Watch Live: Obama’s Counterterrorism Speech

Watch Today’s BlazeCast With Your Questions, Comments & Live Chat!

Faith

LDS Blogger Claims Church May Excommunicate Him Over Anti-Romney Views — But Is This True?

Sep. 25, 2012 10:15pm Billy Hallowell

David Twede, a Mormon and a blogger, is allegedly facing threats of excommunication by church officials over some posts that are allegedly anti-LDS in nature. According to Reuters, the 47-year-old Florida resident encountered problems with the church after writing about its political involvement, being critical of Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney and publishing some unfavorable posts about the faith.

Twede is the managing editor of MormonThink.com, a web site that is designed ”to generate discussion about little-known topics of church history to those interested in increasing their knowledge about these kinds of interesting, historical Mormon issues.” However, some of these topics — and Twede’s take on them — have allegedly landed the blogger in hot water.

Mormon Blogger David Twede Faces Ex Communication Over Anti Romney Blogs

Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney (Photo Credit: FILE)

The Daily Beast has more about the purported content that has led to excommunication fears for the Mormon scientist, novelist and blogger:

In his role as managing editor of MormonThink, Twede wrote an article about Romney last month titled “The God of Mitt Romney: Why Do Some Claim He’s Not Christian?”

Then last week he posted several stories about the political history of LDS and how the church may or may not influence Romney, as well as a few blog posts that were tongue-in-cheek takes on the church. And that was apparently all it took for church leaders to intervene.

“They [his local LDS leaders] were upset by the fact that I was discussing the temple, which is connected to Mitt Romney in my article,” he told the outlet in an interview about the ordeal. “I revealed things about the temple, and secrecy, and other things that they just don’t want anyone to talk about.”

On Saturday, Twede also said that he was confronted over these sentiments and that he was told by church leaders that he may face disciplinary action during a recent meeting. Twede took to his blog on September 17 to describe the uncomfortable gathering the day before, during which he was informed that a disciplinary hearing will be held against him.

Here’s a portion of his description of the alleged events:

[The leaders] chatted about who I am and my membership history and then confronted me about my writings–the (formerly) prozac-ville blog and my editorial role at MormonThink.com. [...]

They gave me a letter stating a disciplinary council for “apostasy” is scheduled on September 30 at 7:30am. During our chat, the leaders persistently asked me about other contributors, why we kept secret our identities and implied that that I am an anti-christ. This was the first time I had ever met each of these leaders, and none of them knew mebefore by name or face, from what I know.

They denied that they are on—in their words—“a witch hunt” but they continued asking me to answer questions such as, “If people are truly interested in truth, as you say they are, then why would they hide their name or who they are?”

Twede went on to share his struggles on the blog in subsequent days surrounding whether or not he should approach media with his story. In the end, he has decided to do just that. However, before speaking with reporters, the blogger sent a letter to his local bishop and stake president. In it, he explained his standing and asked that the disciplinary meeting be halted (he also published this on his blog).

“By contacting you, my aim isn’t to defame or hurt the church irrevocably or incidentally. As managing editor of Mormonthink.com my goal, as it is for most of the board there, is to maintain a site of accurate, useful and objective information,” he wrote in the letter, going on to also admit fault. “However, some of what I wrote in my blog may have treated the church unfairly.”

Then, Twede highlighted some main points he wanted the church to consider before making its decision:

1) I have removed the blog. I do not plan to continue writing about my attendance or representing what happens at the Hunters Creek Ward in public.

2) I have removed direct quotes and other information about the temple ceremonies at Mormonthink.com.

3) I am asking that you reconsider the disciplinary council, at least temporarily, as a matter of courtesy. Given that the first time we ever met was when you called me in to discuss disciplinary action, it seems premature and abrupt on my part. It is also my understanding that it is typical LDS policy to work with individuals before submitting them to a court. For example, the recent letters (http://stevebloor.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/wpid-cr1.png ) church area authorities urge local leaders “to work patiently and lovingly with these members in a way that is most likely to address their concerns…”

4) I would like to have discussions with you as local church leaders about what at Mormonthink is untruthful and try to work with you to create a website that can present accurate, open, honest and noteworthy information that can aid member and non-member alike in exercising free will about what they believe.

Apparently, this didn’t resonate with leaders, seeing as Twede has continued to speak out to media about the dilemma. One of the more interesting posts surrounding the situation focuses upon the letter he received from the church. In it, his apostasy charge is announced. But — it’s noteworthy to point out that his name is misspelled and seemingly corrected with a pen (odd, considering the supposed official nature of the letter):

Photo Credit: Prozacville Blog

In his writings, Twede also contended that he’s unsure as to which content led to his potential excommunication. That being said, he suspects that his Romney-centric claims and statements may be at the root cause of the problems he’s encountering with the church.

As of Saturday, Twede was still contending that politics was likely at the center of his problems with the church. After highlighting some new developments in the story, he wrote:

I feel in my gut, that these excuses only strengthen the case that it was likely political. Before this, I had begun to question the motive, but I again feel stronger that this is probably a considerable factor. I think TheDailyBeast probably reflects what I initially and again most recently believe.

However, not everyone is sold on the idea that politics plays a role. In fact, the church has come out to deny this notion. Reuters has more:

The Utah-based Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints declined to comment specifically on Twede or his blog, saying that disciplinary matters were confidential.

But in a statement, church spokesman Michael Purdy said it would be “patently false” to suggest a Mormon would face discipline for having questions about their faith or for expressing political views.

“The church is an advocate of individual choice. It is a core tenet of our faith.” Purdy said. “Church discipline becomes necessary only in those rare occasions when an individual’s actions cannot be ignored while they claim to be in good standing with the church.”

To better understand the potential cause of Twede’s discipline, TheBlaze reached out to David Buckner, LDS’s New York City stake president. In an e-mail response, Buckner shared his doubts about the political nature of any disciplinary action that may be taken.

“The likelihood of the blogger’s membership issue relating to politics in my experience and estimation be zero,” he wrote. “His reference to ‘apostasy’ as a reason is not something political, by definition.”

In a subsequent phone interview, Buckner explained that, in his experience, there are typically two reasons why someone’s membership in the church would be questioned. Either the individual becomes openly agressive to the faith, denouncing its central tenets. Or — he or she encourages others to engage in activities that compromise the integrity of the church.

“In other words, they’re encouraging people to open practices that are contrary to the faith,” Buckner explained.

Buckner explained that the process that one typically goes through when he or she faces membership questions is one that is based in repentance and restoration. Losing membership, he says, is an extreme rarity.

“[Twede] is publicly denouncing a couple of things,” Buckner said, based on his own reading of the blogger’s words. “It seems to indicate that he’s trying to joust with the media and the church and create an issue.”

As far as the apostasy claim goes, the Mormon leader claims he’s never seen or participated in a case in which a person has been excommunicated for apostasy, showcasing just how rare it is.

A New York Times article offers comments that confirm these suspicions:

Scott Gordon, president of the Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research, an organization in Redding, Calif., that defends Mormon theology, said that he had forwarded materials posted by Mr. Twede to church officials in Salt Lake City.

“It has nothing to do with Romney,” Mr. Gordon said. “I know members very high up in the church who are voting for Obama.”

“It’s about him posting on a blog that he was actively in there trying to subvert people’s beliefs in the L.D.S. church,” Mr. Gordon said, using the shorthand for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Should Twede be penalized, he could be put on probation, excommunicated, exonerated or disfellowshipped. If he is, indeed, excommunicated, he can still attend church, but cannot receive the sacrament, speak at services or enter Mormon temples, Reuters reports.

In the end, though, there would purportedly be opportunities for him to come back into good standing. While the media have been quick to blame anti-Romney sentiment for his discipline, it seems the evidence would generally point against this notion. Still, not enough information about the case is currently known to make a definitive determination.

Benghazi, IRS, AP...What's next? Only TheBlaze TV offers the truth from Glenn Beck, Andrew Wilkow, and Real News from TheBlaze. Get instant access and a free trial here.

Back to The Blaze »

Comments (235)

WithOutGodWePerishAsARepublic
Posted on September 26, 2012 at 12:16am
Tweed…why you lie so… you know who I am… you know you do not even believe in the church and the gospel… you forgot to tell everyone about what you have said at some of the meetings at church and also about the times your bishop has tried to talk with you but, you do not want any of it…so, next step is at Stake Level… Tweed , is this all about what the church’s stand on same sex marriage is… is this what all this is about …just asking .. and Mr Scott Gordon… please…you say that you know members in very high positions that are going to vote for Obama… do tell.. because know one I know has said this… they said they will vote for the one that will be less likely to go against the teachings of Jesus Christ… not very hard to guess on that one really… considering one of candidates is for legalizing same sex marriage and taking away some of our freedoms (God given rights..)..which goes against everything God says !!! And you very well no apostle or prophet with go against what God says !!

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- dwilco77
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 1:41am
  The person that needs to be excommunicated is Harry Reid for publically, and repeatedly bearing false witness. He offends not only the LDS, but any religious or just honest human being. He has put the re-election of Obama above his belief in God. He is truly despicable.
  
  Report this comment
- sbenard
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 5:56am
  @DWill
  
  I agree completely, and would only add the following:
  Hypocrite Harry says he’s a Mormon, but his religion is progressivism, and his god is government.
  
  Report this comment
- sbenard
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 5:58am
  David Twede is a classic case of a wolf in sheep’s clothing. He masquerades as a Mormon, but secretly seeks to undermine and ridicule the faith he claims to believe in — just like Harry Reid!
  
  Report this comment
- IraHayesFlagRaiser
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 7:30am
  Never mind the blogger! What about Harry Reed – kick that weasel out! If the Mormons stand for truth (and I personally don’t believe they do) they should take action against Harry the weasel for his outright lies and defamation of a man highly regarded by his peers as good!
  
  Report this comment
- Individualism
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 9:03am
  the anti romney guy might need protection because his cult might kill him as punishment, it has been done in the past.
  
  Report this comment
- self-reliant man
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 10:04am
  I am LDS and happen to know for a fact certain individuals that are “high up” in the church that are lifelong democrats. I personally am conservative but the church constantly says from the pulpit that it is apolitical and urges all members to vote for whomever they feel will better serve the country.
  
  Report this comment
- saranda
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 11:34am
  Sure he knows who you are. You have not even spelled his name correctly.
  
  As for the mormonthink.com.com.com website, twede has asked for church input into removing erroneous information and/or false statements……..crickets.
  There are many reasons for Twede to stay in the LDS church despite doubts or disbelief including his wife may still believe, fear of shunning by his family and friends or any number of social or work concerns. I have many friends who do not resign from the church because of similar concerns and I do not live anywhere near the traditional morridor of heavy LDS population.
  
  If Twede is willing to work with church officials to cooperate in the informations truthfulness then what difference does it make if he is another number among the more than 10 million inactive LDS members.
  
  Report this comment
- LetUsReason
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 11:48am
  @ INDIVIDUALISM
  
  Nice try. You must be a bitter old man.
  
  Report this comment
- I am 'We the People
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 11:55am
  Sign here for Harry Reid’s excommunication : http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/petition-for-the-excommunication-of-senator-harry/
  
  Report this comment
- Joey8
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 11:11pm
  @individual
  i thought only the Jews assassinated people? Lol. oh yeah, 9/11 was done by muslim terrorists, not by Jews or President Bush.
  
  Report this comment
- P8riot
  Posted on September 27, 2012 at 12:51pm
  @INDIVIDUALISM
  
  I would wager that you believe in Bigfoot and Alien Abductions.
  
  Report this comment
glennisright.com
Posted on September 26, 2012 at 12:01am
This guy’s an idiot. If they haven’t ex-communicated that traitor Harry Reid, they’re certainly not going to ex-communicate this weasel.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- For my Liberty!
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 1:54am
  Hmmm……I believe they are not telling the true facts….Before I met my husband… He and his girlfriend were living together. They were visiting his mother who was right across the drive. He said they asked who he was..and she told them he was her son, and that Becky was his girlfriend. Later, he got a letter from the church stating that he was excommunicated because they were living together and were not married.
  
  Report this comment
- stone2016
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 10:14am
  ForMyLiberty…Nope, but thanks for trying.
  
  Report this comment
- LetUsReason
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 11:42am
  @ FOR MY LIBERTY
  
  I agree with the comment above mine. Your story is not totally accurate. You might mean well and think you’re being truthful, but you do not have all the facts. Members are not summarily excommunicated via letter in the abrupt fashion that you would have us believe.
  
  Report this comment
Serenabit
Posted on September 25, 2012 at 11:41pm
So where do they stand on Harry Reid?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- kalli
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 12:02am
  Amen! That weasel should be first in line to be excommunicated. He’s voted for abortion, welfare, debt onto America, and today trashed Mitt’s standing with the church. I didn’t think that weasel could stoop any lower, but was wrong after what he said today. He will reap what he sows, and I am sure G-d has all his notes on his closet full of ghastly deeds.
  
  Report this comment
- Simonne
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 4:45am
  You can tell it’s near election time because they are bringing his religion up big time. Reid is a despicable man & he doesn’t mind going in the gutter, anything to help Obama. I don’t consider him a man of faith.
  
  Report this comment
- ashestoashes
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 8:57am
  Okay..check out this video..Apparently it is okay to advocate abortion or same sex marriage depending on who you are trying to impress at the time. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_pgfWK3sxw
  
  Report this comment
- Ridd1ck
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 10:06am
  I doubt the church will publicly say anything about Reid. I am sure they don’t support him. He claims there are many LDS faithful here in Utah that support his views. Unlikely. Reid supports and votes for things that are completely against the teachings and ethics of the church. Him publicly accusing Romney with no proof nor apologizing when proven wrong is evidence enough he is not an honorable man.
  
  Report this comment
- LetUsReason
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 11:54am
  I don’t know why Reid even tries to maintain pretenses that he is still LDS. He has forsaken everything good and holy long ago.
  
  Report this comment
- I am 'We the People
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 12:01pm
  Petition for dingy reid’s excommunication: http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/petition-for-the-excommunication-of-senator-harry/
  
  Report this comment
justin.blake
Posted on September 25, 2012 at 11:35pm
Calling BS on this one. The misspelling for one, as letters are generated from the database of membership records which would be correct. Furthermore, if this dude is an ‘active, practicing Mormon’, he would for sure have met and know his Stake President or members of the Stake Presidency, and the High Council members (has to be at least one or 2 from his own ward). Also, a charge of apostasy is so extremely rare its not even funny, as corroborated by the interview the article mentions. Calling your bluff Mr. Twede…you have an axe to grind and you are making an issue conveniently at election time to make political points…bad form, lame try, pathetic delivery.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- DarkJello
  Posted on September 25, 2012 at 11:40pm
  I suspect you are correct. This story is fishy. Wonder what the dude is after.
  
  Report this comment
- Jay_P
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 12:00am
  The only problem is that he can get away with something like this, because only Mormons will be able to catch his bluff.
  
  Report this comment
- HappyStretchedThin
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 12:05am
  Well put, Justin.
  And that’s BEFORE you get to his narrative that the Stake Presidency tried to play “gotcha” with him, as if his own Bishop wouldn’t have pulled him aside privately FIRST and counseled with him.
  Look, the principles are pretty simple and pretty sound: you got a problem with a brother, the scriptures say to take him aside privately, and give him a chance to repent. These things don’t just drop out of the sky on some random victim.
  No church leaders are going to call a guy in on the carpet in this manner.
  And a quick aside for context. “Bishop” is a LOCAL and UNPAID calling–this guy’s the “pastor” of a “flock” of about 250 max. If you haven’t met your bishop, you must be a super spy able to get into buildings unseen, cause the bishop’s usually at the door shaking hands and ESPECIALLY looking to meet the new faces. Stake Pres. is also LOCAL and UNPAID–he’s probably got 10-15 units he’s looking after, but every SINGLE temple recommend holder will pass through him or one of his two counselors at LEAST bi-annually in a face to face, one on one interview. This is NOT the brass from SLC he’s dealing with.
  This yahoo’s fabricating stuff most likely to divide the Republican vote in the hopes just enough Evangelicals will be fooled into thinking mormonism’s the issue rather than their own values of freedom and family.
  
  Report this comment
- symphonic
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 12:09am
  He is after attention
  
  Report this comment
- stone2016
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 10:25am
  My stake pres. doesn’t know me by name, but I’ve met him and his counselors many times. If this guy is attending the temple, he was interviewed by the stake pres. and/or his counselors. Apparently this guy has been attending the temple for many years and you have to be interviewed every two. So was this the first time they met or does he have a temple recommend? Also, if it’s at the stake level, the Bishop has already at least tried to deal with it. No stake president would take on this case without first asking the Bishop what he has done and made sure the Bishop had tried and done all he could.
  
  Can we even count the number of cases against the LDS church that turn out to be fraud? I guess we have one more. If you have to lie to make your case…well then you can at least count Harry Reid as an ally.
  
  Report this comment
- Tranzfonik
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 11:15am
  @ Happy:
  ” If you haven’t met your bishop, you must be a super spy able to get into buildings unseen, cause the bishop’s usually at the door shaking hands and ESPECIALLY looking to meet the new faces.”
  
  Was a member of this exact ward back in “01″ for about 6 months…. While I do agree with you most typical wards would be impossible to hide, I couldn’t get over the fact that I had sat in that ward for three months before the First counselor introduced himself and it was after being there for five months that the Bishop finally introduced himself to me, and having to re-introduce myself week after week in the gospel doctrine class got irritating! I mean, I’m 6’2″ for crying out loud and the youngest person there, yet no one recognised that I had been there the previous week! … That killed me! The ward is mostly seniors and vacationers so I did not hold a grudge, but can you imagine had I been an investigator? I can see this guy may be a plant, BUT, this is the perfect ward to be one because no one there is “permanent” except the seniors!
  
  Report this comment
- nbarendt
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 12:29pm
  Very well said what you said is some of what I said when I first looked at this letter.
  
  Report this comment
NewtonsAmbit
Posted on September 25, 2012 at 11:33pm
This is about FELLOWSHIP. What person continually defames, attacks, and embarrasses those who he wants fellowship with? It is not reasonable. The disiplinary council is to investigate his real intentions. It’s not a court. He knows it. He’s just using this to grow his blog. If he is so embarrassed by the Latter-Day-Saints he should leave and go find someone he can get along with. Those attacking the LDS and other faiths as cults sound much like the Pharisees who claimed Christ had a devil. These are the same types who ended Romney’s Presidential bid last time, and thier division and bitterness gave us Obama.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Abraham Young
Posted on September 25, 2012 at 11:30pm
Oh, yes, number three. The entire temple endowment is on the internet already. It is not too likely that Twede will be excommunicated by that, unless he explicitly reveals the few things that are secret and that he promised not to reveal. The majority of stuff that goes on in there is shareable, and although sacred to us, is not anything that we necessarily hide.

http://www.ldsendowment.org

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- rockmanlinux
  Posted on September 25, 2012 at 11:51pm
  Seriously? Yes, that is definitely a reason to be excommunicated regardless if some other moron has put it out on the web.
  
  Report this comment
- LDSmommy
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 3:39am
  Abraham Young: Is it safe to assume that the Church doesn’t know about your website? You say you’re an ‘outspoken Mormon’, but are you outspoken enough that your Bishop knows about your website? Somehow I doubt it.
  
  Report this comment
- marybethelizabeth
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 6:38am
  Great post.
  
  We have nothing to hide
  Except the secret stuff.
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 1:03pm
  Jesus said, “In secret have I said nothing.” Why is much of Mormonism secret? (John 18:20)
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 2:34pm
  JOEY8
  
  Who’s the troll?
  
  Think of the implications, if what you imply is true. Since Mormons do not know if they are saved or not, this just adds to your confusion.
  
  And then ponder the reason why God gave you two ears and only one mouth.
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 2:41pm
  JOEY8
  
  You were so busy making a fool of yourself that you didn’t answer my question. Do you have an answer or are you just attempting to bury the truth?
  
  Report this comment
- Joey8
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 4:18pm
  your question was “why are their secrets”? my answer is “there are none”. Lol. Anyone can go into the Temple of the Lord, as long as they have faith in Jesus Christ, repent, are baptized and receive the Holy Ghost by someone with God’s authority to do so, and strive to follow Christ.
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 6:20pm
  JOEY8
  
  Don’t you see the hypocrisy in what you just said?
  
  What you describe is a devout Mormon.
  
  Once again, the skin of a reason stuffed with a lie.
  
  Report this comment
- Joey8
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 7:24pm
  Don’t see what’s wrong with what I said. Follow Christ, the mysteries of God are unfolded to you. Jesus doesn’t hide anything, he stands knocking, you have to be the one to let Him in.
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 27, 2012 at 10:17am
  LDS Apostle Bruce McConkie declared, “Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (known informally by the nickname Mormons) believe the Bible. Indeed, so literally and completely do their beliefs and practices conform to the teachings of the Bible that it is not uncommon to hear informed persons say: ‘If all men believed the Bible, all would be Mormons.’ Bible doctrine is Mormon doctrine and Mormon doctrine is Bible doctrine. They are one and the same” (What the Mormons Think of Christ, p. 3).
  
  If that is true, shouldn’t temples and temple ordinances from “Adam to the present” be found in the Bible if LDS beliefs and practice conform “literally and completely” to it? But until God revealed the design and use of the tabernacle to Moses in Ex. 25-40, neither tabernacles nor temples were even mentioned! Instructions to Moses for the tabernacle would have been unnecessary if temples were already in use. If “whenever the Lord had a people on the earth, temples and temple ordinances” were part of their worship, no one from Adam to Moses belonged to the Lord! (paraphrased from utlm.org)
  
  The claims of Mormonism are very confusing and contradictions are obvious and many. One minute you are claiming to be Christians who believe the same as we do, the next minute you are someone entirely different.
  
  Report this comment
- Joey8
  Posted on September 27, 2012 at 1:45pm
  So let me try to phrase your concern. Mormons claim temples have been used since Adam. You say because it’s not in the Bible, it’s not so. And since Moses had to be instructed, that means temples weren’t used before.
  Let’s start with Moses. Remember, when Moses came around, the children of Israel had been in bondage in Egypt for quite some time. Even after the Lord delivered them, they continued to show that their time in Egypt had caused them to forget most of their tradition and knowledge of God. In essence, God had to start over with them, give them a specific law to remind them and teach them about the Messiah, their Savior Jehovah. It would be pretty silly to expect these people to know how to build a temple because their ancestors built them. By your argument, the Temple of Solomon was the first temple because the Lord had specific instruction on that passed from David.
  I feel like this is a recurring theme for you, that if it’s not in the Bible, it didn’t happen. The Bible itself mentions books that we have no record of such as book of the Wars of the Lord (Num. 21:14); book of Jasher (Josh. 10:13; 2 Sam. 1:18); book of the acts of Solomon (1 Kgs. 11:41); book of Samuel the seer (1 Chr. 29:29); book of Gad the seer (1 Chr. 29:29); book of Nathan the prophet (1 Chr. 29:29; 2 Chr. 9:29); prophecy of Ahijah (2 Chr. 9:29) and about 10 others. Also, the last verse in the last chapter of John tells us that there were many other things Jesus did that weren’t writte
  
  Report this comment
- Joey8
  Posted on September 27, 2012 at 1:53pm
  This is why we don’t believe the Bible has everything God intended us to have. Either by negligence or willfull deception, parts were left out of the Bible. I just showed you scriptures that indicate the Bible doesn’t contain everything, so the argument that if its not in the Bible, it didn’t happen, just doesn’t hold up.
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 27, 2012 at 3:00pm
  Are the “mistranslations” which LDS claim are in the Bible corrected in the Inspired Version? One good example is in Is. 65:1, “I am found of them who seek after me, I give unto them that ask of me; I am not found of them that sought me not; or that inquireth not after me.”
  
  Paul quoted this verse in Rom. 10:20, but in Joseph Smith’s translation it says: “But Esaias is very bold and saith, I was found of them that sought me not; I was made manifest unto them that asked not after me.” Smith’s “inspiration” speaks for itself!
  
  The Inspired Version prophesies the coming of Joseph (Smith) in Gen. 50:24-33. But, you do not need to look beyond Gen. 1:1 to see that this is no ordinary Bible. Other texts that did not fit Smith’s doctrine were changed so that they did fit. For example, Ex. 33:20 says, “Thou canst not see my face and live.” But, the Inspired Version says, “Thou canst not see my face at this time. John 1:18 says, “No man hath seen God at any time.” But, the Inspired Version says, “and no man hath seen God at any time except he hath borne record of the Son” (John 1:19). I John 4:12 says, “No man hath seen God at any time,” but the Inspired Version adds, “except them who believe.” Since Joseph Smith claimed that he saw God and Christ in 1820, he made the Bible conform to his teachings! Smith changed hundreds of verses in his Inspired Version, but not one change can be substantiated by the original manuscripts! (easily copied and pasted directly f
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 27, 2012 at 3:24pm
  …from utlm.org
  
  And as a side note, I have been repeatedly and wrongfully accused of stating that “if it isn’t in the Bible, it didn’t happen.”
  
  Allow me to clear this up.
  
  I believe the Old and New Testaments are the Inspired Word of God, which God intended for us to have and provides all that we need as an infallible, final, rule and guide, for all Christian faith and practice.
  
  Nothing more, nothing less.
  
  Report this comment
- Joey8
  Posted on September 27, 2012 at 7:56pm
  You said “Other texts that did not fit Smith’s doctrine were changed so that they did fit. For example, Ex. 33:20 says, “Thou canst not see my face and live.” But, the Inspired Version says, “Thou canst not see my face at this time.” ”
  Did you forget that exodus 33:11 came before all of those scriptures? Did I use an altered version when Iwrote out what exodus 33:11 says? Its funny how we keep coming back to the scripture that gives you the most problem. “Face to face as one man speaketh with his friend….mouth to mouth, not in dark speeches”. It sounds like you are the one that has to change the meaning of scriptures because it doesn’t fit your belief that nobody can talk with God face to face. Joseph Smith did what I would expect a true prophet to do, write as God inspires him to clear up and clarify. That’s what prophets do
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 27, 2012 at 9:58pm
  If the Book of Mormon really contains the fullness of the gospel, why does it not teach the doctrine of “eternal progression”? (See Doctrine and Covenants 20:8, 9).
  
  Report this comment
- Joey8
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 12:20am
  hold on now, slowww down. I know you have that huge page of questions to ask me but take your time. I know it’s tempting to just try and flood me with all these questions but I’m taking 18 credits my senior year in college, i have a wife and 2 kids, and i’m in military reserves so I’m a busy guy and I’m taking time out of my day to answer your questions. The least you can do is try and answer one of mine. I know it might seem frightening to use your own brain and not copy and paste from a website, but that is how real life discussions work. Here’s two different questions so you can choose:
  1. Can someone hear about Jesus without ever reading the Bible and have faith in him? (Before you answer that, think about if Jesus’ followers had the Bible shortly after His death) If not, faith in Jesus is not the only thing you need, you also need the Bible. If so, you don’t need the Bible.
  2. do you follow Calvin’s “perseverance of the saints” or do you follow the more non-traditional “free grace” theology or the “lordship salvation” with its “irresistible faith”? These are all at odds with each other. One Jesus says “as long as you accept me once, nothing you can do after will change your salvation“ while another says ”you don’t have a choice in the matter, I’m choosing you to be able to accept me“ while James says ”faith without works is dead”. These are all at odds with each other and sound like different Jesus’ to me. Which one? Man up
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 29, 2012 at 12:21pm
  Anyone? Why do these tough questions always go unanswered?
  
  Report this comment
Abraham Young
Posted on September 25, 2012 at 11:27pm
This might be a good time to bring up a very salient point. Or two.

Number one. The church doesn’t care what your politics are. It is very neutral, always has been, always will be.

Number two. Harry Reid is a Mormon. Very anti-Romney. Do you think he is in fear of being excommunicated? Not likely.

Number three. This story impacts my life, how?

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Abraham Young
Posted on September 25, 2012 at 11:24pm
I’m an outspoken Mormon , anti-Romney, and my fellow Mormons are fine with that. I teach sunday school, (primary). I know many anti-Romney Mormons.

I’m also anti-Democrat. I have no idea why this fellow is in fear of his membership. And I don’t really care either.

Ho Hum.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 1:10pm
  Ok Mr. outspoken Mormon Sunday School teacher, answer this question:
  
  If the Book of Mormon contains the fullness of the gospel, why doesn’t it teach that God was once a man?
  
  And I might add that I am a staunch Romney supporter in spite of his religion, as is everyone else I know who is also voting for him.
  
  Report this comment
- Joey8
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 2:00pm
  @theother
  I replied to another story you wrote on, so ill say the same here. You are the biggest troll i’ve seen yet. You joined the blaze specifically to rage on one religion and you copy and paste “your” talking points directly from the book “Mormon claims answered”. You’re too lazy to even change the wording so people like myself can’t throw “your” questions into google and see the site you copy them from. I’m waiting for you to come up with something of your own. So much for your “25 years of studying Mormon” bs. LOL. Also, have you figured out yet what “as a man speaketh with his friend” means yet? Talk with any blind, invisible friends in the dark? LOL
- slated
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 2:14pm
  @theother
  
  Who said the Book of Mormon contains the fullness of the gospel? Try reading it… it clearly states that it is “Another Testament of Jesus Christ” on the cover. Nothing more, nothing less.
  
  Report this comment
- Joey8
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 2:25pm
  @slated
  The introduction to the Book of Mormon says that it contains the fullness of the everlasting Gospel, also, Moroni told it to Joseph.
  What theotherberean doesn’t understand is how that phrase is used. Maybe he’ll find a paragraph from the book “mormon claims answered” that will allow him to ask what we mean by that.
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 2:31pm
  JOEY8
  
  Still tossing your hate around I see. But I understand. You’re bitter because I destroyed all of your arguments with your own Church’s teachings, and proved you don’t know what you’re talking about. So go ahead and attack my person. I am a sinner and you will find much wrong with me in that respect, but I notice my arguments go unanswered, because they contain the truth.
  
  chirp chirp chirp
  
  I always site my sources, and unfortunately for you, most of this stuff comes directly from LDS.org, so it’s not the source that causes you distress so much as the truth of the matter contained therein.
  
  Most Mormons don’t have a clue what their religion really teaches, as evidenced in Beck’s explanation of Mormonism. Since it’s a Christian’s job to know the Bible and point out hypocrisy, I am only doing what I have been commissioned to do.
  
  2 Tim 4:3For the time will come when they will not listen to the sound doctrine, but, having itching ears, will heap up for themselves teachers after their own lusts; 4and will turn away their ears from the truth, and turn aside to fables.5 But you be sober in all things, suffer hardship, do the work of an evangelist, and fulfill your ministry.
  
  So my advise is to read your Bible and get back with me…
  
  Report this comment
- Joey8
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 2:44pm
  so when you say you site your sources, you mean the marvin cited them for you when he wrote his book nad included citations right? no dishonesty lol
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 3:03pm
  Give it up Joey8. By your own logic it’s improper to quote anyone.
  
  Here’s one that should make you scream!
  
  In Matthew 16:15 Jesus asked the important question: “But who do you say that I am?” This is a question that is essential to salvation and one that the Mormons and Jehovah Witnesses get wrong. Their answer that Jesus is the spirit brother of Satan is the wrong one. Jesus is God the Son, and in Him the fullness of the Godhead dwelt bodily (Colossians 2:9). He created Satan and one day He will cast Satan into the lake of fire as the just punishment for his rebellion against God. Sadly on that Day of Judgment those who fall for Satan’s lies will also be cast into the lake of fire with Satan and His demons. The god of the Mormons and Jehovah Witnesses is not the God who revealed Himself in Scripture. Unless they repent and come to understand and worship the one true God, they have no hope of salvation.
  
  http://www.gotquestions.org/Jesus-Satan-brothers.html
  
  Couldn’t have said it better myself.
  
  Report this comment
- Joey8
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 4:11pm
  You missed a major point of the scripture you posted. When Jesus asked Peter, Peter answered “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God”. Jesus commended him saying “for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven”. You seem to think that you can prove to someone that God is real. Remember our discussion earlier, you said quote “Why did “God’s Spirit“ have to ”convince” you that Smith’s story is true? Weren’t the facts sufficient?” This scripture answers your question.
  As for what I think of Jesus, I would answer the same as Peter, but i forgot, you are the one that tells me what I believe.
  I also find it amusing that somehow wording it that “Jesus and Satan are brothers”, that it takes anything away from Jesus. Cain and Abel were brothers, but that doesn’t mean they were spiritually equal. It is a very lazy and childish argument.
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 6:49pm
  JOEY8
  
  Show me where the Bible teaches that I should “pray” as to whether or not I should accept the teachings of a false prophet.
  
  There is no doubt the Bible teaches (as does Mormon doctrine) that a false prophet does not speak for God. Period. I have already shown you that the Bible says one false prophecy is all it takes and you are a false prophet. Even Mormon doctrine teaches something similar.
  
  Your argument insists that we can ignore clear Bible teaching and accept Smith’s false prophecies if we get a good feeling about it when we read them. I don’t buy it, and neither have the Bible prophets since around 1400 BC when Deuteronomy was written.
  
  JOEY8 Condescendingly remarked: “I also find it amusing that somehow wording it that “Jesus and Satan are brothers”, that it takes anything away from Jesus. Cain and Abel were brothers, but that doesn’t mean they were spiritually equal. It is a very lazy and childish argument.”
  
  Because it “adds to” who Jesus is. Mormon doctrine teaches that Jesus is the physical mating of a mother and a father god. We’ve been over this. Christianity teaches that Jesus has existed from eternity with the Father, who is spirit.
  
  And please, grow up, bone up, or bow out, I’m weary of your dishonesty, your pathetically ignorant and inane arguments, and especially your uncharitable slandering of my person and character.
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 7:16pm
  Abraham the sunday school teacher, where did you go?
  
  Report this comment
- Joey8
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 7:34pm
  @theother
  “Show me where the Bible teaches that I should “pray” as to whether or not I should accept the teachings of a false prophet.”
  James 1:5-6 “If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him. But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering. For he that wavereth is like a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed.”
  Matt 7:7 “Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you”
  Unless you don’t lack wisdom, then don’t ask God.
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 10:03pm
  So, as i was saying, Abraham, before we got off track, if the Book of Mormon is the “everlasting fullness of the Gospel” as it claims, why doesn’t it teach that God was once a man?
  
  Report this comment
- Joey8
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 11:42pm
  It’s actually the “fullness of the everlasting gospel”, no worries though because it appears you actually wrote that yourself. What we mean by this is that it is all the principles, doctrines, and commandments required to “gain peace in this life and eternal salvation in the world to come.”
  Jesus explained it when he said, ” And this is my doctrine, and it is the doctrine which the Father hath given me… I bear record that the Father commandeth all men, everywhere, to repent and believe in me. And whoso believeth in me, and is baptized, the same shall be saved; and they are they who shall inherit the kingdom of God.” (3 Ne 11:32-33)
  Clearly, teaching that God was once a man doesn’t fall under that, but is more of a gem to members, or I should refer to it as a pearl not to be cast.
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 27, 2012 at 9:12am
  Abraham, where did you go? You made some pretty bold statements. Do you care to defend them? If not, then next time perhaps you shouldn’t be so bold.
  
  Report this comment
- Joey8
  Posted on September 27, 2012 at 12:08pm
  why dont u want to talk with me anymore? im here and willing. you have trouble staying with one topic though and seem to jump when it doesnt go so well for you
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 27, 2012 at 3:34pm
  Does anyone have an answer other than it’s some sort of Mormon secret and I’m just a worthless Christian pig and not worthy to receive these secret Mormon “pearls of doctrine?”
  
  Oops, I forgot, there are no secrets. Some people just don’t measure up.
  
  Report this comment
- Joey8
  Posted on September 27, 2012 at 3:43pm
  man, you jump around a lot, I’m still young and in shape though so I can keep up. So, back in the time of Moses and the tabernacle, who was allowed inside the courtyard? Who was allowed inside? What about inside the Holy of Holies? Wait, you mean that God restricted who was allowed inside of His tabernacle? SECRETS! Why only Levites? MORE SECRETS! What went on inside of the Holy of Holies? Now, try to imagine if Mormons allowed anyone inside of their Temples, you would be copying and pasting something to the effect of “if Mormons claim their temples are biblical, how come it’s not restricted and how come anyone can go in?”
  Reading the Bible>copying and pasting from websites
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 27, 2012 at 4:18pm
  Back on topic.
  
  If the Book of Mormon contains the fullness of the gospel, why doesn’t it teach that God was once a man?
  
  Report this comment
- Joey8
  Posted on September 27, 2012 at 5:51pm
  Already answered that one. What we mean by the Book of Mormon containing the fullness of the gospel is that it has all the principles, doctrines, and commandments required to “gain peace in this life and eternal salvation in the world to come.”
  Jesus explained it when he said, ” And this is my doctrine, and it is the doctrine which the Father hath given me… I bear record that the Father commandeth all men, everywhere, to repent and believe in me. And whoso believeth in me, and is baptized, the same shall be saved; and they are they who shall inherit the kingdom of God.” (3 Ne 11:32-33)
  Clearly, teaching that God was once a man doesn’t fall under that as you can have peace in this life and eternal life without knowing this.
  An instance of the Book of Mormon containing the fulness is when it talks about baptism. Even you yourself say that you don’t think baptism is necessary, more of an outward show, and other churches teach different ways to baptize. The Book of Mormon clarifies that baptism isn’t only essential, but it has to be done by someone with the proper authority from God and the person has to be fully submerged and it has to be done in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 27, 2012 at 10:01pm
  Ok, so you can’t answer that one. How about this one?
  
  When God number one was a man (before He became God), who created a planet upon which he (man number one) could live? (See Revelation 1:8; 4:11).
  
  Report this comment
- Joey8
  Posted on September 28, 2012 at 12:21am
  hold on now, slowww down. I know you have that huge page of questions to ask me but take your time. I know it‘s tempting to just try and flood me with all these questions but I’m taking 18 credits my senior year in college, i have a wife and 2 kids, and i‘m in military reserves so I’m a busy guy and I’m taking time out of my day to answer your questions. The least you can do is try and answer one of mine. I know it might seem frightening to use your own brain and not copy and paste from a website, but that is how real life discussions work. Here’s two different questions so you can choose:
  1. Can someone hear about Jesus without ever reading the Bible and have faith in him? (Before you answer that, think about if Jesus’ followers had the Bible shortly after His death) If not, faith in Jesus is not the only thing you need, you also need the Bible. If so, you don’t need the Bible.
  2. do you follow Calvin’s “perseverance of the saints” or do you follow the more non-traditional “free grace” theology or the “lordship salvation” with its “irresistible faith”? These are all at odds with each other. One Jesus says “as long as you accept me once, nothing you can do after will change your salvation“ while another says ”you don’t have a choice in the matter, I’m choosing you to be able to accept me“ while James says ”faith without works is dead”. These are all at odds with each other and sound like different Jesus’ to me. Which one?
  
  Report this comment
LeadNotFollow
Posted on September 25, 2012 at 11:22pm
…
David Twede may be an occupy freak who infiltrated the church with the sole purpose of defaming Romney and the LDS. He’s a traitor to the religion.
Any church member who bad-mouths another member or the church, should be thrown out of the church, no matter what religion they are.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- marybethelizabeth
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 6:50am
  And all the people who criticize Harry Reid above should be excommunicated?
  
  The best thing that could happen to Mr. Tweede is to be excommunicated. Then he can accept true Christianity.
  
  Mr. Beck was ranting earlier in the week about the Muslim God.
  The Jews, tIslam and Christians worship the same God.
  The Church of Jesus Christ Latter-day Saints doesn’t believe in a triune God. They worship something else. That’s how Mr. Beck can blaspheme the God of Islam. But when he does this he blasphemes the true God, not some fake Joseph Smith construct.
  
  And Bulwinkle says, “Watch me pull a rabbit out of my hat.”
  
  The only thing The Church of Jesus Christ Latter-day Saints can restore is a false religion.
  
  Report this comment
- Tranzfonik
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 11:35am
  Mary Mary, quite contrary!
  
  Everyone is entitled to believe in what ever “GOD” they want, THAT is the beauty of free will!…believing is the first step. BUT, if you ever read “the good book”, you would also know the true and LIVING God does NOT contend with you!
  
  If it be in you, it shall abound.
  
  Righteousness begets righteousness and the fruit thereof is UNMISTAKEABLE
  
  The whole world will know who you are, weather you be of a good nature or of an evil one.
  Tell me,
  
  What type of fruit comes forth from Judaism?
  What type of fruit comes forth from Christianity?
  What type of fruit comes forth from Islam?
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 1:15pm
  TRANZFONIK said: Mary Mary, quite contrary! Everyone is entitled to believe in what ever “GOD” they want, THAT is the beauty of free will!
  
  True, but Mary was attempting to point out that the God of Mormonism and the God of the Bible are not the same God.
  
  Report this comment
- Joey8
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 2:04pm
  @theother
  I’m still trying to figure out who your ‘god’ is. You seem so focused on bashing Mormons, you fail to offer any substance of your own. I’d at least understand if you weren’t copy-and-pasting all of “your” concerns directly out of “mormon claims answered”. Your ‘god’ never spoke with Moses face to face, like a man speaks with his friend. So, do you believe in the “perseverance of the saints” like the leaders on the berean site do? We should discuss how biblical that is.
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 2:59pm
  JOEY8
  
  Mormon bashing? I think not. The notion that the truth has no agenda also applies when you don’t have it.
  
  Where is the lie in anything I have said? Please point it out.
  
  So far, instead of addressing my arguments in a mature and intelligent manner, you have chosen fallacious arguments that only discredit my person instead. Not only is this mean spirited but it exposes your desperation to hide the truth.
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 3:12pm
  JOEY8 said: Your ‘god’ never spoke with Moses face to face, like a man speaks with his friend.
  
  You know that is a blatant lie. My argument is that Moses did not “see” God, not that he didn’t speak with God face to face.
  
  And since you brought it up, it is maniacal to argue that speaking with someone face to face is the same as seeing them with your eyes. Your lie is to try and prove your failed argument that Joseph Smith actually saw God, but it doesn’t work, neither does attacking my person change that reality.
  
  Your insistence that Moses saw God only reinforces the argument that once you tell a lie you have to keep telling lies. The Bible plainly says no one can see God and live.
  
  Report this comment
- Joey8
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 4:16pm
  LOL your rationalizing of that scripture gets worse and worse. “And the Lord spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend”. You keep putting all the focus on “face to face” but refuse to address the second part which I think is more important, “as a man speaketh unto his friend”. It’s true God speaks with prophets in visions and in dreams, but Moses was different. Remember this scripture?
  6And he said, Hear now my words: If there be a prophet among you, I the LORD will make myself known unto him in a vision, and will speak unto him in a dream.
  7My servant Moses is not so, who is faithful in all mine house.
  8With him will I speak mouth to mouth, even apparently, and not in dark speeches; and the similitude of the LORD shall he behold: wherefore then were ye not afraid to speak against my servant Moses?
  With Moses, it wasn’t so. God didn’t speak to him in dreams or “dark speeches” (sounds like what you are talking about). And it makes sense because us Mormons believe Jesus Christ to be the similitude of the Lord, and we believe that Jesus spoke in behalf of the Father to the prophets of old.
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 7:01pm
  That verse does not say Moses saw God with his eyes. You can say the Scriptures may imply that, but they clearly do not say that. You can scream and shout and beat your fists on the table, but you are still “thinking beyond” what is written.
  
  1 Cor 4:6Now these things, brothers, I have in a figure transferred to myself and Apollos for your sakes, that in us you might learn not to think beyond the things which are written, that none of you be puffed up against one another.
  
  And as I have said many times, your interpretation causes a contradiction. The Bible is either the Word of God or it is not. Your argument only works if it is not, and Joseph Smith’s gospel is.
  
  Report this comment
- Joey8
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 7:31pm
  @theother
  “The Bible is either the Word of God or it is not”. I like how we say it, “we believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly”. If the Bible is sufficient, why are there thousands of Christian churches that claim to understand it. Where is the “One Lord, one faith, one baptism”? Surely, God doesn’t want us to be confused on what He wants right? Or do you claim there is no confusion in the Christian world as to who’s interpretation is right. Do Baptists have it right? Do Calvinists? Lutherans? Catholics? Anglicans? Jehovah’s witnesses? That’s where the Book of Mormon comes in, another witness of Jesus Christ to back up the Bible (In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established).
  Moses did speak with God face to face, mouth to mouth, as one man speaks with his friend, not in dark speeches. That is the truth.
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 10:15pm
  As I was saying, TRANSFONIC, before I was distracted by wrangling about words, to no profit, but to the subverting of those who hear. Tim 2:14
  
  Mary was attempting to point out that the God of Mormonism and the God of the Bible are not the same God. Here is why…
  
  This, and more at http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=2354fccf2b7db010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD&locale=0&sourceId=b79b27cd3f37b010VgnVCM1000004d82620a____&hideNav=1
  
  [begin quotes]
  [...]The LDS doctrine of Heavenly Father has led one recent commentator to write, “The Mormons espouse a radical, anthropomorphic conception of God that sets them far apart from other religions.”
  
  [...]The Prophet explained that “God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens”;
  
  [Christ's] [...]Mortal existence. He was the Son of God, the “Only Begotten of the Father” in the flesh. (D&C 76:20–23.)
  [end quotes]
  
  The difference is that the Christian God is spirit, not flesh and bones:
  
  Num 23:19God is not a man, that he should lie, nor the son of man, that he should repent. Has he said, and will he not do it? Or has he spoken, and will he not make it good?
  
  John 4:24God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.
  
  Report this comment
- Joey8
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 11:37pm
  “The difference is that the Christian God is spirit, not flesh and bones:”
  So what happened after Jesus was resurrected? Didn’t He show Himself to His disciples and have them feel the prints and the wound in His side? Does the Bible say that He threw that body away afterwards? I thought that if the Bible didn’t mention it (ie. Jesus being married), then it didn’t happen. Do you believe that Jesus got rid of the body afterwards? If so, what about when Jesus appears to the Jews as spoken of in Zechariah 13,” And one shall say unto him, What are these wounds in thine hands? Then he shall answer, Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends.”? Is Jesus going to put the body back on for that appearance?
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 27, 2012 at 9:16am
  Consequently, my point is that Mormons and Christians worship entirely different Gods, a different Jesus and a different Gospel. You are not Christians, and we are not Mormons.
  
  Report this comment
- Joey8
  Posted on September 27, 2012 at 12:10pm
  way to not answer at all. you are good at attacking but really suck at explaining your beliefs. too bad
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 27, 2012 at 10:02pm
  God said, “Is there a God beside me? Yea, there is no God; I know not any.” How can there be Gods who are Elohim’s ancestors? (See Isaiah 44:8 and Journal of Discourses, Vol. 1, pg. 123).
  
  Report this comment
RamonPreston
Posted on September 25, 2012 at 11:18pm
Every church thinks they are “THE church” and are doing “THE work.” Christ warned that many false ministers would come professing that he(Christ) is the christ and deceive MANY. Check what they preach against the Bible.

Start with this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSf5y5D5z70&feature=relmfu
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X9bxPMxNiYQ&feature=relmfu

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Abraham Young
  Posted on September 25, 2012 at 11:34pm
  And in this case, the LDS church is correct in their claims to divine origin. But we won’t force you to acknowledge that, it is not the way of the Lord to do so.
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 1:20pm
  Actually, Abraham, if the Bible as the standard for truth, then Mormonism fails, and vise versa.
  
  Report this comment
- Joey8
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 2:09pm
  Jesus not only taught us how do discern true prophets from false prophets, but he also laid out the foundation of His church. It’s only natural that any church claiming to be His would be set up in the same way. Ephesians 4 reads:
  11.And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;
  12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
  13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:
  14 That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;
  This lists what he gave, why he gave them, and how long they should be given. Apostles and prophets, to perfect the saints and to edify and to unify in Christ, so that we don’t argue like children over deceptive teachings and interpretations.
  The Bible was written by inspired men called of God, it makes sense that inspired men called of God should be the ones to interpret them.
  I’m anxious to see which talking point theotherberean copies from “mormon claims answered”. Maybe some day he’ll think for himself.
  
  Report this comment
- Joey8
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 2:13pm
  …I forgot to add, so Jesus gave us this foundation, told us why but I forgot to mention how long we should have them. The verse mentions “Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God”. I don’t think we are there yet, don’t really see a unity of faith among the believers of Christ (hence, thousands of Christian denominations). Amos also tells us, “Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets.” It’s funny to see that people who worship dead prophets would not be excited if Moses were around today to clear up some confusion.
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 3:19pm
  JOEY8
  
  The Scriptures you posted don’t teach about “false” prophets. That teaching can be found in Deut 13 and 18 which instruct that we are not to listen to false prophets, and those who do will suffer the same fate as he, eternal torment in the lake of fire, where their worm does not die and the fire is never quenched. Isa 66 Mark 9
  
  Joseph Smith uttered many false prophecies, and you can dodge that truth all you like, but you can’t dispute it. So by your own logic, and using the Biblical teaching you espouse, you are not to follow him.
  
  Report this comment
- Joey8
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 4:24pm
  Actually, I prefer the New Testaments standard to tell false prophets from true prophets. Jesus said in matthew 7 “Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. 16Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? 17Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. 18A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. 19Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. 20Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them”
  Look at the fruits of Joseph Smith; the Book of Mormon and the church he was commanded to establish. It’s pretty easy. I don’t have to convince anyone of anything. All they have to do is read the Book of Mormon with a sincere desire to know if it’s true, and the Holy Ghost makes it known to them. Worked for me and has worked for millions. The only catch is asking sincerely which apparently some people have problems with.
  What false prophecies were you talking about? Were they the ones that you copied and pasted because I thought I copied and pasted a page of rebuttals to that (lazy huh?)
  No comment on the foundation Jesus set? Does your church have a better foundation than “…the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone”?
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 7:28pm
  The “fruits” of a prophet, are his prophecies. If even one fails, that prophet does not speak for God.
  
  Report this comment
- Joey8
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 7:37pm
  @theother
  Here’s one of the prophecies you are fulfilling right now LOL
  “He called me by name, and said unto me that he was a messenger sent from the presence of God to me, and that his name was Moroni; that God had a work for me to do; and that my name should be had for good and evil among all nations, kindreds, and tongues, or that it should be both good and evil spoken of among all people.”
  A young, uneducated farm boy said that and look at yourself, sitting at your computer almost 200 years later, speaking ill of him while im speaking good of him. That’s some good fruit there.
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 10:17pm
  Again, Abraham, if the Bible as the standard for truth, then Mormonism fails, and vise versa.
  
  Report this comment
Taurnil
Posted on September 25, 2012 at 11:10pm
Hmm. Right now the whole thing sounds fishy.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
jasonsmommy
Posted on September 25, 2012 at 11:09pm
This has nothing to do with Romney and this man’s comments about him. If that was true then Harry Reid would have been gone a long tie ago!
But in all seriousness. As a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter day Saints . The church is politically neutral. I have never been to a meeting where they tell you who to vote for. And they never endorse a candidate. They take stand on moral issues. They encourage us to be involved in politics and to know the issues but that is as far as they go.
If this man is being punished it is because he did something wrong. And from reading the article one can tell that he is not sorry for his actions. The things that we do in our temple our sacred not secret and just like other religions we hold sacred. We don’t talk about them.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Abraham Young
  Posted on September 25, 2012 at 11:36pm
  Right, they won’t even allow political meetings in the building, of any sort.
  
  I wrote a skit once, for the teenagers to perform, in which I mentioned the word Democrat. I was told to strike it from the scene, that it was too political for church. So I did and I don’t regret it.
  
  Report this comment
- kindling
  Posted on September 25, 2012 at 11:38pm
  I agree with you. I live in a conservative area of California and there are many Libs in my branch. I have never heard anyone talk politics except that we are told not to talk politics. I did get a prop 22 sign from a member and placed it in my yard. Within an hour it had been run over by a car. I went and got another one and fixed the first. It got ran over everyday and everyday I fixed it and before long many other yards had the same sighs.
  
  Report this comment
pr0grammer
Posted on September 25, 2012 at 11:07pm
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. Mormons as you like to call them belong to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints and are not of Satan.

Before casting that first stone and claim it is a false religion, read the Articles of Faith….

http://mormon.org/articles-of-faith

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- RamonPreston
  Posted on September 25, 2012 at 11:21pm
  Here’s one for you. Read Revelation 12:9 that states that all religions are wrong. “Satan has deceived the whole earth.”
  
  Report this comment
- Abraham Young
  Posted on September 25, 2012 at 11:35pm
  God is a just God and will redeem His people. There is no contradiction between John the Revelator and the Church of Jesus Christ. They are the same doctrine.
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 1:26pm
  Abraham, really?
  
  Orson Pratt taught that all other Churches are “of the devil:”
  
  “Both Catholics and Protestants are nothing less than the ‘whore of Babylon’ whom the Lord denounces by the mouth of John the Revelator as having corrupted all the earth by their fornication and wickedness.” (The Seer p 255)
  
  Report this comment
- Joey8
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 2:19pm
  @theother
  Wow, you’ve read a lot of the churches writings. Wait, is that the same quote that was used in “mormon claims answered”, the same book you copy all of your talking points from? Noooo, it can’t be. Anyways, I’m surprised you didn’t copy what Bruce R McKonkie wrote in Mormon doctrine to define the whore of the earth, since that is the more generally accepted definition. Of course, you know Bruce McKonkie originally put that it was the Catholic church (something you would actually agree with if you actually follow those guys on the bereancall) but was asked to change it to its present.
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 3:24pm
  JOEY8
  
  I know, the truth hurts doesn’t it.
  
  BTW, my argument stands until you can offer a rational refutation.
  
  Report this comment
- Joey8
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 7:39pm
  What was your argument in this thread?
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 27, 2012 at 9:14am
  Abraham, will you admit that there is in fact, a contradiction?
  
  Report this comment
sacwoodpusher
Posted on September 25, 2012 at 11:01pm
Here it comes, the belief of all religions that you must believe as I do, or you are going to hell. I see it in EVERY Christian religion, I see it in Islam.

Hey, you MUST believe as they do, no matter how hard “they” twist the scriptures.

Bah! Sheep! Follow that pastor, elder, prophet! Don’t read and think for yourself, be good sheep!

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- woodyee
  Posted on September 25, 2012 at 11:08pm
  Not unlike Leftist/ Liberal theology, except that goals of religions (except Islam) are pretty much admirable.
  
  Report this comment
- rainman1
  Posted on September 25, 2012 at 11:11pm
  Believe as I do, is to believe in the Holy Bible.
  
  Report this comment
- NewtonsAmbit
  Posted on September 25, 2012 at 11:20pm
  Here it comes, the belief of all religions that you must believe as I do, or you are going to hell. I see it in EVERY Christian religion, I see it in Islam.
  Hey, you MUST believe as they do, no matter how hard “they” twist the scriptures.
  Bah! Sheep! Follow that pastor, elder, prophet! Don’t read and think for yourself, be good sheep!
  
  Your understanding and reasoning are very shallow Sacwoodpusher. This is about FELLOWSHIP. What person continually defames, attacks, and embarrasses those who he wants fellowship with? It is not reasonable. The disiplinary council is to investigate his real intentions. It’s not a court. He knows it. He’s just using this to grow his blog. If he is so embarrassed by the Latter-Day-Saints he should leave and go find someone he can get along with. You reason like a democrat.
  
  Report this comment
- RamonPreston
  Posted on September 25, 2012 at 11:32pm
  @RainMan1
  There is a big difference between believing IN the Bible and believing the Bible. You have to read it first. Most Christians are biblically ignorant. Try this simple test:
  1) Name the 4 gospels
  2) What is Golgotha?
  3) Which apostle was a tax collector?
  4) Which apostle was a physician?
  5) Which day of the week is God’s sabbath?
  6) (I love this one) Did Adam feed his dog chicken or beef?
  
  Report this comment
- Abraham Young
  Posted on September 25, 2012 at 11:42pm
  Yeah, rainman, THAT’s IMPORTANT stuff.
  
  When you get to the pearly gates, they are going to quiz you on Biblical trivia, and if you are “smart” enough, IN YOU GO!
  
  ROFL.
  
  Sorry, the point of the Gospel is to develop Faith, Hope, and Charity, not your Biblical IQ.
  
  Report this comment
- LDSmommy
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 3:41am
  SacWoodPusher…Ummm, wrong. The LDS Church does NOT believe if you don’t believe as we do you go to hell. 100% FALSE!!!
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 1:30pm
  Abraham said: Sorry, the point of the Gospel is to develop Faith, Hope, and Charity, not your Biblical IQ.
  
  Question: How does one know the “point” of the Gospel if their Biblical IQ is lacking?
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 1:34pm
  LDSMOMMY said: Ummm, wrong. The LDS Church does NOT believe if you don’t believe as we do you go to hell. 100% FALSE!!!
  
  ReallY? Back to the books Mommy. Orson Pratt taught that all other Churches are “of the devil:”
  
  “Both Catholics and Protestants are nothing less than the ‘whore of Babylon’ whom the Lord denounces by the mouth of John the Revelator as having corrupted all the earth by their fornication and wickedness.” (The Seer p 255)
  
  Mommy also said: “You need to either study harder, or stop commenting on something you know nothing about.”
  
  I agree. Teacher, teach thyself.
  
  Report this comment
- Joey8
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 2:31pm
  @theother
  Did you learn those manners while you were getting your theology degree? I’ll write this again here, theotherberean is a troll here. He joined the blaze just to bash Mormons but he isn’t even creative with it. He copies his talking points straight from the book “mormon claims answered”, as he is not capable of coming up with anything on his own. I also wrote earlier that I was surprised you didn’t use Bruce McConkies definition of the whore of babylon as it is the more generally accepted definition. He originally wrote that it was a reference to the catholic church (which you and your bereancall.org guys would agree with) but was asked to change it.
  Also, I’m confused because your book also says that Mormons don’t believe in hell, but here you claim that we do (only when it fits what you want it to).
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 3:39pm
  JOEY8
  
  When you attack me instead of my arguments, it only exposes the fact that you don’t have any rebuttals.
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 4:04pm
  JOEY8
  
  I really should not argue with a fool, they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.
  
  But I must correct your error.
  
  You are the one who has been disrespectful, and of me.
  
  I do not have a theology degree. Anyone with a search engine and a desire to know the truth can figure this stuff out.
  
  And you sir, are the troll, not me. I joined the Blaze to support Glenn, because I like his show in spite of his Mormon beliefs. You obviously joined the Blaze to promote and defend Mormonism so is it fair to chastise me if I “were” here to defend Christianity? I discovered that there are a lot of Mormon trolls spreading lies about the Mormon Church and correcting these errors does not make me a troll. Posting in every thread that I do, with the sole intention of “exposing me as a troll” and only because my arguments are too tough for you to address, makes you the troll. Not me.
  
  Why should I come up with something on my own when I can quote someone who has said it as eloquently or better than I could have? Your problem is you don’t like the quotes because you have to keep telling yourself, gee I never knew that and wow, I didn’t know THAT.
  
  It’s not ME who is confused about Heaven and Hell, the Mormon teachings are contradictory.
  
  http://www.utlm.org/onlineresources/contradictionsinldsscriptures_verses.htm#Alma41v8
  
  Now go read your Bible while the adults discuss the issues here.
  
  Report this comment
- Joey8
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 4:39pm
  You said ” I joined the Blaze to support Glenn, because I like his show in spite of his Mormon beliefs” but earlier you wrote “…if Beck would have kept his mouth shut instead of doing an entire segment on Mormonism and them lied about it, I wouldn’t be here exposing those lies”. So why did you join the blaze the day after he did the segment on his religion? And you wonder why I attack your character? Because you are dishonest and your whole purpose here is to bash my religion. I joined the Blaze a right after it was created, check my profile, and i comment on a variety of stories. Now seeing how dishonest you are, I am going to check your profile and see where you write so I can let other people know your real intentions, not your fake little “I support Glenn and I want to help save Mormons” BS.
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 6:14pm
  JOEY8
  
  Both of your arguments are the skin of a reason stuffed with a lie. Like that big sausage that you’re trying to feed everyone about my person and motives, and only because your flimsy arguments have floundered. That’s intellectually dishonest.
  
  I am a paid subscriber to theblaze/tv and yes I joined the blaze to see what was being said about the segment Glenn did on “Explaining Mormonism,” and because I felt strongly about that. But that’s different when Mormons comment here, right? Everyone else is here just to BASH someone or something, except you and the other Mormon trolls, right? Baloney.
  
  It’s obvious you are here now with ill intent, to bash my person and cast aspersion on my character, and only because you keep making a fool out of yourself trying to prove I’m wrong. The Mormons are here to troll for Mormonism, so don’t play the martyr.
  
  So why single me out as some sort of dishonest attack troll intent on bashing your religion when in I’m merely doing the same thing you are? Show me anything I have said that is not true about your religion and I will recant my position. I am a truth seeker too and if I am wrong, then show me. Dismissing my arguments as you do is not only dishonest but the cowards way out.
  
  As for Glenn, I truly love and respect Glenn for the person he has become, in spite of his Mormon beliefs, but I understand he is just confused about who Jesus Christ is, but that can be corrected.
  
  Report this comment
- Joey8
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 7:47pm
  @theother
  ” The Mormons are here to troll for Mormonism, so don’t play the martyr.
  
  So why single me out as some sort of dishonest attack troll intent on bashing your religion when in I’m merely doing the same thing you are?”
  
  So how many Mormons on here call out specific religions and bash them with copy and pasted articles from sites whose sole purpose is to bash this single religion? Which Mormons have done that? None on this site. Now looking at all of your comments, they have all been directed at my religion. You’re second post was a “answer me this Mormons!!!!!”. I’ve had plenty of discussions on the blaze with people that don’t share my faith on all kinds of subjects, but I have to admit, you are the first to be so brazen with your lazy dishonest copy-and-paste attacks on my religion (the one you single out). If I wanted to play the victim, I’d just cry about it, but instead I post rebuttals to your BS and I really enjoy doing it. I don’t even know what religion you are, so how am I doing the same thing you are? Tell me your religion and I’ll do the same thing you are doing. I’ll go to www.(your religion)is wrong.com and ill copy and paste what I find there. Then Ill be doing what your doing. Oh, and I’ll tell you what you believe too.
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 27, 2012 at 9:09am
  I’m still waiting for your comments, Mommy and Abraham.
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 27, 2012 at 10:31am
  Mormon bashing? When Mormons claim to be Christians, I consider that an attack on my faith, and I feel compelled to speak up and defend my faith. Pointing you to your own church’s teachings is not bashing you.
  
  How can we both be Christian when we define Jesus and God differently?
  
  Why can’t Mormons own up to the fact that our doctrines are worlds apart and just leave it at that? You are not Christians and we are not Mormons.
  
  Mormons who cry foul and call anyone who points out these differences a Mormon basher, are no different than liberals calling conservatives who question their ethics, racist. It has the same effect, which stifles any real dialogue and disguises the truth. And it is just as dishonest when Mormons do it.
  
  We don’t care what you believe, what you wear or what you do in your temples, but we can’t remain silent while you pollute our doctrines by mingling them with yours, then go knocking on doors boldly proclaiming that yours are the true ones and ours are corrupt. You ridicule, slander and defame us for speaking to that, claiming we are intolerant bigots and painting us as liars and thieves only bent on bashing your poor, victimized religion while stealing your faith. Baloney. In reality “your” actions exhibit the intolerance, and exposes a tactic which isolates you from the truth of the matter and discourages the free exchange of ideas. Mormons point this out in others all the time but fail to see it in themselves.
  
  I’m just saying…
  
  Report this comment
- Joey8
  Posted on September 27, 2012 at 2:19pm
  So let me try to phrase your concern. Mormons consider themselves Christian, so you see that as an attack on your faith, the same way that an evangical calling Joseph Smith a pedophile and a liar. You see both of those instances as an attack? Is that right? You feel attacked when someone tries to find common ground? Is that what all your huffing and puffing against my religion is about? Because we consider ourselves Christian? Poor you. I’m surprised you feel so confident as to speak in behalf of the Christian world when you don’t belong to any specific sect. You hide behind your “I’m a Bible Christian”. What makes you right and the Methodists wrong? Or the Baptists? If they aren’t wrong, why aren’t you joining them?
  “…which stifles any real dialogue and disguises the truth”
  So when you tell people you joined theblaze comments to “support Glenn, because I like his show in spite of his Mormon beliefs” but earlier you tell me ”…if Beck would have kept his mouth shut instead of doing an entire segment on Mormonism and them lied about it, I wouldn’t be here exposing those lies”, does that count as disguising the truth? Does that stifle any real dialogue when you pretend to come here to support Glenn, but really you are here to expose the Mormon lies?
- Joey8
  Posted on September 27, 2012 at 2:21pm
  How about when a liberal says on here “Hey conservatives, I have a question for you…” and then copy and paste directly from an article at mediamatters? Are they being honest? How is that any less deceptive than you saying “Mormons, answer me this…” and then copying and pasting from a site dedicated to trashing my religion. Why be deceptive about it? Why claim that you came up with the question and also claim that you read the sources that it came from, when you didn’t. I even called you out on D&C 132, you had no idea what it said, but you put it as a source for your question as to what the church commanded.
  And if you were really the “truth seeker” you say you are, wouldn’t you be interested at least in letting people answer those questions? Wouldn’t you be interested in what the answers are in? Instead, you dismiss anything because to you, you weren’t really looking for an answer, you’re trying to expose Mormons with inflammatory questions. I’ve never met anyone as dishonest in my entire life, and I grew up in southern California.
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 27, 2012 at 10:05pm
  How can any men ever become Gods when the Bible says, “Before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me”? (See Isaiah 43:10).
  
  Report this comment
woodyee
Posted on September 25, 2012 at 10:46pm
Blaze, why don’t you find out how long Twede has been a member of the LDS Church? Also,
his behavior indicates to me that his interests lie in something other than what he implies. It could very well be that he created the website to demean the LDS Church and get public notoriety as a means of casting stones at Romney while making the name of his website known nationwide.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- jzs
  Posted on September 25, 2012 at 11:06pm
  What kind of outfit is the Mormon church? Does this mean there is a hierarchy in the Mormon Church, one that can excommunicate people like the Catholic Church?
  
  Sorry if I’m confused, but Protestant churches don’t have that same organization do they? I mean, there’s nobody that can tell pastors they are saying the wrong thing and therefore aren’t Christians anymore. Can Protestant pastors tell their parishioners that, because they have the wrong beliefs, they have to leave the church?
  
  Seriously, what is the deal? Can these Mormon bigwigs kick people out of the church for their beliefs? Sounds like it. What kind of religion is that?
  
  Report this comment
- IX-XI
  Posted on September 25, 2012 at 11:11pm
  So, I take it, JZS, you are also referring to the Catholic Church when you ask, “what kind of religion is that?” Because you talk about the similarity of the Mormons to the Catholics in this regard like it’s a bad thing.
  
  Report this comment
- woodyee
  Posted on September 25, 2012 at 11:15pm
  JZS, when one joins an organization, they agree to abide by the rules of the organization, not the other way around. If they don’t like the organization, they can always leave. If the new members actions are contrary to and detrimental to the organization, they are within their rights to make a happy person of said individual, and remove any responsibility from him/her to participate in it.
  
  It’s like sexual deviants wanting to force the Boy Scouts to accept sexual deviants. Why? Just go out and create your OWN “scout” group for sexual deviants. Why give grief to an organization established with a certain set of rules to abide by and certain goals in mind, when, if you don’t like it, you’re free to start your own with your OWN set of rules and goals in mind?
  
  Report this comment
- Jay_P
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 12:08am
  apparently he is a 5th generation mormon.
  
  Report this comment
- NeoFan
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 12:55am
  JZS just go ahead and speak out against your Union and see how fast they kick you out of Nambla.
  
  Report this comment
- For my Liberty!
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 2:00am
  @ JZS…yes they can and do. as I posted above my husband was excommunicated before I met hm because he was living with a girlfriend. He had been a member in good standing for many, many years.
  
  Report this comment
- sbenard
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 6:30am
  Formyliberty! –
  If your husband was “living with his girlfriend” as you said, he could hardly be “in good standing”. Living in an adulterous relationship, which by definition he was committing the sin of fornication, by nature is contrary not only to the teachings of the LDS Church, but against Bible teachings (at least 32 Bible references). All disciplinary actions are initiated at the local level in the local congregation. If your husband was in good standing, he would have been attending that local congregation and would have known those leaders VERY well. To claim that he just got a letter out of the blue, without any advance notice, warning or contact, is NOT the way the Church operates. If that is his claim, then he is misleading you! There is far more to his story than what he is telling you!
  
  JZS–
  These are not Church “big-wigs”, as you falsely asserted. All this was done at the local level. This is why Twede is being very dishonest in claiming that this was the first time he had met or heard of these people. If his claim is true, then he could hardly have been a practicing Mormon. These are HIS local Church leaders, and yet he claims that he didn’t know them? If he is being deceitful about this point, what else is he lying about? He is one of those we were warned about that by their “cunning craftiness” “lie in wait to deceive” (see Ephesians 4:14, King James Version) “Cunning craftiness” just about describes this Twede dweeb perfectly!
  
  Report this comment
Lord_Frostwind
Posted on September 25, 2012 at 10:39pm
Uh, bucko, the damage is already done when you have discussed those sacred things. Some scientist you are if you can’t understand that part of what you covenant. Sorry, but consequences come with your actions, whether you intended them or not, and these pathetic attempts to make yourself a martyr before the media show what you (Mr. Twede) truly care about.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Prosecute_Constitutional_Treason_In_Washington
Posted on September 25, 2012 at 10:39pm
No religion can take ones salvation. This is a wicked, vile, satanic lie. The writer is a teacher of lies. Who is the father of lies? Yip, satan.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- bullcrapbuster
  Posted on September 25, 2012 at 10:45pm
  Please explain your post and what does it has to do with the subject.
  
  Report this comment
Prosecute_Constitutional_Treason_In_Washington
Posted on September 25, 2012 at 10:36pm
No where in the Bible can a church or man take ones right to salvation. This is a lie of a false religion. Who is the father of lies? Yip, satan. Satan teaches many false religions. Mormonism is one. Islam is another. Both depend on you having to earn your way into paridise. Both are satanic religions.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- IX-XI
  Posted on September 25, 2012 at 10:48pm
  Ummm, excommunication is in the policies of such mainstream faiths as Catholicism (surely a Papist cult), Lutheranism, Church of God, Jehovah’s Witnesses (now there’s a cult), the Amish and Bretheren, Church of England (a rather pedestrian cult that) as well as dozens of smaller nominally Christian cults like the Assembly of God and the Church of Christ. Yep, excommunication. Proof of a religion’s falsehood.
  
  Report this comment
- bullcrapbuster
  Posted on September 25, 2012 at 10:49pm
  @prosecute…….Yip, me thinks he would be happier with you in your fools paradise where your actions count for nothing. Do and say whatever you want and still be saved in paradise. Utter nonsense!
  
  Report this comment
- ashestoashes
  Posted on September 25, 2012 at 11:01pm
  @BULLCRAPBUSTER..there is only one way to the Father..and that is through His Son Jesus/Yeshua the Messiah..one cannot make it by any other means..this man would do well to be ex-communicated so that he would have the chance of salvation through accepting Jesus as the only begotten Son of God..born in the flesh.. He took the sins of us all..and died on the cross..and was resurrected the third day..and lives..To obey His commands shows that you love Him..but if one chases after another religion..then one has been deceived by Lucifer..the god of this world..and in the end will be destroyed..
  
  Report this comment
- LDSmommy
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 3:51am
  Sir, you are sadly mistaken about the Mormon Church. You wrote: “Both depend on you having to earn your way into paridise.” (sic)
  That is utter nonsense. Not true in the least. You need to either study harder, or stop commenting on something you know nothing about.
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 27, 2012 at 10:21pm
  The following comes copied and pasted directly to you, from http://utlm.org/onlinebooks/mclaims7.htm#claims
  
  Not only do the LDS teach that Christ’s church apostatized and had to be restored, but Smith also claimed that God told him his new church was “the only true and living church upon the face of the whole earth” (D. & C. 1:30). And, he said that all other churches were wrong (P. of G.P. J.S. History 1:18-19). In the B. of M., an angel told Nephi, “Behold there are save two churches only; the one is the church of the Lamb of God, and the other is the church of the devil” (I Nephi 14:10). Therefore, members of all other churches must belong to the church of the devil! [end quote]
  
  An angel told Nephi that I belong to the church of the devil. But I’m not concerned.
  
  Galatians 1:6I marvel that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ to a different “good news”; 7and there isn’t another “good news.” Only there are some who trouble you, and want to pervert the Good News of Christ. 8But even though we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you any “good news” other than that which we preached to you, let him be cursed. 9As we have said before, so I now say again: if any man preaches to you any “good news” other than that which you received, let him be cursed.
  
  Report this comment
v15
Posted on September 25, 2012 at 10:35pm
This will quickly become among The Blaze’s Top 5 Popular Stories (w/ 500+ hateful comments) or it will (hopefully) slip by almost unnoticed (w/ 47 hateful comments). Either way, I’m not touching this one with a hundred foot pole.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 27, 2012 at 9:20am
  Seems to me the hateful comments come mostly from Mormons who think they have been unfairly “bashed” because they have been exposed to the inconvenient facts about their religion.
  
  Report this comment
IX-XI
Posted on September 25, 2012 at 10:34pm
Sounds like the guy really doesn’t care much about whether or not he is “excommunicated.” In my experience, churches generally don’t excommunicate people who didn’t already quite obviously excommunicate themselves through words and actions. If you don’t like the Mormon church, hey, great. It’s a big world out there and I’m pretty sure you’re in the majority. But shut up about the Mormon church’s right to protect itself from fifth columnists. If you don’t like the Mormon church then there’s absolutely no reason for you to be a member of it–just like if you don’t like the Catholic church you don’t join up and then crank up an anti-Catholic website.

Or maybe you do. People are weird.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Prosecute_Constitutional_Treason_In_Washington
Posted on September 25, 2012 at 10:33pm
Romney claims to be a Christian just as all mormons claim. Mormon doctrine teaches one has to earn their way to heaven. The book of Galations teaches to add works to Jesus Christ leaves one lost and no ability to enter heaven. Adding works to Jesus Christ’s free gift is a slap in God’s face. God says your not a Christian if you add works to Jesus Christ free gift. Mormons are not Christ ones. Mormons are headed for hell. Christ ones receive the work of Christ for free and offer no works of justification for salvation.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- IX-XI
  Posted on September 25, 2012 at 10:42pm
  And the book of James teaches us that faith without works is dead. Any time you take one scripture out of context and build your whole belief system around it you’re headed for trouble. Repentance is a work. It’s a good work–and so apparently Paul forbids it if we are to take his words out of context.
  
  What a convenient world you live in. No repentance required–because that would be admitting Jesus wants you to make an effort.
  
  Report this comment
- rainman1
  Posted on September 25, 2012 at 11:07pm
  YOU R AN IDIOT. Have you ever opened a bible, let alone read it?
  
  Report this comment
- rickbob
  Posted on September 25, 2012 at 11:19pm
  No informed Latter-day Saint anywhere believes they can get into the kingdom of God on their works alone. What is grace? The mainstream Christian denominations say that grace alone will get us into heaven, which is contrary to the teachings of James. Mormons believe that you do all you can, THEN the grace of the Lord will take us the rest of the way. James was writing to the whole church. Paul addressed his letters to specific congregations of the church.
  
  Report this comment
- Abraham Young
  Posted on September 25, 2012 at 11:40pm
  Mormon doctrine does NOT teach that you can earn your way to heaven. Ready, fire, aim! Is that your principle.
  
  You should ask a Mormon what they believe, not get your doctrinal education from anti-Mormons.
  
  The Lord will judge us according to the light we have been given, and His grace will need to be applied in every case, but as a perfect God He cannot look upon sin with any degree of allowance.
  
  That’s why He offered Himself as a ransom for sin, because we all fall short of the mark.
  
  Report this comment
- fccblaze
  Posted on September 25, 2012 at 11:42pm
  Mormon doctrine does NOT teach that man must work his way to Heaven. This is a common misconception. Man is saved by the grace of Jesus Christ; this is what Mormons believe. If anyone tells you differently, he is either lying or is misguided. I have cited quotations from scripture (both Bible and Book of Mormon) that refute this false notion at http://www.yourbookofmormon.com/ .
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 12:22pm
  Christ’s death means nothing more to a Mormon than gaining the ability to be resurrected so that their works may be judged.
  
  A Mormon’s “salvation” (godhood) rests entirely on their own works; “Plus All you can do,” all Mormons live in constant fear that they will not measure up in the end. Mormons need belief + repentance + baptism + laying on of hands + temple work + mission work + church ministry + tithing + ceasing from sin + abstaining from the use of intoxicants and strong drinks and tobacco + confessing Joseph Smith as Prophet + temple marriage + baptism for the dead, etc. etc. (see McConkie, Mormon Doctrine 116-117; Book of Mormon [3 Nephi 27:13-21]; Doctrines of Salvation 1:268; 18:213; The 4th Article of Faith; Smith, Gospel Doctrine pg. 107; Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 3:93; 3:247; 9:312; Gospel Principles 290; Doctrine and Covenants 39:5-6; 132:19-20).
  
  By contrast, the Christian Gospel for the last 2000 years has taught that Christ’s death paid “once,” for all of mankind’s sin, and therefore salvation is by grace through faith in Jesus Christ, plus “nothing.”
  
  Hebrews 9:28 so Christ was offered once to bear the sins of many. To those who eagerly wait for Him He will appear a second time, apart from sin, for salvation.
  
  Report this comment
- Joey8
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 8:21pm
  @theother
  There you are again,telling us what we believe and how we believe it. Here’s some Book of Mormon verses on what we believe
  “And he shall go forth, suffering pains and afflictions and temptations of every kind; and this that the word might be fulfilled which saith he will take upon him the pains and the sicknesses of his people.And he will take upon him death, that he may loose the bands of death which bind his people; and he will take upon him their infirmities, that his bowels may be filled with mercy, according to the flesh, that he may know according to the flesh how to succor his people according to their infirmities.”
  
  I know you like to make it either saved by grace alone or saved by works alone when it is neither. Clearly, we are only saved by the grace of God. Nothing we can do will ever allow us to “earn” our way to heaven. But, God does require things on our part. Jesus takes our debt, but rather than expect perfection on our part, he simply states “if ye love me, keep my commandments”. If you want to skip over James, then you can say we don’t need to do anything, but James teaches that “faith without works is dead”.
  Another verse from the Book of Mormon:
  “Wherefore, redemption cometh in and through the boly cMessiah; for he is full of grace and truth.
  Behold, he offereth himself a sacrifice for sin, to answer the ends of the law, unto all those who have a broken heart and a contrite spirit; and unto none else can the ends of the law be a
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 10:24pm
  …And, I don’t know any Mormons who believe they are saved.
  
  Report this comment
- Joey8
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 11:58pm
  @theother
  I feel that if I were to die today, I would be saved. Same with my children and my wife. It really depends on your definition of “saved”. we know that “For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ’s at his coming.” The resurrection, or being “saved” from physical death (separation of body and spirit) is a universal gift to everyone because of Christ and His power. Being “saved” from spiritual death is a different story. This is when we talk about Eternal life, living with God. This is reserved for those who follow Christ. In Romans 8, we are given a look at what is promised to the faithful followers. “The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God: And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.” The promise and the condition are given, if so be that we suffer with him.
  According to your understanding of my religion, if I died right now, I wouldn’t be saved because I still have more on my checklist. That is wrong and not what we believe. If I died right now, I’m confident I would be saved from physical and spiritual death through the grace of Jesus. I wouldn’t earn it, it’d be a gift from God.
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 27, 2012 at 9:26am
  So, does no one have a valid argument that disputes the clear Bible teaching that works are the result of salvation, not the cause of it?
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 27, 2012 at 9:49am
  It’s silly to argue that Mormonism does not teach a works based salvation, when it clearly does.
  
  Pres. Joseph Fielding Smith wrote, “Salvation is twofold: General — that which comes to all men irrespective of a belief (in this life) in Christ — and Individual — that which man merits through his own acts through life and by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the gospel” (D. of S., Vol. I, p. 134).
  
  What part of “his own acts” don’t you get? This is different from Christians who’s works are accounted to them but have nothing to do with their salvation. Good works are expected of us. Jesus paid the entire penalty for ALL sin, both past and present. The Christian requirement for salvation is faith in Jesus Christ plus nothing.
  
  Again, you can believe anything that makes you happy but clearly Mormons are not Christians and Christians are not Mormons, and that is defined by the difference in our doctrines.
  
  Report this comment
- Joey8
  Posted on September 27, 2012 at 3:06pm
  James 2:14 “What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him? If a brother or sister is naked and destitute of daily food, and one of you says to them, “Depart in peace, be warmed and filled,” but you do not give them the things which are needed for the body, what does it profit? Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead. But someone will say, “You have faith, and I have works.” Show me your faith without your works, and I will show you my faith by my works
  You say “The Christian requirement for salvation is faith in Jesus Christ plus nothing.” That is you saying that, not the Bible. James, a disciple of the Lord, says in the BIBLE,
  ” Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead”
  So what you said sounds exactly like what James describes as “dead”. Faith only in Jesus without any works, is dead.
  
  Report this comment
- Joey8
  Posted on September 27, 2012 at 3:07pm
  James continues “ You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only”. Uh oh, heresy coming from James! Oh no, please, no more James, my ears are bleeding from your Mormon teachings!
  “ Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar? Do you see that faith was working together with his works, and by works faith was made perfect?
  Again, you try to misrepresent what Mormons believe. Like I said before, you can’t earn your way into Heaven. Only Jesus did that. The standard to get to Heaven is still the same, perfection. Jesus died for our sins so that if we follow Him and do what he asks, we can be made perfect in Him, through His grace.
  
  Report this comment
- Joey8
  Posted on September 27, 2012 at 3:24pm
  @theother
  So, do you follow Calvin’s “perseverance of the saints” or do you follow the more non-traditional “free grace” theology? Did you know that these two ideas contradict each other, and another view called the “lordship salvation” with its “irresistible faith” opposes them too? But according to you, you can believe in any one of these and still be a Christian, because these are all the same Jesus right? One Jesus says “as long as you accept me once, nothing you can do after will change your salvation” while another says “you don’t have a choice in the matter, I’m choosing you to be able to accept me” while James says “faith without works is dead”. These are all at odds with each other and sound like different Jesus’ to me.
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 27, 2012 at 10:07pm
  Joseph Smith stated that without the ordinances and authority of the priesthood no man can see the face of God and live (Doctrine and Covenants 84:21, 22). He also said that he saw God in 1820 (Joseph Smith 2:17). Joseph Smith, however, never received any priesthood until 1829 (Doc. & Cov. 13). How did he see God and survive? In which was he in error: his revelation in Doctrine and Covenants 84:21, 22 or his experience in the grove?
  
  Report this comment
rickbob
Posted on September 25, 2012 at 10:32pm
If this person is saying he is being threatened with excommunication for his anti Romney views, he is lying. Period. End of discussion. I have had the opportunity to sit on a number of disciplinary councils and NONE have ever been because of a persons political beliefs. If this allegation of Mr. Twede is true, the Harry Reid’s LDS church membership would be in grave peril and it isn’t.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
PutMoreOnMyPlate
Posted on September 25, 2012 at 10:30pm
Bless him. He’s welcome at my church, no initiation required and no secrets.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- IX-XI
  Posted on September 25, 2012 at 10:38pm
  Must not be a Christian church. Christians have initiatory rites–typically baptism. No initiation required to go to the Mormon church either. Baptism is a pretty standard ritual, not some weird “initiation.” I’d wager 90 percent of Christian denominations use baptism as their “initiation.” Maybe yours doesn’t. Ask Nicodemus.
  
  Report this comment
- bullcrapbuster
  Posted on September 25, 2012 at 10:43pm
  You can have him.
  
  Report this comment
- DarkJello
  Posted on September 25, 2012 at 10:43pm
  “Bless him?” Did you read the article? If he is given the boot, it will be based on irrefutable evidence that he broke one or more covenants. Do you believe in honesty? Would you be just fine with someone in your church actively opposing it’s teachings? Wow, just wow!!
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 1:41pm
  IX-XI
  
  Most Christians believe that Christian Baptism is an outward sign of an inward change. Others are quite dogmatic about it, but lack evidential support for the notion that it is required for salvation.
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 2:13pm
  DARKJELLO
  
  Excellent point!
  
  Why was Joseph Smith still preaching against polygamy in October 1843 after he got his revelation in July 1843 commanding the practice of polygamy? (Doctrine and Covenants 132 and History of the Church, Vol. 6, pg. 46, or Teachings of the Prophet, by Joseph Fielding Smith, pg. 324).
  
  Report this comment
- Joey8
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 4:59pm
  @theother
  Lol at your copy and paste from carm.org “Questions for Mormons”
  You are terrible at citing your sources. You’re supposed to cite the website you copy it from, not just consider their use of citing enough for you. At least someone on that website took the time to maybe look at the original writing (probably just the one verse they wanted).
  I’d be interested to read where he taught against it and know who his audience was. When it was first introduced, it was only to a few members of the church and they were very reluctant. It wasn’t practiced by general members of the church until after Joseph Smith died and Brigham Young was President of the church.
  And polygamy wasn’t a commandment to the church. In D&C 132, it was a commandment to Emma Smith. Maybe you can at least read what source youre citing first, you would’ve caught that.
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 7:15pm
  JOEY8
  
  Ok, so you’re not ready to receive the truth, and you’re too proud to see that. So I’m done with you. Bye bye
  
  Report this comment
- Joey8
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 8:24pm
  @theother
  Oh, so I caught you using sources you don’t even bother reading and you call it quits? LOL. Give me a break, were just getting to know each other. At least point me to where Joseph taught against polygamy so we can have a discussion on it because I honestly don’t know where he did or if he did, so you see why it would be important for me to know about it so I can see who his audience was and what time it was. Come on, give me the truth, I can handle the truth!
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 26, 2012 at 10:50pm
  So what do you think, DARKJELLO?
  
  Why was Joseph Smith still preaching against polygamy in October 1843 after he got his revelation in July 1843 commanding the practice of polygamy? (Doctrine and Covenants 132 and History of the Church, Vol. 6, pg. 46, or Teachings of the Prophet, by Joseph Fielding Smith, pg. 324).
  
  Report this comment
- Joey8
  Posted on September 27, 2012 at 12:12am
  @theother
  I’m seriously thanking you right. I hadn’t read church history for October 1843 but you led me to it. It was actually a very enlightening read on the priesthood authority to bind things both in heaven and on earth. Joseph was trying to teach others that he was the only one that had those binding powers because some of them were taking it upon themselves to perform these marriages. Nauvoo on Oct 5 1843 Joseph “Gave instructions to try those persons who were preaching, teaching, or practicing the doctrine of plurality of wives.” His scribe recorded: “Joseph forbids it and the practice thereof. No man shall have but one wife.” The Prophet also taught this principle to those who practiced polygamy saying “that the law of the Lord concerning these things was exceedingly strict.”
  you said “he got his revelation in July 1843 commanding the practice of polygamy? ”
  Like I wrote before, D&C 132 was a command to Emma Smith only. There was never a general command to the church. These verses go to show that they took the matter very seriously, and that Joseph was the only one to approve these. It later talks about someone who tried to perform a marriage without the authority and Joseph rebuked him. During Joseph’s life, nobody was to teach it or practice it without the proper authority.
  
  Report this comment
- Joey8
  Posted on September 27, 2012 at 12:20am
  I actually found the full text with a footnote “Gave instructions to try those persons who were preaching, teaching, or practicing the doctrine of plurality of wives; for, according to the law, I hold the keys of this power in the last days; for there is never but one on earth at a time on whom the power and its keys are conferred and I have constantly said no man shall have but one wife at a time, unless the Lord directs otherwise.”
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 27, 2012 at 9:29am
  Does anyone care to address the contradiction?
  
  Report this comment
- Joey8
  Posted on September 27, 2012 at 3:09pm
  I hate to break it to you theother, but it’s just you and me LOL. I’m the only one who cares to give you any attention so you’re stuck with me answering all of “your” (or Marvin’s) questions. Are you going to go through the whole list because I’m getting pretty good at this.
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 27, 2012 at 10:23pm
  No one?
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 27, 2012 at 10:27pm
  Ok, how about this one then…
  
  Why does Apostle Bruce R. McConkie deny that the doctrine of “blood atonement” was once taught in Utah? (See Mormon Doctrine, by Bruce R. McConkie, pg. 92. Compare Journal of Discourses, Vol. 3, pg. 247; Vol. 4, pgs. 219, 220).
  
  Report this comment
- theotherberean
  Posted on September 29, 2012 at 12:29pm
  I am amazed that no one will even attempt to answer these questions. Err.. I mean contradictions.
  
  Report this comment
WithoutGuile
Posted on September 25, 2012 at 10:30pm
It has nothing to do with his views on Romney….or Reid or anything else. The church is very serious about it’s political neutrality. It has to do with his representing things considered sacred and with his seeming to have very little understanding of the doctrine of his proclaimed beliefs…. this I know because I I am a Mormon. Sadly… this attention seeking nobody is being made into a somebody because of the oh too willing media.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
woodyee
Posted on September 25, 2012 at 10:30pm
He can probably be ex-communicated for speaking against Church doctrine (although I’m not sure about that), but he sure as heck isn’t going to be thrown out for speaking out against Romney – that’s just a lie.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply

It appears that you have Javascript Disabled. Please enable Javascript in your browser preferences for a better user experience on TheBlaze. You can not comment without Javascript enabled.