Symptoms pointing to a diagnosis

Great article on the Amateur, the CES – our president.

2 cents: Hopefully many millions of USA citizens are wanting systemic change in our government on election day. Hopefully those many millions will be the majority.  Still the greatest resource the incumbent has this election is the Republican party’s candidate. I’m sure many voters are also quite leery of Romney and his Mormon background. I also think this election is yet more proof that the average Christian is only actually Christian on Sunday, major holidays and when death seems near. That is an abysmal Christianity which points at one large reason our society and culture has degenerated so swiftly over the last hundred years.  By definition according to the Bible’s definition of the word Christian (Acts 11:26) whom we label as Christians would not be called that. We would likely grouped with Demas (2Timothy 4:10) who Paul said had forsaken him because he loved this present world.  The other reason why Mormonism is not being seriously discussed during this election is because it would divide the Romney vote which would seal the victory for the incumbent. Hence our predicament. I guess that the hope is that Romney’s religion will actually be in name only and not impact his worldview and decisions he makes, like many who call themselves Christians.

The big elephant in the room that no one is addressing in MSM is the teachings of Mormonism. It is joked only on when referring to holy underwear and by making it a joke it is easily disregarded. Below is some information in a succinct way from the Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry  (CARM)

So I and in reality – many – have a difficult choice on Election Day; which I am still mulling over how best to use my vote. Sad commentary on the state of each political party and our nation that these two gentlemen are the supposed cream of the crop.

These are Mormon beliefs

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, known as the Mormons, teaches that God the father used to be a man on another planet, that he became a God by following the laws and ordinances of that God on that planet and came to this world with his wife (she became a goddess), and that they produce a spirit offspring in heaven.  These spirit offspring, which includes Jesus, the devil, and you and me,  are all brothers and sisters born in the preexistence.  The preexistence spirits come down and inhabit babies at the time of birth and their memories of the preexistence are lost at the time.  Furthermore, faithful Mormons, who pay a full 10% tithe of their income to the Mormon church through Mormon temples, have the potential of becoming gods of their own planets and are then able to start the procedure over again.

Is it Christian?  No.

If you were to go to any Christian bookstore and look in the non-Christian cult section you will see numerous books on Mormonism that document Mormon beliefs as aberrant and un-Biblical. The Mormon Church is not considered a Christian church.

This is not simply an opinion that they are false; it is a fact that they teach abberant and unchristian theology.  In fact, Jesus warned us about such groups when he said in Matthew 24:24 that in the last days many false Christs and false prophets will arise and deceive many. Mormonism is exactly that, a manifestation of a false prophet: Joseph Smith, who taught all these things.

The Bible does not teach that God came from another planet, or that he has a goddess wife, or that we can become gods. In fact, the Bible clearly and definitely contradicts those teachings. But, the Mormon Church responds by saying that the Bible is not really trustworthy, that the true faith was lost, and that its leader, Joseph Smith, restored the so-called “true” Christian faith:  god from another world, becoming gods, goddess mother, etc. Of course, the Mormon Church’s claim is not true.

One question to ask the Mormon Church as a whole is why is it that it does not appoint a representative to publicly debate and answer the challenges of competent Christians who know not only the Bible, but what Mormonism teaches?  Why is it that the Mormon Church refuses to have open dialogue and appoint a representative who would attempt to defend the LDS teachings from the Bible? Why does it refuse to do this?  I believe it is because it doesn’t want to be made to look bad.

Mormon Beliefs documented

Please note that these teachings are documented from Mormon writers, not anti-Mormon writers:

  1. Book of Mormon
    1. The book of Mormon is more correct than the Bible, (History of the Church, vol. 4, p. 461.)
  2. Devil, the
    1. The Devil was born as a spirit after Jesus “in the morning of pre-existence,” (Mormon Doctrine, p. 192.)
    2. Jesus and Satan are spirit brothers and we were all born as siblings in heaven to them both, (Mormon Doctrine, p. 163.)
  3. God
    1. God used to be a man on another planet (Mormon Doctrine, p. 321; Joseph Smith, Times and Seasons, vol. 5, p. 613-614; Orson Pratt, Journal of Discourses, vol. 2, p. 345; Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, vol. 7, p. 333).
    2. “The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as mans…” (D&C 130:22).
  4. God, becoming a god
    1. After you become a good Mormon, you have the potential of becoming a god (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 345-347, 354).
    2. “Then shall they be gods, because they have no end; therefore shall they be from everlasting to everlasting, because they continue; then shall they be above all, because all things are subject unto them. Then shall they be gods, because they have all power, and the angels are subject unto them,” (DC 132:20).
  5. God, many gods
    1. There are many gods (Mormon Doctrine, p. 163).
    2. “And they (the Gods) said: Let there be light: and there was light,” (Book of Abraham 4:3).
  6. God, mother goddess
    1. There is a mother god (Articles of Faith, by James Talmage, p. 443).
    2. God is married to his goddess wife and has spirit children (Mormon Doctrine, p. 516).
  7. God, Trinity
    1. The trinity is three separate Gods: The Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. “That these three are separate individuals, physically distinct from each other, is demonstrated by the accepted records of divine dealings with man,” (Articles of Faith, by James Talmage, p. 35).
  8. Heaven
    1. There are three levels of heaven: telestial, terrestrial, and celestial (Mormon Doctrine, p. 348).
  9. Holy Ghost, the
    1. The Holy Ghost is a male personage (A Marvelous Work and a Wonder, Le Grand Richards, Salt Lake City, 1956, p. 118; Journal of Discources, vol. 5, p. 179).
  10. Jesus
    1. “Therefore we know that both the Father and the Son are in form and stature perfect men; each of them possesses a tangible body . . . of flesh and bones,” (Articles of Faith, by James Talmage, p. 38).
    2. “The birth of the Saviour was as natural as are the births of our children; it was the result of natural action. He partook of flesh and blood – was begotten of his Father, as we were of our fathers,” (Journal of Discourses, vol. 8, p. 115).
    3. “Elohim is literally the Father of the spirit of Jesus Christ and also of the body in which Jesus Christ performed His mission in the flesh …” (First Presidency and Council of the Twelve, 1916, God the Father, compiled by Gordon Allred, p. 150).
  11. Joseph Smith
    1. If it had not been for Joseph Smith and the restoration, there would be no salvation.  There is no salvation [the context is the full gospel including exaltation to Godhood] outside the church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormon Doctrine, p. 670).
  12. Pre-existence
    1. We were first begotten as spirit children in heaven and then born naturally on earth (Journal of Discourse, vol. 4, p. 218).
    2. The first spirit to be born in heaven was Jesus (Mormon Doctrine, p. 129).
    3. The Devil was born as a spirit after Jesus “in the morning of pre-existence,” (Mormon Doctrine, p. 192).
  13. Salvation
    1. “One of the most fallacious doctrines originated by Satan and propounded by man is that man is saved alone by the grace of God; that belief in Jesus Christ alone is all that is needed for salvation,” (Miracle of Forgiveness, by Spencer W. Kimball, p. 206).
    2. A plan of salvation was needed for the people of earth so Jesus offered a plan to the Father and Satan offered a plan to the father but Jesus’ plan was accepted. In effect the Devil wanted to be the Savior of all Mankind and to “deny men their agency and to dethrone god,” (Mormon Doctrine, p. 193; Journal of Discourses, vol. 6, p. 8).
    3. Jesus’ sacrifice was not able to cleanse us from all our sins, (murder and repeated adultery are exceptions), (Journal of Discourses, vol. 3, 1856, p. 247).
    4. Good works are necessary for salvation (Articles of Faith, p. 92).
    5. There is no salvation without accepting Joseph Smith as a prophet of God (Doctrines of Salvation, vol. 1, p. 188).
    6. “The first effect [of the atonement] is to secure to all mankind alike, exemption from the penalty of the fall, thus providing a plan of General Salvation. The second effect is to open a way for Individual Salvation whereby mankind may secure remission of personal sins (Articles of Faith, by James Talmage, p. 78-79).
    7. “As these sins are the result of individual acts it is just that forgiveness for them should be conditioned on individual compliance with prescribed requirements — ‘obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel,'” (Articles of Faith, p. 79).
    8. “This grace is an enabling power that allows men and women to lay hold on eternal life and exaltation after they have expended their own best efforts,” (LDS Bible Dictionary, p. 697).
    9. “We know that it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do,” (2 Nephi 25:23).
  14. Trinity, the
    1. The trinity is three separate Gods: The Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. “That these three are separate individuals, physically distinct from each other, is demonstrated by the accepted records of divine dealings with man,” (Articles of Faith, by James Talmage, p. 35).

to block the rise of the Islamists

CAIRO — Even as they promised to hand authority to elected leaders, Egypt’s ruling generals were planning with one of the nation’s top judges to preserve their political power and block the rise of the Islamists, the judge said. (emphasis added)

…the generals “certainly” never intended to relinquish authority before supervising a new Constitution, Judge Gebali said.

The military council’s plan to cede authority was premised on first establishing the Constitution, the judge said, so the generals “knew who they were handing power to and on what basis. That was the point.”

The generals have again pledged to transfer power after a new Parliament is elected and a Constitution drafted.

Some argue that this is in Egypt’s best interest.

The generals “want to make sure before they leave that the Constitution is not monopolized by any group or direction,” said Anwar el-Sadat, nephew of the former president and a member of the Parliament that was dissolved. He was referring to the Islamists, who had won control of the Parliament and went on to win the presidency.

“They would like to make sure this is a civil state,” Mr. Sadat added, as opposed to a religious one. “That is all.”

Whole article here

2 cents: Reminder: this is a good thing for the citizens of Egypt and those in the region. This of course is contradictory to the CES’s desires for the nation. To have another nation similar to Iran in the region is not a stabilizing source for the region or the world. The ruling generals are acting predominantly in the best interest of the the citizens and the world.

 

Night time in Egypt

2 cents: Below is an article on today’s Fox News website that articulates what I figure will happen with the Muslim Brotherhood and the real purpose of the military’s actions before the election and since. If a real democracy is to take root and grow in that country, it will require the threat of military trumping the government and holding them in place. As commented earlier I figure that the actions going on behind the scenes right now with the MB is figuring how best to create cabinet and committees that will be engaged with the military and – ultimately – to infect them and weaken them most probably my creating a schism. It is night time right now (symbolically) in Egypt and the evil always ply their trade in the night.

Again – don’t forget – the CES wanted the MB to win the presidential election in Egypt.

article:

After thousands of years as the land of the pharaohs and decades under dictators, Egypt could find its experiment with democracy brief, some analysts worry.

That concern follows the Muslim Brotherhood’s wild success at the polls in post-Mubarak Egypt, most recently with the election to the presidency of Brotherhood candidate Mohammed Mursi. He was sworn in over the weekend.

Kori Schake, a research fellow at the Hoover Institution, feels Mursi and the Muslim Brotherhood’s rise owes much to Egyptians’ dislike of those candidates aligned with Hosni Mubarak and the Egyptian military. But the result is that the second-largest recipient of U.S. foreign aid is now led by a party with past ties to terror group Hamas.

“With the Islamist parties, because they are revolutionary, that is — they seek to change the societies as they have been governed — the fear is that you will get one man, one vote, one time,” Schake said.

Middle East and Propaganda

WASHINGTON — The United States has quietly moved significant military reinforcements into the Persian Gulf to deter the Iranian military from any possible attempt to shut the Strait of Hormuz and to increase the number of fighter jets capable of striking deep into Iran if the standoff over its nuclear program escalates.

The deployments are part of a long-planned effort to bolster the American military presence in the gulf region, in part to reassure Israel that in dealing with Iran, as one senior administration official put it last week, “When the president says there are other options on the table beyond negotiations, he means it.”

Whole NYT article here

2 cents: More of the same going on over there. This article’s purpose IMO is not for the Middle East folk but to attempt to sway voters here in the USA that the CES is tough and wise in his resolution and strategy toward Iran. In other words….propaganda.

 

CES=Chief Empty Suit=current USA president

Missing the point

2 cents: A good article but Friedman is either missing the point deliberately or out of ignorance. The point being in the last paragraph which I have highlighted in red; note the context of the paragraph – it is a mandate, if you will, written by and for Arabs on principles that they believe they need to address and improve in order for their nations and people to thrive. They – the Arab so-called intellectuals and leaders – do not believe Friedman’s insertion (text in red) are principles that need to be adopted and embraced in their countries. My point being that the Muslim Brotherhood in order to fulfill their agenda and beliefs CAN NOT actually allow Friedman’s insertion to be a reality or even seriously entertained by the citizens of Egypt or other Arab countries. Therefore the text highlighted in blue will not be realized as long as they are in power.

June 26, 2012

The Fear Factor

By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN

If there is one thought that summarizes the strength and weakness of the Arab awakenings, it’s the one offered by Daniel Brumberg, a co-director of the democracy and governance studies program at Georgetown University, who observed that the Arab awakenings happened because the Arab peoples stopped fearing their leaders — but they stalled because the Arab peoples have not stopped fearing each other.

This dichotomy is no surprise. That culture of fear was exactly what the dictators fed off of and nurtured. Most of them ran their countries like Mafia dons operating “protection rackets.” They wanted their people to fear each other more than the leader, so that each dictator or monarch could sit atop the whole society, doling out patronage and protection, while ruling with an iron fist. But it will take more than just decapitating these regimes to overcome that legacy. It will take a culture of pluralism and citizenship. Until then, tribes will still fear tribes in Libya and Yemen, sects will still fear sects in Syria and Bahrain, the secular and the Christians will still fear the Islamists in Egypt and Tunisia and the philosophy of “rule or die” will remain a potent competitor to “one man, one vote.”

You would have to be very naïve to think that transitioning from primordial identities to “citizens” would be easy, or even likely. It took two centuries of struggle and compromise for America to get to a point where it could elect a black man with the middle name Hussein as president and then consider replacing him with a Mormon! And that is in a country of immigrants.

But you would also have to be blind and deaf to the deeply authentic voices and aspirations that triggered these Arab awakenings not to realize that, in all these countries, there is a longing — particularly among young Arabs — for real citizenship and accountable and participatory government. It is what many analysts are missing today. That energy is still there, and the Muslim Brotherhood, or whoever rules Egypt, will have to respond to it.

Precisely because Egypt is the opposite of Las Vegas — what happens there never stays there — the way in which the newly elected president, Mohamed Morsi, the candidate of the Muslim Brotherhood, ultimately learns to work with the secular, liberal, Salafist and Christian elements of Egyptian society will have a huge impact on all the other Arab awakenings. If Egyptians can forge a workable social contract to govern themselves, it will set an example for the whole region. America midwifed that social contract-writing in Iraq, but Egypt will need a Nelson Mandela.

Can Morsi play that Mandela role? Does he have any surprise in him? The early indications are mixed at best. “As Mohamed Morsi prepares to become Egypt’s first democratically elected president,” Brumberg wrote on foreignpolicy.com, “he will have to decide who he really is: a political unifier who wants one ‘Egypt for all Egyptians’ as he said shortly after he was declared president, or an Islamist partisan devoted to the very proposition that he repeated during the first round of the election campaign, namely that ‘the Quran is our constitution.’

“This is not so much an intellectual choice as it is a political and practical one,” he added. “Morsi’s greatest challenge is to unite a political opposition that has suffered from fundamental divisions between Islamists and non-Islamists, and within each of these camps as well. If his call for a government of national unity merely represents a short-term tactic for confronting the military — rather than a strategic commitment to pluralism as a way of political life — the chances of resuscitating a transition that only days ago was on life support will be very slim indeed.”

It is incumbent on the Muslim Brotherhood to now authentically reach out to the other 50 percent of Egypt — the secular, liberal, Salafist and Christian elements — and assure them that not only will they not be harmed, but that their views and aspirations will be balanced alongside the Brotherhood’s. That is going to require, over time, a revolution in thinking by the Muslim Brotherhood leadership and rank-and-file to actually embrace religious and political pluralism as they move from opposition to governance. It will not happen overnight, but if it doesn’t happen at all, the Egyptian democracy experiment will fail and a terrible precedent will be set for the region.

The U.S. has some leverage in terms of foreign aid, military aid and foreign investment — and we should use it by making clear that we respect the vote of the Egyptian people, and we want to continue to help Egypt thrive, but our support will be conditioned on certain principles. What principles? Our principles?

No. The principles identified by the 2002 U.N. Arab Human Development Report, which was written by and for Arabs. It said that for the Arab world to thrive it needs to overcome its deficit of freedom, its deficit of knowledge and its deficit of women’s empowerment. And, I would add, its deficit of religious and political pluralism. We should help any country whose government is working on that agenda — including an Egypt led by a Muslim Brotherhood president — and we should withhold our support from any that is not. 

Perspective

Interesting comment (see highlighted):

from Debka

The Muslim Brotherhood’s rise to power in Egypt will have pushed aside Iran and energy as top issues when Monday, June 25, Russian President Vladimir Putin on a short visit to Israel meets Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. On this at least they have common ground:  The Muslim Brotherhood governments rolling out along Middle East shores with US encouragement – Libya, last year; Egypt, yesterday; and Syria, tomorrow – are seen as a threat to regional stability rivaling even the menace of a nuclear-armed Iran.

Putin counts US President Barack Obama’s sponsorship of Muslim Brotherhood power as a strategic threat to Russian national security because of it could be the match which lights the flame of radical Islam in the Caucasus and among the Russian Muslim populations of the Volga River valleys.

2 cents: the CES’ mark

rest of article here