• joggerblogger said on Nov 27, 2006....

  Here in Britain, a politicians religion is hardly ever mentioned, let alone an issue for deciding how to vote. Its their views that matter. It may be that their religion is a basis for their views. But its never thrust down the voters throats, so to speak. In the USA, it appears a persons religion is all important. Yet the people who puff the most about their religious convictions appear to be the most hypocritical. I can leave the reader to think of the countless examples ranging from homophobia to the killing of civilians in 'foriegn' countries. I also am not Christian. In fact I have no religion. My convictions are based on what I believe to be right, not on what a 'god' tells me. I have the distinct impression that religious people go to church to be forgiven for what they have done wrong. How about not doing the wrong thing in the first place. How about doing the 'right' thing 24/7 instead of just Sunday morning/Wednesday evening, or whenever you are at church? How about actually 'believing' in whats right and wrong rather than being told by a god whats right and wrong? How about voting on what the politician stands for politically?

• bloc said on Nov 27, 2006....

  "In the USA, it appears a persons religion is all important."
  
  It is with some, but they aren't the majority. However, it only takes a small percentage of people to sway a vote. If 10% of people won't vote for someone because they are mormon it could sway the election.
  
  The most interesting aspect of this particular issue is that the people whom are likely to care are the base of the republican party which is the party that Romney would run for.
  
  We have a handful of vocal social conservatives on SC and I'm really curious what they think. I have no idea if it would make a difference or not.
  

• BALLS said on Nov 27, 2006....

  Mormonism was begun by a fellow named Joseph Smith. Old Joe was a nut

  and his Book of Mormon is the rantings of a NUT.

  It's an interesting story though, at one time the United States declared war

  on the Mormons. It was a short lived war. Read about it, it's how we learn.

   

  As far as a Mormon ever becoming President, what the hell, they're talking

  about running Hillary. If she can be, I suppose anyone can.

• Ormocanon said on Nov 27, 2006....

  Why not? If his track record in government service is excellent, vote for him.
  There are many of their missionaries here in the Philippines and so far these people are well-liked by those they interact with.
  

• Jenna said on Nov 27, 2006....

  Bloc...I know this is a serious post... and forgive me... but when I first read the title I thought it said "Can A Moron Be President?"  And to that I have to answer yes... we have had many. 

• curmudgeon said on Nov 27, 2006....

  If the Mormon convinces me that he/she is the better choice than the opponent, I'll vote for the Mormon. That would go for a Hindu, Muslim or Atheist, by the way. Just as long as they adhere to the conservative philosophy.
   
  Joggerblogger - can you honestly say that you do EVERYTHING right the first time, 24/7? If that's the case, perhaps you ought to run for office or start your own religion. If it's not the case, who then is the hypocrite? Who are you to judge others if you do not live up to your own standard?
   
  I'm so sick of these windbag atheists conjuring up generalizations and judging people out of complete ignorance or partial knowledge. You all haven't experienced what it's like to be a part of a church community that you really love. If you had, you wouldn't denigrate it. If you don't get it, don't judge it.
   
  You people define yourselves not by the values you profess, but by the God you don't believe in. And you call us irrational? And what is with this obsessive compulsion to constantly charge the faithful with hypocrisy and irrationality? What, are your superior intellects and capacities for reason so threatened by simple people of faith? Why even engage it if we are so mentally challenged as to believe in a fictitious God and subscribe to fairy tales? How about professing that which you do believe in without demonizing those with whom you have a theological disagreement?
   
  You dare call us judgemental hypocrites - look in the bloody mirror.

• joggerblogger said on Nov 27, 2006....

  Curmudgeon - In answer to your questions.

   

  No, I do not do everything 'right' first time. But I try to, just as I would hope others do. All to often, however, some so-called religious people go against their faith for personal gain, and then attend church for 'forgiveness', only to continue in the same way again, once leaving the church gate. The point I was making was that I dont need a God to tell me right from wrong. I think I can work that out for myself.

   

  Your comment about a persons religion being of no importance as long as they adhere to the philosophy you believe in, is fair comment. You vote for the politician closest to the set of policies you agree with, just as I would. And thats the way it mainly works here in Britain.

   

  "I'm so sick of these windbag atheists conjuring up generalizations and judging people out of complete ignorance or partial knowledge." I could re-write the whole sentence and replace the word 'athiest' with 'religious people'. But I wont, because insults should not replace reasoned arguement. Being part of a church community that you really love is very laudable. In fact, I am part of an athletics club that I really love. My intention was not to denigrate church communities, and I apologise if my comments were taken that way. And it was wrong of me to generalise about 'religious people' in the comments  I made about the reasons for going to church. I was more thinking of the many politicians who wear their religion on their sleeve as they impliment all their religion teaches them not to do. One American politician I really disagreed with politically was Ronald Regan. Yet I admired the way he kept his religious beliefs in the background. This is so unlike Bush, who seems to use religion for political expediency rather than actually believing it. I could be wrong of course, but actions speak louder than words, and Bushes actions seem most un-christian to me. Incidentally, I have many christian friends, and our moral values coincide uncannily.

   

  "You people define yourselves not by the values you profess, but by the God you don't believe in.". All I said was that I have no religion. It was you who put the lable 'Athiest' on. Thus your statement is utterly wrong. Religion is not an important issue for me; but I accept it is to people who believe in a god. I think a persons faith, or lack of it, is a personal matter that should not be judged. Problems arise when a persons religious views are imposed on others. Unlike in America, Britain has the church and state closely connected, and it has caused all sorts of problems for those of us either with no religous beliefs or are not Church of England. As far as wanting me to profess in what I do believe in, then basically its this. Treat other people as you would like to be treated yourself. Dont do to others what you would not like done to yourself. In essence, I conduct myself in a way most religious people would, but without the 'god' bit.

• ALIENated said on Nov 28, 2006....

  I was all ready to talk about Jimmy Carter or Al Gore (I too thought the title said moron). Oh well. I think Mormons are about like any other religious group that is based on a bad premise (as BALLS pointed out)--the individuals are good people who really have no clue what the f*** their religion stands for and is based on. All that aside, I doubt that Mitt Romney will get the nod. I mean, come on. Mitt? What the heck kind of name is that? That is something a catcher uses, not a name for a president.

• silverwhisper said on Nov 28, 2006....

  on quickly & inaccurately reading the title, i was all set to reply "obviously: look at the sitting president!"  :>
  
  to answer the question: no, a mormon will never be elected president of the US.  and frankly, i would no more consider mormons a christian sect than i would consider christians part of a fringe jewish sect.  you do realize, bloc, that the founder of mormonism penned an entire religious text which trumps the bible for importance in their faith?
  
  this country is way too backwards ever to take seriously a presidential candidate who's non-christian.  hell, wasn't JFK the first catholic president in US history?
  
  ed
  

• danetteb said on Nov 28, 2006....

  LOL @ Jenna - yeah I read that too...
  
  Was just going to say that moron presidents are nothing new :P
  

• JadeLondon said on Nov 28, 2006....

  In response to Silver: From what I understand, they also use the Bible as supplement. And who knows what the 'right' version is anyway? What I mean to say is: the Catholics have books that the Protestants don't. Anyway, I don't want to get in an argument over theology--it just happens to be an observation of mine.

  As to the question, if enough people elect him, sure. I have to wonder, at least a little, how does every Hindu, Muslim. etc. feel when a Christian is elected?

  I wouldn't have a problem with a Mormon being President, provided the country benefitted from his leadership. That is what this is about anyway: the country.

• Zayda said on Nov 28, 2006....

  Silver, the Book of Mormon does not supplant the Bible in any way.  The Bible still plays a central role in the Mormon faith, as much of a role as the Book of Mormon.  Mormons are Christians first and foremost because they have to accept Christ into their lives in order to follow the tenents of both the Bible and the Book of Mormon.

• silverwhisper said on Nov 28, 2006....

  ah yes, i'd somehow forgotten you're knowledgeable re: mormonism, super z. however, i would think that there are cases of conflict b/n the bible and the book of mormon, no? in such cases, which source takes precedence?
  
  ed

• danetteb said on Nov 28, 2006....

  I definitely don't see Mormons as Christian, even they might see themselves as this.  Apparently the men are allowed to have more than one wife, even encouraging them by saying the more wives they have, the better their chances of getting into heaven.  Some thing's fishy with them I think.   They also believe in magic underwear with an which will protect them from all physical harm. 
  
  Its some Harry Potter shit I'm telling you! :P
  
  [Here's what I found - an exmormon writing about her disappointment]
  
  

• Zayda said on Nov 28, 2006....

  Dannette, you are sadly misinformed about the Mormon religion.  Mormon men are not allowed to have more than one wife. Polygamy is against the tenets of Mormon religion, it has been since before Utah was made a state in the Union.
  
  A sect did break off from the Mormon church, and that sect, does practice polygamy.  But Mormons do not practice polygamy. 
  

• Zayda said on Nov 28, 2006....

  BTW, since I can't seem to edit comments, 90% of the information on exmormon.org is conflated and inaccurate.  Talk about finding one of the most biased and unreliable sources about the religion to post a link to.

• danetteb said on Nov 28, 2006....

  Thank you for clearing that up Zayda :)
  
  As for the underwear - do you know anything about that?
  

• silverwhisper said on Nov 28, 2006....

  i should note that the illegality of polygamy in utah was evidently a condition of utah's statehood.
  
  super z, don't those sects also call themselves mormons?
  
  ed

• Zayda said on Nov 28, 2006....

  Go here to read about the history of polygamy in Colorado City, Arizona/Hilsdale Utah.  This is an incomplete source, to some extent.
  
  That sect calls themselves, "Fundamentalist Mormons" but they are not part of the Mormon Church, which is actually The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (LDS).
  
  The sect in Colorado City founded a church called the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, (FLDS).
  
  There is also a third church that many associate with Mormons, it's the Reformed Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (RLDS). 
  
  Neither the FDLS or the RDLS is associated with the Mormon Church whose largest temple is in Salt Lake City, Utah or whose world headquarters is in SLC.
  
  So, yes, understanding what religion is Mormon and what isn't can be confusing.  Members of the LDS church--THE Mormon church--consider themselves to be the only true Mormons who are following the practices of God/Jesus and Joseph Smith.
  
  As to your question earlier about the Book of Mormon contradicting the Bible, as far as I know it doesn't.  The Book of Mormon is an extension of the Bible, according the history of the way it came to be.  It's a parrallel New Testament to some extent at least as I see it.  I can't fully explain it.  But my husband could as he is well versed in Mormon teachings. 
  
  I'll ask him about it later and post a comment about what he says.
  

• silverwhisper said on Nov 28, 2006....

  thank you, i for one would be most interested in hearing what he has to say, esp in light of my own comparisons of how christians and jews view their respective bibles.  :>
  
  ed
  

• Zayda said on Nov 28, 2006....

  I should note the link that I provided above is to the Rick Ross Institute, which identifies both the LDS church and the FLDS as cults. And many people do think of Mormons as a cult, not a religion.
  
  But then, we could argue semantics I suppose and talk about whether or not all religions aren't fundamentally cults.
  

• Zayda said on Nov 28, 2006....

  Honestly, to answer Bloc's original question, I don't know that a Mormon could become president because there is so people outside the faith don't actually know about the faith itself.  And well, there are too many lingering fabrications about the faith as well.
  
  One of the strong appeals to many about the religion, even if they don't practice the religion, are the Mormon beliefs about family as being the center of everything.  And focus on family is particularly appealing to conservative voters, btw.  So, who knows how religion would play when it comes to votes.
  
  To learn more about the Mormon church, it might be helpful to visit the official sites online:
  
  Main LDS site
  
  Learning about the Mormon Church and Beliefs
  
  
  

• Zayda said on Nov 28, 2006....

  Oh, btw, the entire Book of Mormon is available online.

• BALLS said on Nov 28, 2006....

  Joseph Smith was bi polar, the entire book of Mormon is his manic

  ranting. The Mormons practiced polygamy and had to drop the practice

  in order to allow Utah to become a State.

   

  Joseph Smith himself was a polygamist, as was Brigham Young. This is

  not a religion, it is a cult.

   

  The Mormon Church is extremely wealthy, when you delve into it's

  history you come out shaking your head and wondering why it's many

  followers do not take into account is roots.

   

  Joseph Smith took most of his secret rituals for the church from the

  Free Masons. It's a crazy deal, really crazy and yes. Hardly anyone

  knows about the real Mormon Church and it's beginnings. How it got

  to this place today.

• areallulu said on Nov 28, 2006....

  A person's religion or lack of one doesn't qualify them to run a government.  True, our country is founded on Christian princibles, nothing obejctionable, biased or mandated.  The best qualified person for the job is someone who is able to see the big picture, how we as a country fit into it, what is in our best interest both nationally and globally, and act with integrity, honesty, common sense, and decency in carrying out his or her duties.  This person is not going to be narrow minded or insensitive, but educated, well rounded with plenty of exeperiences to enable them to be diplomatic, resourceful, and assertive.

• kruuyai said on Nov 28, 2006....

  Interesting discussion. 
   
  Joggerblogger, you put everything so eloquently.  I, too have noticed a huge amount of hypocrisy among the religious..  and by "religious" I'm not knocking people who have a genuine spiritual faith of one kind or another. 
   
  But those people, including but not limited to politicians, who wear their religion on their sleeves and go about mindlessly quoting scripture, whether or not it applies to the situation at hand, just to defend their fear-based belief systems, are the ones who seem to be most likely to act in ways that go against what they supposedly believe in.  Using Bush as an example, just because he's so handy, since when is it in allignment with Christian values to drop bombs on innocent people in order to promote your family's economic interests... or your country's economic interests for that matter?
   
  Even among the less famous, I generally find... and yes, of course there are exceptions, but it has been my overwhelming experience that the people who are most likely to practice loving kindness and the golden rule, which are supposedly what the practicers of most, if not all, world religions aspire to, are not churchgoers.  They may or may not have spiritual beliefs, but you generally won't find them sitting in a pew.
   
  Example...  the day before my wedding, a hundred years ago, I went shopping for stuff to make breakfast for my new husband on our first morning of marriage.  I didn't have a car or know how to drive, so I walked, and I'm guessing the store was about a half mile or so away.  This was in the days of paper grocery bags, and I got a lot of stuff, including a gallon of milk.  It was a hot day, and the milk bottle started to sweat, and the grocery bag started to get soggy.
   
  I walked as fast as I could, hoping to make it home before I lost everything.  When I was walking along the sidewalk in front of the parking lot to a church that was just across the street from our apartment complex, the bottom of the bag gave out and my groceries went everywhere.  It was too much stuff to scoop up in my arms, and I didn't know how I was going to get it all home.  Would I have to leave most of it there, while I carried away the most important things, and came back at least five or more minutes later, hoping that the rest would still be there?  I stood there, and tried to pick my stuff up, but everything kept falling out of my arms, and I was so upset that I began to cry.  
   
  There was a group of people standing on the other side of the parking lot, maybe 50 feet away.  They had obviously just come out of a church service,  where they were probably all patting themselves on the back for being such good christians.  But did one of them come over and offer to help?  Nope. They all just stood there looking at me. 
   
  Eventually, what happened was that two young guys came riding by in an old, beat up pickup truck.  They both had long hair in ponytails, which at that time, was in style, but the kind of look that the religious and other conservatives liked to portray as the root of all evil.  They asked me if I needed a hand, and within seconds, they had scooped everything up into their pickup and drove me to my apartment.  The whole thing took about 2 minutes.
   
  I know it's a trivial example, but it illustrates a point.  And I know that you can all think of plenty of examples where church going people have lent a helping hand to someone.  So, the point is, let's not judge people by whether or not they go to church or by what they profess to believe or not believe.  Let our actions speak for themselves.
   
  I guess I got a little off the topic....
   
  It is interesting that, in a country that was founded on the separation of church and state, that this discussion of whether or not a person of one religion or other could be elected even comes up. But it's true, that this really seems to be a focal point in American elections.  Why is that?
   
  Well, here's hoping my message doesn't get truncated (there may be those of you who wish it had)  :)

• bloc said on Nov 28, 2006....

  Wow, I came in this morning to a giant response on my post :)
  
  1. I guess I should change the title :)
  
  2. A lot of people seem to be saying that the mormon myth is nutty. From an outsider (non christian, muslim, mormon, etc) they all sound nutty to me.
  
  @ kruuyia
  "It is interesting that, in a country that was founded on the separation of church and state, that this discussion of whether or not a person of one religion or other could be elected even comes up. But it's true, that this really seems to be a focal point in American elections.  Why is that?"
  
  I think this is an issue because he's a republican and a large part of the republican base is the religious right. Will these very religious conservatives be willing to turn out for a mormon who isn't of the same religion, but has the same values?
  

• bloc said on Nov 28, 2006....

  The history of mormonism in song :)
  
  
  
  
  

• silverwhisper said on Nov 28, 2006....

  that episode just plain rocks, bloc.  i'm glad you linked it.  :D
  
  whenever zayda gets back, we should have some interesting reading.
  
  ed
  

• bloc said on Nov 28, 2006....

  
  
  

• MissMimi said on Nov 28, 2006....

  Jenna, you made me laugh.
   
  I agree with JadeLondon, that the important thing is his/her ability to govern well, and in a way that benefits the whole country.
   
  And who knows?  When JFK ran, nobody thought he'd get elected because of his Catholicism either.

• dailyachesandpains said on Nov 28, 2006....

  I was living in MA when Romney became Governor.  He put the smack down on the budget the day he sat down at the state house.  I did not vote for him.  I was actually nervous about him being our Governor because of the budget cuts he had planned and the way it would affect the school system. 

  Did you all know that he doesn't accept salary as Governor?  He cut himself from the budget!  I don't believe the LT. Governor accepts a salary either, but I'm not positive.

  He's done a really good job in MA.  When he says he's going to do something, he's been pretty good about following through with it.  He's been excellent in dealing with the "Big Dig" and going after the people that are responsible for the mess. 

  I think I have enough confidence in him to vote for him in the Presidential election.  I can't tell until then though...don't know who's running yet and their "plans". 

  Sorry, I had to race through typing that.  Toddler to take care of.

  Daily

• bloc said on Nov 28, 2006....

  thanks for the good info daily :)

• dailyachesandpains said on Nov 28, 2006....

  Sorry, Bloc :-)

  Here's a bit of Mitt in MA for you to read up on, if you'd like.  It may be a little much, but I thought you would like it:

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitt_Romney

• kruuyai said on Nov 29, 2006....

  Does anyone know the name of the Sherlock Holmes novel that was about Mormons?

• purrrkitten said on Dec 01, 2006....

  Gotta throw my .02 c in here... Mormons are not Christians even though they tell you they are. Their fundamental beliefs (all sects of Mormonism) are far different than the average, practising Christian believes.

  I have nothing against Mormons - my ex is an x-mo. I did a lot of research on their beliefs and practices. I don't know if I would or wouldn't vote for one as president (after all, I am Canadian              :-D) but if I were you, I'd make darn sure I was aware of whether or not he's into the whole United Order thing of which there is supposed to be a group that are working towards fulfilling the "prophecy".

  Maybe he is just a nice guy with Mormon beliefs. I dunno but it seems that all political agendas are based on lies and deceit.

• Zayda said on Dec 01, 2006....

  What does the average practicing Christian believe that you think Mormons beliefs differ from.
  
  A Christian is someone that believe that Jesus is the Christ or that believes the teaching and follows the teaching of Jesus Christ as read from the Bible. Christians believe that Jesus is the Christ and Saviour of the world and have accepted that Christ is their Savior
  
  My husband is Mormon; I'm Baptist. 
  
  Mormons do believe that Jesus is THE Christ and the Saviour of the world.   They accept Christ as their Savior.
  
  Interestingly, as my husband just noted, the  Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, (FLDS), located into Colorado City, Arizona (those who do practice polygamy) do not actually follow the book of Mormon as their scripture.  And for the record, nothing in The Book of Mormon condones polygamy.  Neither does The Book of Mormon actually tell men to take more than one wife.
  
  Additionally, for those of you claiming that historically Mormons are Polygamists (i.e. indicated that Joseph Smith was a polygamist as was Brigham Young), very few Mormons actually practiced polygamy. Those who did were drawing on the Old Testament for their believes in multiple spouses, not The Book of Mormon itself. You see, Abraham had multiple wives--4 to be exact.  It is from the Old Testament that those Mormons who did practice polygamy drew from.  That's right, the Old Testament, a book that is part of the foundations of CHRISTIAN faith.
  

• bloc said on Dec 01, 2006....

  @zayda
  
  I think you've indirectly hit on the dangers of allowing religious ideology to dominate political action. If the fundamentalist right control the political landscape will mormons, baptists, or catholics be considered part of the team? Maybe they are now out of expedience, but will they continue to be?
  
  Secular people like myself are already considered bad and untrustworthy.
  

• Zayda said on Dec 01, 2006....

  ACK---My comment should have said I was raised in a Baptist family.  I don't actually follow the teachings of the Baptist church.  But I am well read in Christian teachings, including the Book of Mormon.  After all, I thought it was pertinent that I understand the teachings in the Book of Mormon since my husband was a practicing Mormon at the time we married.
  
  I have more to say but no time to do so right now.
  
  Have a good weekend everyone.  I'll follow-up on this later.
  

• purrrkitten said on Dec 01, 2006....

  Zayda, just curious to know where you got your info from? There is more than just believing that Jesus is THE Christ and the Saviour. You also have to go on what the terms mean to each party. (ie. salvation, atonement, grace, etc.)
   
  You are correct in saying that the BOM doesn't condone polygamy. It's in the Doctrine and Covenants (132 I believe) that JS brings in the revelation of polygamy. The Bible talks about polygamy but does not promote it. Notice Adam and Eve - not Adam and Eve and Lucy and Sally and Joan. It starts in Genesis with a man named Lamech. Old testament is history of the Israelites and New Testament is life and teachings of Jesus and his immediate followers. New Testament says in 1 Tim. 3 that men in the church should have but one wife. Christ is the fulfillment of the prophecies in the OT.
   
  Hey... I'm up for discussion if you'd like but we probably shouldn't use up bloc's space for it... :-)   I'll have to make a space to go to if you're interested, k?
   
  BTW bloc, I don't find 'secular' people bad nor untrustworthy. I'd have to say most of my friends are nonbelievers and one close one is also a mormon. I do think church and politics should be a separate thing. People's judgement can be clouded and freedom removed when the two become one. Doesn't matter if they be christian, mormon or something else.

• bloc said on Dec 01, 2006....

  "BTW bloc, I don't find 'secular' people bad nor untrustworthy."
  
  yeah, most christians don't. It seems the hard line ones are often the more vocal. I've had many looks of disgust if not outright vitriol from people that ask me if I go to church or some such and I say that I'm not a christian. This happened often when I was in the army.
  
  @zayda
  some of my closest friends have been mormon. It was great because we could use the basketball court in the church. That's almost enough reason for me to join ;)
  

• Zayda said on Dec 01, 2006....

  Purrkitten--excuse me?  You seem to be saying that it takes more to be a Christian than believing that Jesus is THE Chirst and Saviour of mankind. 
  
  The American Heritage Dictionary defines Christian as:
  
  
  adj.  1)  of, pertaining to, or derived from Jesus Christ or His teachings:  a Christian faith.  2) of pertaining to, beliving in, or belonging to the religion based on the teaching of Jesus Christ:  Spain is a Chirsitian country.  3) of or pertaining to christians.  4) exipiting a spirit proper to a follower of Jesus Christ.
  
  
  Funny, but Mormons follow the Old Testament and the New Testament; both are central to their worship services, to their mission calling, and to their faith.  In addition (not as a replacement to) the Bible, Mormons also follow The Book of Mormon.
  
  So, if Mormons follow the Old Testament and the New Testament and they accept Christ as their Saviour, how exactly are they not a Christian faith as Christian is defined in almost any dictionary? 
  
  You stated that Mormons were not Christian:
  
  purrkitten quoth:
  
  
  Their fundamental beliefs (all sects of Mormonism) are far different than the average, practising Christian believes.
  
  
  Yet you fail to identify any of the fundamental beliefs of Christians that are different for Mormons?   What fundamental beliefs of Christians are you speaking of?
  
  Salvation to Mormons means that you accept Christ into your life as the Saviour and you do your best to follow his teachings.  And that differs from the belief of other Christian faiths, how? 
  
  Somewhere along the way, we, as humans screw up and that is where Christ's grace comes into play--his grace that he imparted to Christians we he died for our sins.  Again, this concept of grace is also a belief of Mormons.
  
  The Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance present this definition of Christianity
  
  
  Most liberal Christian denominations, secularists, public opinion pollsters, and this web site define "Christian" very broadly as any person or group who sincerely believes themselves to be Christian. Thus, Fundamentalist and other Evangelical Protestants, Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox believers, Presbyterians, Methodists, Episcopalians, United Church members, Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Christian Scientists, etc. are all considered Christian. They total about 75% of the North American adult population.
  
  
  Please note that they include Mormons in those they identify as Christians.  Wikipedia's entry on the Christian Denomination lists The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons) as a Christian denomination. They do group the LDS church along with some other churchs as being outside mainstream Christianity (Protestants, Catholics, Greek Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox), but as still a Christian denomination. The entry on Christianity at Answers.com also identifies The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as a Christian religion.  BBC's entry on Christianity identifies Mormons as a Chritian faith as well.
  
  So, it's interesting to me that anyone can say that Mormons are not a Christian religion when so many sources,
  
  Let me reiterate, the Book of Mormon does not take the place of the Christian Bible.  Mormons believe  that Christ visited ALL 12 tribes of Isreal--and one of those tribes was the Tribe of Joseph.  The Book of Mormon is the record of Christ's visit to the Tribe of Joseph, whereas the NT is the record of  the history of Christ's visit and teachings to the House of Judea. (And as it is foretold in the OT, the House of Judea rejected Christ).
  
  For a Biblical reference (OT) to the belief that Christ visited all 12 Tribes of Isreal see  Genesis 49:22.
  
  
  "Joseph is a fruitful bough, even a fruitful bough by a well; whose branches run over the wall."
  
  
  (This is interpreted by many--not just Mormons--to mean that the Tribe of Joseph left the well--Jerusalem--and traveled elsewhere before the destruction of Jerusalem.)
  
  The first 20 chapters of the Book of Mormon (the first book) talk about a family fleeing Jerusalem before the destruction and what they took them including the teachings of the prophets found in the Old Testament up to that point--up until Jeremiah--so they would have a record of those teachings in order to be able to teach their kids.)  And yes, that family killed a man for the book--the teachings of the prophets up to Jeremiah--because they believed it was better for one man to die than a whole nation dwindle in unbelief.
  
  You asked where I got my information  I have read the entire Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, the Old Testament, the New Testament. I have read other books published by the LDS church.  I have read about the history of the Mormon church from sites online not sponsored by the church itself, including New Advent, which draws on the Catholic Encycledpia as one of its primary sources and the BBC's entry on Mormonism.
  
  I also attended a religious affiliated college--a Baptist college to be exact--and was required to take 18 hours worth of religion courses to graduate (enough hours to be a minor in Religion or Religious studies at many other universities).  Among these courses was a course specifically on the Old Testament, one specifically on the New Testament, as well as one specifically on Christian religions.  Interestingly enough, in that course focusing on Christian religions, one of the religions that we studied the history and beliefs of was the Mormon religion, so even my univerisity which was affiliated with a Protestant religion and more specifically the Southern Baptist Association identifies Mormons as a Christian religion.
  
  And really, I fail to see why we should move to another blog for this discussion as it is pertinent to Bloc's question as to whether a Mormon could be President since many other Christians as well as non-Christians alike spout information that they have "heard" about Mormons without studying the history of the Mormon church or the religion itself.
  
  It's also pertinent to the discussion because Bloc specifically asked if those of other Christian faiths could support a Mormon president.
  
  
  

• purrrkitten said on Dec 02, 2006....

  Zayda, no need to get angry. I was merely trying to not take up space on bloc's site, 'tis all. Having a discussion about mormonism vs. christianity doesn't have anything to do with whether or not, I'd vote for a mormon to be president of the USA. I can't speak for anyone else. BTW, we had a mormon premier here not too long ago. He was a very nice man. And I do have information pertaining to all that you've spoken of. I have read much of it too, and not just from a christian perspective. I can tell you're angry about what I said. I feel it screaming down the line towards me. I've been in this exact position many a time from my x and from his family. And I've heard much of this before as well. I kinda guessed that you'd converted to your husband's beliefs by how you reacted to my first post. However, before I continue this discussion, I would like to ask bloc if he minds that it's being done on his blog... You're feelings, kind sir?

• Zayda said on Dec 02, 2006....

  I haven't converted to my husband's beliefs. I was raised in a Baptist family but I'm agnostic.
  
  And I'm not angry with you. I just think you are flat out wrong in saying that Mormon's aren't Christians. As do dozens of other sources, which I can site for you that I haven't cited here.
  
  And while my comment addresses you at the beginning, it is also in response to other people who have commented in here making baseless claims about the Mormon relgion on half-truths they have heard. Please understand that I am not saying that you are making baseless claims on half-truths. I understand that your ex was an ex-Mormon and that you studied the religion. However, I stand by the fact that I think you are completely wrong in stating that Mormons are not Christians.
  
  While Christianity may not have anything to do with whether you would vote for a particular candidate, for many Americans it does. They base their vote on their religious convictions; I've seen it numerous times, specifically in small southern towns where THE primary factor that voters look at is the candiates religion and where he/she stands on hot bed religious issues such as abortion and gay marriage/gay rights. (For me, btw, those are social issues and human issues, not religious issues.)

• Zayda said on Dec 02, 2006....

  Bloc--Who do you see as the fundamentalist right, btw, just for my clarification?

• purrrkitten said on Dec 02, 2006....

  No worries! I can see that you have definately read up on mormonism. I apologize if I offended you. :-) I think I tend to define christianity on the terms that I grew up with. However, I can see your point of view on that. I'm just at a loss as to how to describe each party without defining mormons as something different. And I have proofs enough as to why I say we're different creatures. Not half truths but based on individual mormons' own words. As far as voters go, I cannot say what everyone else uses to vote in their candidate. Personally, I don't think I care much what religion (if any) the person belongs to as long as they allow me to practice what I believe too! I base who I vote for on the important issues to me. I think everyone should be treated the same: gay, straight, Mormon, Christian, Agnostic, whatever.

• mom said on Dec 02, 2006....

  This article caught my eye and I had to read. First I want to say that I am LDS. Zayda I loved what you said and thought it was funny because you are Baptist married to a Mormon and I am a Mormon married to a Baptist. I am always intrigued by how many different emotions are exposed when Mormonism is brought up. I want to say that the topic of whether we are Christian or not has been debated many times. My personal feelings on this subject is that too many times people hide behind the term "Christian". I feel if they are Christian, then their attitudes and lives will speak for them. It is not enough to say someone is or isn't Christian, the way we live will determine that for us. "By their fruits ye shall know them." As with anything if you want to see the good then you will and if you want to see the bad then you will as it is with religion. Just as Atheists see the Bible as crap or people looking at other religions see them as bad. It is not easy being LDS because of the controversy raised by so many. You have to really believe in it otherwise you would get swallowed up in the hate. As to whether or not a Mormon should be president, well it would depend on the individual. We don't believe that just because you are LDS that makes you perfect. We are always told to pray about our leaders and receive inspiration from our Heavenly Father. The Gospel of Jesus Christ is perfect but the people aren't. As to our being a very rich church, I have to say that the members pay their tithing and the money goes to build more churches and temples. Our leaders do not get paid at all so all the money goes for building up the kingdom of God. We also pay what we call a fast offering, in that we fast one sunday each month and take the money we would have spent for 2 meals and donate it to the church to go toward our welfare system to help others that are in need. The members are very generous. Our churches and temples are paid for by the members. It would be nice to see people not judge but I know that will always happen, and so I don't fret, I am trying too hard to make it back to my Heavenly Father.

• bloc said on Dec 02, 2006....

  @zayda
  james dobson comes to mind first. Pat robertson is another. Basically, people that believe their views are infallible and want to impose them on our culture. The fact that they perceive their views to be infallible is what makes me wonder if they will accept mormons in the the long wrong since their beliefs are different although similar.
  
  @mom
  "As to whether or not a Mormon should be president"
  
  I just wanted to make sure you didn't misunderstand me. When I asked "can a mormon be president?" I wasn't asking if a mormon would be capable. I'm sure plenty would and I would be more than happy to vote for one if I liked their vision.
  
  I was asking if the religious right, who have been a major component of the republican party, would turn out strong for a mormon; i.e. mitt romney.
  
  @purrkitten
  by all means keep discussing this. I find it very interesting.

• purrrkitten said on Dec 02, 2006....

  bloc, as long as you don't mind...  :-)

  I'll be back some time tomorrow or the next day with my answers to zayda's questions. I gotta write it out on word first so I don't end up losing it somewhere along the line. I don't always have much time with the twins buggin'. This is probably gonna be long... :-)

• mom said on Dec 03, 2006....

  Hi Bloc, I was not offended at all. Many people have said that a Mormon would never be elected as president because we follow a prophet and that people were afraid that the president elect would have to rely on the prophet rather than think for themselves. I know that we (LDS) are never told how to vote or what our political beliefs should be. If you belong to a church and believe in their doctrine then it stands to reason that you would run the country or your life according to your own convictions. I also know that there are some, not all, who would not even consider voting for a person based on their beliefs or morals. I have always voted for the person who had the same kind of values I did, regardless of who they are or their religious affiliations. I spoke up only to give views from a Mormons stand point. Thanks for giving me that opportunity.

• purrrkitten said on Dec 03, 2006....

  Hmmm… How to start this… There is so much involving our discussion that is relevant. Perhaps I should just answer according to your questioning.

   

  Let’s go with the fundamental beliefs first then. I’m going to give you the Christian definition of a word then the Mormon definition. Let’s start with:

   

  Redemption:

  (Christian) Belief and acceptance of Jesus as LORD and Saviour for all mankind. He took the sins of the world on His shoulders on the cross, crucified that we might be saved if we believe that He is God’s one and only Son. We are saved by faith alone, not by works.

  (Mormon) Belief, repentance, baptism by immersion and laying on hands are all necessary for salvation/redemption. We are saved from death in that we are resurrected at the end of time and sent to one of the three levels of heaven. Only those true and faithful mormons will reach Celestial Heaven where they will become gods and goddesses. Telestial Mormons will go to Spirit Prison to preach to those still unbelieving until everyone has reached at least Terrestrial Heaven.

   

  Salvation:

  (Christian) Not everyone is saved. It is based upon the belief in Jesus as our redemption. Those who believe are saved; those who do not are not saved.

  (Mormon) Everyone is saved. At the end of time, everyone goes to one of the three heavens. This is considered the grace that the Bible speaks of – that nobody dies.

   

  Grace:

  (Christian) We are saved by grace which is a free gift from God. It cannot be earned. Works are not necessary to be saved. (Grace defined by the dictionary: 8a. Divine love and protection bestowed freely on people.) A gift/grace must be given freely. If you work for it, it is no longer a free gift but wages paid.

  (Mormon) Grace kicks in after one tries one’s hardest to achieve all the works necessary for salvation. “For we labor diligently to write, to persuade our children, and also our brethren, to believe in Christ, and to be reconciled to God; for we know that it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do.” 2 Nephi 25:23. For more info, you can look under the topic of grace in the LDS version of the Bible. The third article of faith also requires following the laws and ordinances. Works are necessary to be saved though there is some confusion as to grace, atonement and salvation being kind of the same thing or relating to the same thing. (Not meaning that I am personally confused but that the issues are confused/mixed with one another.)

   

  Atonement:                    

  (Christian) Christ atoned (dictionary - To make amends, as for a sin or fault) for mankind’s sin on the cross. All sins are forgiven. Christ’s blood covers all. We receive the gift of eternal life by the grace of God’s Son.

  (Mormon) Christ atoned for most sins in the Garden of Gethsemane. However, it is not sufficient to grant eternal life and it doesn’t cover certain sins like murder. Goes hand in hand with salvation in that “Eternal Life is rewarded for obedience to the laws and ordinances” (see Bruce McConkie’s words in Mormon Doctrine). Brigham Young states in The Journal Of Discourses that “blood atonement” is necessary for some sins. This is still relevant today even though the JOD is not considered scripture. See Joseph F. Smith in Doctrines of Salvation, Bruce McConkie in Mormon Doctrine, “What Mormons Think About Christ” (pamphlet put out by LDS church). Blood Atonement is the doctrine that an offending person’s blood must be spilt to atone for certain sins.

   

  In the interest of time and space, I will leave those as starters. Even the concept of God and Jesus and the Holy Spirit (aka Holy Ghost) are different between the two religions. There are many more of them but this should do for now.

   

  I agree that “salvation” and “grace” are things that Mormons believe in but I disagree on what those terms mean thereby disagreeing with the statement that Mormons believe the same things as Christians. Generically or perhaps, technically using the terms defined in the dictionary as to what pertains to being Christian, they can be called Christians or followers of Christ.

   

  I know the story of the Book Of Mormon. I haven’t read it completely (I couldn’t get past the repetition and garbled sentences) but I have read the outline and in depth analysis of the story elsewhere and checked in the BOM itself on authenticity of certain verses used. (Meaning, I checked context to be sure that the verse used was not taken and misused through misdirection.) The BOM quotes Isaiah extensively from the King James Version.

   

  My biggest problem with the BOM is that it is supposed to be a “history” of a “lost tribe of Israel” and Jesus visiting the Americas. The Bible is the same thing. However, where is ANY historical proof of the BOM? There are no cities, no monies, no plates, no inscriptions, no skeletons, no battle remains, no evidence of any kind of the Lamanites or Nephites even existed outside of JS’s BOM. Try and find a non-Mormon archeologist that will say that proof of any of it can be found, if you’re interested. There are also many anachronisms in the BOM (ie. Horses didn’t arrive before the Spanish in the history of America, there was no such thing as the “Bible” back in Nephi’s time, chariots couldn’t be horse drawn if they were around (no archeological evidence), compasses weren’t invented until later, and the agricultural scene was the same as JS’s time – not 2000 years ago).

   

  Secondly, since I believe the Bible is the all that is necessary for salvation, there is no need for secondary books like the BOM or D&C or Pearl of Great Price or Book of Abraham. The reason given for the BOM to appear is that the Bible “in its present known corrupted state… have been mutilated, changed, and corrupted in such a shameful manner… who in his right mind could, for one moment, suppose the Bible in its present form to be a perfect guide? Who knows that even one verse of the whole Bible has escaped pollution, so as to convey the same sense now that it did in the original?” (Orson Pratt’s Works “The Bible Alone Is Insufficient”) I use that quote but it is reiterated in the Articles of Faith number 8 (“so far as its translated correctly”) and in many other official publications.

  Casting doubt upon the Bible creates a need for something else to “fix” the problem – namely, another revelation! I can (if I learned Greek and Hebrew, both of which are possible in today’s world) read and translate for myself the original Greek or Hebrew versions of the Bible. Each “new” version of the Bible is translated directly from the original Greek and not translated from another translation (just like the game Telephone). You cannot do that with the BOM as the plates have been “hidden” so that no one can see them or read them. Of the 11 witnesses who “saw” the plates, three were the original three witnesses being used again and four were related to JS (one by marriage). There is conflicting testimony from all (some saw only, some touched with “supernatural power”, some saw a vision of them) and at least two of the witnesses either were excommunicated or left the church completely. They were also shown “under cloth” encouraged to be seen with “eyes of faith”.

   

  There is also question of why if the BOM is “the fulness of the everlasting gospel” (see the Introduction of the BOM), there needed to be the other scriptures (D&C, POGP, BOA). Most of the doctrines believed by many Mormons aren’t even in the BOM! Again, there is more but time and space doesn’t permit. This should be a sufficient start.

   

  I too went to a Baptist Bible college for a year. I have learned more in my travels and in my own research than I did while attending. Not that it was a poor college, merely, I was too young and angry to make the most of it.

   

  You misunderstood my desire to move to another blog for this discussion. I didn’t feel it was fair to take up so much space discussing the nitpickies of two different religions when he was asking our opinions as to whether a Mormon could or couldn’t be president. That’s why I asked bloc’s permission first. I wasn’t running away from the discussion at all.

   

  I’ll have to go back through to find which “half truths” you are referring to but I don’t recall seeing any. I’ll check and if I find any, I’ll address them too. Or you could point them out to me too. I may just have missed them…

   

  I look forward to hearing from you.  J  ~^^

• purrrkitten said on Dec 03, 2006....

  PS. I found the half truths you referred to. ( I think?)

   

  Originally in Mormon history, JS DID start polygamy with his revelation on it in the Doctrine & Covenants. He states there that it is an “everlasting covenant” a even though the LDS church revoked it a few years later. (The world wasn’t ready for it is the reason I’ve heard most often.) Then Utah did become a state. It was the defining factor (check your history books) in allowing it become a state. It is still practiced in the FLDS church, yes, BUT if you look closer, the “everlasting covenant” of polygamy will be reinstated at some future time. Therefore, it is still a belief, even if it is not practiced.

   

  As for the “magical underwear”, any TBM who has attended the Temple will be wearing their temple garments. Not that it is literal underwear as we know it but as clothing worn under street clothing. It is marked with symbols at the heart, navel and knee. It is worn at all times (bar bathing and sex) and it is for spiritual protection against the evils of the world. JS said it was to protect from all harm, not just spiritual, when it was first introduced. The symbols are from the Masonic Temple.

   

  I don’t think JS was bi-polar. He was into the occult. He did take the temple rituals from the Free Masons. He and BY were polygamists. The BOM is eerily similar to a book that was written before it called “View Of The Hebrews”. The Mormon church is one of THE wealthiest churches in all the world and their funds stay in the church as opposed to going to any types of charity or missions. Check out Time Magazine, Aug. 4/97, pgs 30-39. I have a copy. Not true about hardly anyone knowing about the LDS church’s origins. It’s all there in their own historical writings and other outsider’s historical writings. The info is out there if you’re willing to look for it and actually research it.

   

  That’s all I see. Let me know if there are others… J

• mom said on Dec 03, 2006....

  Hi Purrkitten, I will respond to your first entry about the differences between us and other religions. You are right, that is what we believe. In response to your next entry, these are your views and opinions taken from what you have learned. Yes, you are right that the origins and information are out there about the history of our church and everyone will percieve it the way they choose too.

• purrrkitten said on Dec 04, 2006....

  Yes, I know those are my beliefs from as stated in the Bible. Zayda had said she wanted to know what ... er... dang it... there's that word again... "christians" believe versus what Mormons believe. Sorry, I gotta use that word. It's the only one I know that encompasses Baptists, Episcopolians, Pentacostals, Mennonites, Evangelicals and those along the same line of faith.

  Yes, there are small differences in beliefs like "should women be deacons" or "everyone should wear their best sunday clothes to church". Those are insignificant beliefs and are not the defining ones to our religion. Things like: the nature of God, the nature of salvation, Jesus' divinity and humanity, and the Trinity are all VERY important and the defining ones in what makes us ... er ... "christians".

  It is our definitions and our practices and beliefs that make us different. "Christians" is just a word. Christianity is a belief system. Hmmm... maybe I should start trying to use Christianity vs Mormonism? Would that work better? Although, I thought that's how we all ended up using "christians" as the defining word?

  I'm looking forward to hearing from you!  ~^^

• mom said on Dec 04, 2006....

  You can use the word "Christian" all you want I am not offended at all by the word. I agree with you that Christianity is a belief system.

• purrrkitten said on Dec 04, 2006....

  Sorry 'bout all that babbling... I got caught up in the thought and started rambling... ehheheh...  It happens.   :-)

• mom said on Dec 04, 2006....

  :) It happens to everyone. No worries.

• sleepyzZ said on May 21, 2007....

   

  For purrrkitten
  

  I don't normally do blogs. Takes too much time. I thought i would do this though. Maybe, if I have time I will continue, but right now I will only respond to the Redemption part.
  
  

  “(Christian) Belief and acceptance of Jesus as LORD and Saviour for all mankind. He took the sins of the world on His shoulders on the cross, crucified that we might be saved if we believe that He is God’s one and only Son. We are saved by faith alone, not by works.”
  
  

  “Belief and acceptance of Jesus as LORD and Saviour for all mankind.” We sure do believe in that.
  
  

  “He took the sins of the world on His shoulders on the cross...” took upon him the sins of the world. Another check mark. We believe that he took upon him the sins of the world.
  
  

  You also said that he was “crucified that we might be saved if we believe that He is God's one and only Son.” Check mark! We believe that he died “that we might be saved” and we believe,as the scriptures say, “the only begotten of the Father ” (John1:14).
  
  

  You also said the following. “Yes, I know those are my beliefs from as stated in the Bible.” See, if you are taking your beliefs from the Bible it is one thing. However, you are are not doing that “as stated from the Bible.” The bible never says that we are saved by only faith and nothing to do with works because faith drives works.
  

  In fact the whole second chapter of James refutes that idea. Let's not forget about Revelations 20:12-13, where it says we are judged according to our works.
  

  Now, I don't want to get into a whole big thing with quoting scriptures. Maybe the real problem is that you think we try too hard. Luther had an interesting interpretation of the Bible. He wrote, “Sin cannot separate us from God, even if we were to commit a thousand adulteries and as many homicides” (Christian Apologies Vol. 2. Page 417). I am not arguing the Saviors ability to forgive. What I am saying is that I am going to work my hardest not to do even one adultery.
  
  

  The bottom line is I want to be like the Savior. I have faith that if i keep his commandments and follow his example I can overcome the weaknesses that are in me. I am not saying I will be perfect, but I will be a lot better than I was before and I can also be an example that faith in Jesus Christ does change lives for the better. If faith was the only thing that was required and not works then I have faith. How can I be excluded for believing a little bit more. How can i be excluded for having works also. (I don't believe that by my works I can build a tower to heaven. I believe if there are no works, if you are not up and doing, your faith is dead and a dead tree can't bring forth any fruit.)
  

  On the general question of a Moron being elected for President. I have a good friend who would not vote for Romney for the sole reason that he is a Mormon. There are some that think he is the Anti-Christ. Romney has a lot to overcome, but it is not impossible for him to win.

• mormonblog2 said on May 24, 2007....

  http://beta.mormon.org http://lds.org http://www.jefflindsay.com/LDS_Intro.shtml#basic www.jefflindsay.com/BOMIntro.shtml,www.lightplanet.com/mormons/ please see Articles of Faith in http://mormonchrist.typepad.com http://soulcast.com/mormonblog2 http://soulcast.com/ldsblog http://7cmm.org http://mormonchrist.com

• welljoe-lds said on Sep 13, 2007....

  http://www.soulcast.com/welljoe-lds/ http://www.soulcast.com/post/show/88222/Light-%26-Truth---Live-Long-And-Strong-%2B-Scripture-Study-Helps# Ann Romney on her choices, family, health and future

• TruthHurts said on Oct 13, 2007....

  My question is, can BALLS be an more ignorant to the LDS beliefs? I guess its possible, I should have been able to answer that question based on his screen name!
  Well done BALLS!! you have just shown everyone how uninformed one can truly be about anothers faith...
  Joseph Smith had no more then a 3rd grade education and and comparing his accomplishments to the brilliant things you have said here i would guess you propably didnt make it much further then preschool, if you made it at all?

Comment on "Can a mormon be President?"

Currently tagged	religion politics mormon Mormonism JUST KEEPIN IT LIGHT joseph smith moron president Hello Seperation of Church and State mormon links Christ balls ignorant Nut Job (Click to add tags below)
Tag this post	(Separate tags using commas, for example: New York, dating, vegetarian)
Your comment