according to the consequences of breaking the rules.

Edited by Scott
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Mores
19 minutes ago, Scott said:

Just out of curiosity, can you what common ground we should try to find with the kinds of things conservative Christians are saying about our Church?

How about that we believe that

  • Jesus Christ was divine. 
  • He was born of a virgin mother. 
  • He lived a perfect life. 
  • He performed the Atonement. 
  • He died and rose again as a resurrected being. 
  • And now he reigns as King of Kings and Lord of Lords.
19 minutes ago, Scott said:

This is directly cut and pasted from a sermon given by James Melton, a pastor for the Bible Baptist Church.

Who in the Church has "sucked up to" James Melton?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Mores
43 minutes ago, Scott said:

I'm not talking about our Church itself or its leaders, but there are a lot of LDS members who completely ignore the blatant misrepresentations made by conservative christian groups and churches while taking issue with something much less serious from an atheist or CNN, for example. 

Again, this doesn't really answer the "suck up" question.

But regarding the comparison between CNN and Baptists:  Baptists are another faith.  They have an agenda they are supposed to espouse.  They're performing their purported purpose.  And by the 11th article of faith, we accept that.

CNN is supposed to be about FACTS, not opinion, interpretation, or characterization.  and it certainly shouldn't be about lies.  The thing that irks me most about CNN is that they are the one news network who tries to put on the face of neutrality, while being absurdly biased.  Fox claims "fair and balanced".  They don't say unbiased.  The way they are balanced is that they often have people on both sides of an argument on the show to discuss their positions.  When does CNN do that?  I believe there is about a 10:1 ratio of this practice in Fox's favor.

Other networks and individuals make no bones about it.  They proudly wear the liberal/conservative label.  They specifically gear their programs as commentary, not news.

That is why CNN tends to hold a special place of disappointment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Scott said:

It's hard to show the point I was making without showing specific examples, but I will find a way to edit the comments while still trying to get the point across.

I put them in white ink so they are invisible on the forum unless someone copies and pastes them.   Would this be an acceptable compromise?   If not, you're the moderator and I will delete or edit anything you wish to see edited further.   

PS, I just looked at the rules and while your mod hat is on, what is your stance on the below rule?

Third Hour will allow political discussion, also long as all posts remain neutral with respect to partisan politics and candidate campaigns for public office. You may not use the site to show support, endorse, oppose or sanction any candidate. In addition, all posts must be respectful and sensitive to readers of all political beliefs and backgrounds. Any post that violates any of the above conditions will be dealt with according to the consequences of breaking the rules.

Scott, I appreciate the questions.  I am just one of several mods; we’ll follow up via PM.  :)  

On political discussion—I believe a couple years ago there was a slight relaxation of that rule that was discussed by @pam on the main forum; but we may not have gotten around to actually updating the site rules.  I’ll invite Pam to weigh in and tell me if I’m wrong.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Scott
19 minutes ago, Mores said:

 

 

19 minutes ago, Mores said:

How about that we believe that

  • Jesus Christ was divine. 

Many (perhaps most) conservative Christian groups/Churches tell everyone that we do not believe that Christ was divine.  

Quote
  • He was born of a virgin mother. 

Many (perhaps most) conservative Christian groups/Churches tell everyone that we do not believe that Christ was born a virgin.  They say that we believe that God the Father had sex with Mary and that's how Christ was born.

Quote
  •  
  • He performed the Atonement. 

No other churches I know of believe that Christ atoned in Garden of Gasthemene and many believe that it is blasphemous to believe that.

Quote
  • He died and rose again as a resurrected being. 
  • And now he reigns as King of Kings and Lord of Lords.

Yes, that is some very good common ground. 

Quote

Who in the Church has "sucked up to" James Melton?

James Melton was merely an example.   Those who I am referring to only have to suck up to those who support the kinds of things James Melton is saying.  This is probably most Conservative Christian groups and Churches.   Can you find even one that will even acknowledge that we are even Christian?  

 

Edited by Scott
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Mores
46 minutes ago, Scott said:

Many (perhaps most) conservative Christian groups/Churches tell everyone that we do not believe that Christ was divine.  

There is no common ground with lies.

46 minutes ago, Scott said:

Many (perhaps most) conservative Christian groups/Churches tell everyone that we do not believe that Christ was born a virgin.  They say that we believe that God the Father had sex with Mary and that's how Christ was born.

There is no common ground with lies.

46 minutes ago, Scott said:

No other churches I know of believe that Christ atoned in Garden of Gasthemene and many believe that it is blasphemous to believe that.

I specifically left Gethsemane out of the description because of that.  And you may not understand that the Atonement included the Cross as well.

46 minutes ago, Scott said:

Yes, that is some very good common ground. 

At least we're getting somewhere.

46 minutes ago, Scott said:

James Melton was merely an example.   Those who I am referring to only have to suck up to those who support the kinds of things James Melton is saying.  This is probably most Conservative Christian groups and Churches.   Can you find even one that will even acknowledge that we are even Christian?  

Yes, I can.  He's on this board.  His name is Prison Chaplain.

And you have yet to name anyone who is "kissing up" to anyone of these.  And you haven't even described what kissing up means in this context.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Scott
45 minutes ago, Mores said:

Yes, I can.  He's on this board.  His name is Prison Chaplain.

Prison Chaplain is not a conservative Christian group or conservative Christian church which is specifically what what I said in the phrase you are quoting.  What church does he belong to (if any) and what does his church teach about us?  Is he a conservative Christian (and I'm not talking politics)?  Maybe he can tune in.  I don't know; I'm just asking.  

Quote

And you have yet to name anyone who is "kissing up" to anyone of these.  And you haven't even described what kissing up means in this context.

I won't name any specific people, but I will name specific examples.  I'll go one step further and intentionally pick some examples from outside this forum so no one thinks that I am referring to them specifically.  I'll even use something not from a forum and will use a few FB examples.

This is an example of a meme shared by someone in our old ward (we moved, but we're still FB friends):

meme.jpg.e14fee85674667e38d5d1e7f20b082a0.jpg

Obviously it's a knock against liberals, but the same person is at the time sucking up to conservative Christians and apparently even calling herself one.   If that's not sucking up, I don't know what is.  I do have to wonder if she knows what the conservative Christians who she is (in my opinion) sucking up to say about our Church.  At least that's better than knowing it and ignoring it while knocking on the atheists who aren't the ones out spreading most of the falsehoods about our Church.  

The bishop's wife shared this one:

2131347724_lynne3.jpg.f9d59481ac7bf43d501ad300e3e6350d.jpg

The thing is that the same people who are saying these type of things are the same people who are attaching our church.
Robert 

Without using FB, and not referring to any person on the forum, where are all the post on this forum discussing Trump's faith adviser Robert Jeffress?  Maybe I missed them, but I only hear crickets.    I see a lot of posts about how atheists, liberals, or CNN is spreading all of these falsehoods against the church, but I don't see anything about Robert Jeffress, who for example, says a lot more nasty things about our church or members than those being discussed. 

Those are the kinds of things I am referring to.  If you haven't seen this, then you haven't been very active on the forum. 



 

Edited by Scott
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Scott
53 minutes ago, Mores said:

There is no common ground with lies.

I agree, and the things you listed which you listed as common ground which I pointed out are the same ones which the conservative Christians are claiming that we have no common ground on (such as the virgin birth or the divinity of Christ).  

PS, I do not dislike conservative Christians.   I am merely saying that when it comes to spreading falsehoods about our Church or misrepresenting our Church, they are the group or groups that are the most guilty.    They are also the groups that are seldom called out on this forum and other places, at least from what I have seen.

Using this very thread as an example, I see at least a fair amount of criticism towards CNN and the writer of the article (even though it seems pretty good considering it was written by a non-member), yet when something far worse is said by say a conservative Christian group, say for example that "Mormons believe that God impregnated Mary by sex", it always gets blown off.   Or so it seems to me.  

Edited by Scott
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I consider myself to be a conservative Christian.  

I don’t get overly political on my Facebook, but if I posted a meme defending conservative Christians—it wouldn’t be because I was trying to curry favor with my Baptist and Pentecostal friends.  It would be because I considered myself to be defending my own (broadly defined) faith community.  

Edited by Just_A_Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Scott
26 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

I consider myself to be a conservative Christian

Interesting.  Do you or do you just consider yourself to be both a conservative and a Christian or a conservative Christian?  They aren't the same thing.   Conservative Christian doesn't necessarily refer to politics, but the religion.   Christian right would be a better term for someone who is conservative politically and is a Christian.  

Generally a conservative Christian is one who believes that the Bible is the sole authority on matters of faith and that the Bible is inerrant.   Do you consider yourself in that category?

Generally, a liberal Christian is one who believes in a more modern approach to the Bible and traditional Christianity.  They don't always take it as 100% literal and many also believe that the Bible isn't inerrant, even though it is of God and inspired.  

 

Edited by Scott
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Scott said:

Interesting.  Do you or do you just consider yourself to be both a conservative and a Christian or a conservative Christian?  They aren't the same thing.   Conservative Christian doesn't necessarily refer to politics, but the religion.   Christian right would be a better term for someone who is conservative politically and is a Christian.  

Generally a conservative Christian is one who believes that the Bible is the sole authority on matters of faith and that the Bible is inerrant.   Do you consider yourself in that category?

Generally, a liberal Christian is one who believes in a more modern approach to the Bible and traditional Christianity.  They don't always take it as 100% literal and many also believe that the Bible isn't inerrant, even though it is of God and inspired.  

 

I'll answer this but just note that I'm not answering for JAG.  I'm answering for me.

When we hear conservative Christian, that usually means politically conservative and a Christian.  What you refer to as conservative Christian is usually referred to as Fundamentalist Christian - the sola scriptura folks - as opposed to Fundamentalist Mormon - the polygamy folks (NOT the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints).

JAG is a politically conservative Latter-day Saint Christian.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Scott
20 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

When we hear conservative Christian, that usually means politically conservative and a Christian. 

Anatess, maybe so, but is it correct?   You are big into the definitions of conservative and liberal.

Which is the correct definition of conservative Christianity?

Edited by Scott
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Scott said:

Anatess, maybe so, but is it correct?   You are big into the definitions of conservative and liberal.

Which is the correct definition of conservative Christianity?

The "correct definition" is irrelevant in the same manner that the "correct definition" of feminist is irrelevant or the "correct definition" of Anti-fascist is irrelevant or the "correct defintion" of liberalism/conservatism is irrelevant.  We are using the terms according to how it is understood by our general audience.

That is why, only 24% of Americans identify as feminists even as they believe in gender equality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Mores
1 hour ago, Scott said:

Prison Chaplain is not a conservative Christian group or conservative Christian church which is specifically what what I said in the phrase you are quoting.  What church does he belong to (if any) and what does his church teach about us?  Is he a conservative Christian (and I'm not talking politics)?  Maybe he can tune in.  I don't know; I'm just asking.  

Yes, he is.  He's an ordained minister in the AoG.  Therefore, he is an official representative of that faith.   Assembly of God is about as conservative as you can get.  You could make the argument that he is not the equivalent to an apostle in our church.  But he teaches what his faith teaches.  So, you can ask him.

I also have a friend who is a Methodist minister.  According to her, the hierarchy of the church has no statements calling us a cult or denigrating us in any way other than saying that we are a false church just the same as we call them a false church.

1 hour ago, Scott said:

Obviously it's a knock against liberals, but the same person is at the time sucking up to conservative Christians and apparently even calling herself one.   If that's not sucking up, I don't know what is. 

So, you're saying that calling yourself a Conservative Christian is "Sucking Up"?

I'm not going to go any further.  You've got to confirm or deny.  Because if that's what you're saying, then you're off in la-la land.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Scott said:

Interesting.  Do you or do you just consider yourself to be both a conservative and a Christian or a conservative Christian?  They aren't the same thing.   Conservative Christian doesn't necessarily refer to politics, but the religion.   Christian right would be a better term for someone who is conservative politically and is a Christian.  

Generally a conservative Christian is one who believes that the Bible is the sole authority on matters of faith and that the Bible is inerrant.   Do you consider yourself in that category?

Generally, a liberal Christian is one who believes in a more modern approach to the Bible and traditional Christianity.  They don't always take it as 100% literal and many also believe that the Bible isn't inerrant, even though it is of God and inspired.  

 

@anatess2 articulates my thoughts on this even better than I was going to.  Yes, I consider myself both conservative and Christian.  Additionally I consider myself a “conservative Christian” (which I would define as focusing on praxis) but not a “fundamentalist Christian” (which I view as being more interested in matters of theology/dogma). I oppose elective abortion, believe gay sex is a sinful and destructive activity meriting no especially sanction by government, support churches that endorse traditional family/gender roles, and think that the nation would be better off if we talked about God more in public fora (including in schools), and believe adherents of a given faith should change their conduct to conform to their faith’s ideals rather than the reverse.  When my progressive acquaintances make some statement about “conservative Christians”, and their oppressiveness of women/minorities/LGBTQ, and the general uselessness of their religions, and the prospect that “bigoted” churches should at least be taxed—they mean me, and they don’t usually care that I’m not a young-earth creationist.

Edited by Just_A_Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Scott
1 hour ago, anatess2 said:

We are using the terms according to how it is understood by our general audience.

So by "our general audience" you mean just those LDS members posting on our forum, correct?   I can promise you that you would be hard pressed to find another church who would call ours "conservative Christian".   I also made it clear farther back in the thread that I was not referring to politics.   If we aren't referring to politics, I assume you agree with me.      

Still, it seems moot point to this thread because I said that I am not referring to politics when referring to conservative Christianity.      

Edited by Scott
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Scott
1 hour ago, Mores said:

Yes, he is.  He's an ordained minister in the AoG.  Therefore, he is an official representative of that faith.   Assembly of God is about as conservative as you can get.  You could make the argument that he is not the equivalent to an apostle in our church.  But he teaches what his faith teaches.  So, you can ask him.

It is a good idea to ask him.

Anyway, I went to the official AoG website.   Although I have found nothing that says it is an official statement directly from their Church, there are many links to articles and various leaders saying that we are not Christian.   I can't find any that says that we are.

Here is one article on the official AoG website.  I think I can post it here because it isn't disparaging towards our church.   I also think that they are trying to be fair and not trying to misrepresent us, even if not all postitve:

http://pentecostalevangel.ag.org/Articles2002/4579_spencer.cfm

Here is the last statement in the article on the official AoG website:


In the final analysis, Mormonism is an original, invented religion, born of the mind of Joseph Smith, who is responsible for the spiritual seduction of millions of people. To the world, Mormonism sells itself as the friendly Christian church down the street, but in reality it is no closer to biblical Christianity than Hinduism or Islam.

Still, no harm, no foul.  They didn't misrepresent our beliefs, they merely stated their opinions on ours.  In my book, this is perfectly OK.  

Quote

I also have a friend who is a Methodist minister.  According to her, the hierarchy of the church has no statements calling us a cult or denigrating us in any way other than saying that we are a false church just the same as we call them a false church.

In this case, I can find official statements from Methodist denominations on our Church.  Again, in this case they are definitely trying to be fair towards our church.   They don't consider us to be Christian, but I don't see them as attacking us.   UMC has this link to some official statements and policies:

http://www.umc.org/what-we-believe/receive-guidelines-for-ministering-to-mormons-who-seek-to-become-unite

Again, I'm not speaking of politics, but generally the United Methodists would be considered to be centrist on the scale of conservative vs liberal Christianity.  They may lean slightly conservative.   Politically they are mostly conservatives, but once again I emphasize that I am not talking politics so lets move on.  

The Evangelical Methodist Church or the Evangelical Methodists Church of the USA would be conservative Christian.   

Anyway, no harm no foul on any statements from the Methodists.  
 

Quote

So, you're saying that calling yourself a Conservative Christian is "Sucking Up"?

I'm not going to go any further.  You've got to confirm or deny.  Because if that's what you're saying, then you're off in la-la land.

I say that not calling out conservative Christians (and again, I'm not speaking of politics) for attacks on our church (not just simple disagreements) while at the same time sharing memes from the very same people who are attacking our church and viewing them in a positive manner is sucking up.  It seems pretty straight forward to me. 

Regardless of what you want to call yourself, I can promise you that anyone outside our faith who considers his or herself to be conservative Christian will be very unlikely to consider us to be conservative Christians, regardless of how many times you want to argue it.  

Edited by Scott
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Scott said:

I don't think I'd say that is just a little nasty talk.   Some conservative Christians have actively tried to stop temple construction, for example.   While some people wanted to stop temple construction due to rational reasons such as traffic or loss of tax revenue, some churches have made attempts to stop temple construction in certain cases.  The Billings Montana temple is an example.  There were people attempting to curtail the temple construction due to what I would consider to be valid concerns (property values, traffic, etc.), but there were also churches who also tried to curtail it that went beyond simple protest, but trying to gain favor from local politicians.

Something similar happened with the temple at Carmel Indiana as well.  

I have to laugh.  We had some issues with the Newport Beach temple.  The original design was too big and too white.  So they changed the style and made it more of a tan color.  The irony is that the area is a flood with mega churches (including Rick Warren's Purpose Driven Life campus).   The temple is actually smaller than the LDS chapel next to it.

Here's a map to give you comparison.  And by the way, the Mariner church was kind enough to allow their parking lot be used during the open house. 

 

Newport_temple_size.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Scott, I appreciate the questions.  I am just one of several mods; we’ll follow up via PM.  :)  

On political discussion—I believe a couple years ago there was a slight relaxation of that rule that was discussed by @pam on the main forum; but we may not have gotten around to actually updating the site rules.  I’ll invite Pam to weigh in and tell me if I’m wrong.  

Some of the IRS rules have changed that at one time would have gotten us in trouble with our 501c status.  As long as ThirdHour is not advocating a political candidate we are okay.  Opinions from forum members are okay.  I'll have to ask the powers that be regarding the need to update the rules if need be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Mores
14 hours ago, Scott said:

I say that not calling out conservative Christians (and again, I'm not speaking of politics) for attacks on our church (not just simple disagreements) while at the same time sharing memes from the very same people who are attacking our church and viewing them in a positive manner is sucking up.  It seems pretty straight forward to me. 

Let me rephrase this and see if it sounds reasonable to you.  "Sucking up" can take the form of:

1) Not getting into a tizzy fit every time someone says something negative about you or your beliefs.
2) Joining forces with people towards a common goal, even if those people are otherwise opposed to us.

You must have a very lonely life if you actually live like this.

What you've described in these two ideas is what is meant by "turning the other cheek."  Yet you would take Christ's words and make it seem like we're "sucking up."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Scott
2 hours ago, Mores said:

2) Joining forces with people towards a common goal, even if those people are otherwise opposed to us.

Since the goal of those spreading such misinformation about our church is to destroy it, I see where you stand on finding the common goal.

2 hours ago, Mores said:

What you've described in these two ideas is what is meant by "turning the other cheek."  Yet you would take Christ's words and make it seem like we're "sucking up."

Gotcha.  According to you, turning the cheek means allying with those who are out to destroy the church and spread and much misinformation about the Church as possible.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Mores
1 hour ago, Scott said:

Since the goal of those spreading such misinformation about our church is to destroy it, I see where you stand on finding the common goal.

The common goals I speak of are:

  • Abortion
  • Protecting free speech and freedom of religion
  • Sanctity of the Family
  • LGBTQ issues
1 hour ago, Scott said:

Gotcha.  According to you, turning the cheek means allying with those who are out to destroy the church and spread and much misinformation about the Church as possible.  

You don't appear to be familiar with some counsel from the Lord on this.

Quote

And I say unto you, Make to yourselves friends of the mammonof unrighteousness; that, when ye fail, they may receive you into everlasting habitations.

 -- Luke 16:9

And now, verily I say unto you, and this is wisdom, make unto yourselves friends with the mammon of unrighteousness, and they will not destroy you.

 -- D&C 82:22

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scott quoted some tripped out bible thumper who said, "The Mormon people of today are highly respected in our society, but there is nothing respectable about their doctrines."

Really?  Hmmm.  I have heard that about my dating standards, but not religious preference (at least not recently).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share