Who says Mormons aren't Christians?

Who says Mormons aren't Christians?

There are 32098 comments on the CNN story from Oct 12, 2011, titled Who says Mormons aren't Christians?. In it, CNN reports that:

Editor's note: Dean Obeidallah is an award-winning comedian who has appeared on TV shows such as Comedy Central's "Axis of Evil" special, ABC's "The View," CNN's "What the Week" and HLN's "The Joy Behar Show." He is executive producer of the annual New York Arab-American Comedy Festival and the Amman Stand Up Comedy Festival.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at CNN.

Realpeople

Ashburn, VA

#27780 Sep 5, 2013
Mormons worship joseph smith.
Realpeople

Ashburn, VA

#27781 Sep 5, 2013
Mormons have added to the bible which is not right.

Since: Oct 08

Location hidden

#27782 Sep 5, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>Yes I do understand. That is why Modern Christianity aren't even close to being true examples of what Christians were 2000 years ago. Modern Christianity doesn't do/replicate a lot of what Jesus did/established. Modern Christianity picks and chooses what's important and what's not important to be preached/obeyed according to what the popular opinion is/isn't of the day. I realize that very well.
Concerning modern Christianity, it's a farce. It's a bunch of people imitating what they want to apply to themselves of a people that were true Christians 2000 years ago. The church of Rome 1700 years ago was the bastardized edition of true Christianity. Do you comprehend?
You think women should be treated like they were in the bible? Here's a hint..LOL

Since: Oct 08

Location hidden

#27783 Sep 5, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>None of us but dana can compare to being the freak of statements that you command, just saying :)
I will give a go at your question though you left a lot out. The lizards 12 fire no one from a "job" that someone has been "hired" to do. So the fact that you think it's happened discredits your story already.
Next, when did this happen? Thirty years ago? Ten months ago? The time period is important. See, atheists and theists both have prejudices because their humans and you seem to forget that when you speak of Mormons. It's like to you Mormons aren't human as like you who can be sarcastic, say mean and vile things to hurt others or hold prejudices, know what I mean?
No doubt homosexuals in the church once found out whether they have always been single or 'active' in relationships they hid from other church members, once found out no doubt many suffered the loss of church positions and or hired positions and or even were excommunicated for being sexually active by their own admittance.
A little more info about your story would go a long way :)
It just happened, days ago..so whatever you just said makes no difference.

Since: Oct 08

Location hidden

#27784 Sep 5, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>You never have been Mormon which explains your far left thinking of Mormons and how you really don't understand most of what you speak of, except for what you read or heard. Unless you were a "attending mo" in which you went but never had an interest to learn anything. Which is it?
See, if you were a mo at some past time, you would know a bishop and or stake president has to be a married man. The Bishop a married man with a family. A family isn't a requirement of a stake president but marriage is UNLESS they became a widow while holding that position and then they're usually released. The 'lizards' since Smith's time like leading positions/callings to be held by married men. If their single it's because they became a widow while holding that position like being a seventy or an apostle or prophet.

Concerning Mitch Mayne @ http://www.mitchmayne.com/ what he did was wrong and he loosly admitted to it. He had held callings and positions a single adult would/could hold without being married. He stated "Up until a year ago, I was in a committed, monogamous relationship with my partner of several years. I wore a wedding band. I attended church and held callings within my ward." In other words his ward more than likely didn't know of his 'partner' and if they did they said nothing out of politeness. I say that because if anyone in the bishopric had evidence he was having a same sex relationship and holding callings, like it would have happened to a heterosexual guy he would have been spoken to about the information and if he admitted to it he would have lost his callings and given a time to repent and abstain from sex as is done with heteros.
The fact he 'suddenly' quits the relationship and some time later is called to be a secretary to the bishopric means he admitted to the bishop what was happening and repented because he wanted to do what he felt was the Lord's will, not his own will.
The following will no doubt have you and dana doing the finger puke gag thing...lol...
" But, life is not without its own twists and turns, and I left that relationship for a variety of reasons, none of which had to do with pressure from the church. It was, without question, the most painful decision I’ve ever made.

As a result, my current circumstances provide me with a unique opportunity to serve in a Priesthood leadership role within my community. I am committing to adhere to the same standard of behavior that we require of any single, heterosexual man in a priesthood leadership position.

Like each of us in the human family, I don’t know what my future will bring; but I do know I will always strive to live my life in accordance what I understand my Savior’s will for me to be. That desire to do what is right—just like my orientation—is embedded into my spiritual DNA. And both are cornerstones to what make me my Father’s son."
Right...all those rules are pretty silly, when you get down to it, aren't they?

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#27785 Sep 5, 2013
So much that is true in this little satire.

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/lifestyle/568263...

Since: Oct 08

Location hidden

#27786 Sep 5, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
So much that is true in this little satire.

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/lifestyle/568263...
..and all the worthy sisters snub the ones married under the basketball hoop.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#27787 Sep 5, 2013
NoMo wrote:
<quoted text>
You think women should be treated like they were in the bible? Here's a hint..LOL
Never said that. Please don't promote untrue lies, I get enough of that from dana child.
Got a clue for you, most females in most countries share a traditional husband works and wife tends the kids relationship and don't mind it. I know you think it's a puke and gag scene but that's from your far left liberal feminist side that would rather all females behave as you do in relationships and screw what they want right?

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#27788 Sep 5, 2013
NoMo wrote:
<quoted text>
It just happened, days ago..so whatever you just said makes no difference.
What I said in response wasn't meant to make a difference. I asked questions because as usual, you asked a question(s) about an incident you claim you have some knowledge about without filling in the blanks so someone could give an appropriate answer. So I asked you to give some extra info which you didn't but for the time element.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#27789 Sep 5, 2013
NoMo wrote:
<quoted text>
Right...all those rules are pretty silly, when you get down to it, aren't they?
Rules you don't understand would appear silly because you don't take the time to question why the rules exist of if they have any effect.

Jesus established all the offices of the church he formed that he filled with followers. So the silly rule for a bishop was established by Jesus that bishops had to be married with a family. So wag your finger at Jesus for doing what you call silly.

Since: Oct 08

Location hidden

#27790 Sep 5, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>Never said that. Please don't promote untrue lies, I get enough of that from dana child.
Got a clue for you, most females in most countries share a traditional husband works and wife tends the kids relationship and don't mind it. I know you think it's a puke and gag scene but that's from your
"far left liberal feminist side that would rather all females behave as you do in relationships and screw what they want right?"
How far off the road do you live? Do your neighbors know your last name? Maybe you should go to town more often.

Since: Oct 08

Location hidden

#27791 Sep 5, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>What I said in response wasn't meant to make a difference. I asked questions because as usual, you asked a question(s) about an incident you claim you have some knowledge about without filling in the blanks so someone could give an appropriate answer. So I asked you to give some extra info which you didn't but for the time element.
Really, go to town..walk around and buy a corn dog. You need some air

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#27792 Sep 5, 2013
Dana Robertson wrote:
So much that is true in this little satire.
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/lifestyle/568263...
It's very true. Mormon ward houses are very drab for the most part. The halls have a framed picture here and there and that's it. They don't have crosses or idols to be respected and venerated and bow the knee to to pray to for intercession. The ward house isn't built to prove to the community at large for how majestic, pretty and beautiful it makes God appear. Their built for efficiency and as the writer proves, some people feel what a church looks like reflects the grace, majesty and grandeur of God to those attending that building.
Everyone has an opinion :)

Since: Oct 08

Location hidden

#27793 Sep 5, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>Rules you don't understand would appear silly because you don't take the time to question why the rules exist of if they have any effect.

Jesus established all the offices of the church he formed that he filled with followers. So the silly rule for a bishop was established by Jesus that bishops had to be married with a family. So wag your finger at Jesus for doing what you call silly.
Lol. Women don't need rulers. Hopefully since you haven't, your kids will figure it out.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#27794 Sep 5, 2013
NoMo wrote:
<quoted text>
"far left liberal feminist side that would rather all females behave as you do in relationships and screw what they want right?"
How far off the road do you live? Do your neighbors know your last name? Maybe you should go to town more often.
Maybe you should remember your bit's of venomous sarcasm you have spit all over this thread for Mormon women that stay home. You have said things one can read from a book for how to be a great feminist.
You have proved over and over and over you're a far left liberal extremist. You obviously resent male authority figures. So if a complete reversal was done tomorrow and women and men held the priesthood and still made the same decisions they did before whom you called racist, prejudiced etc, what name would you have for the racist, prejudicial female priests? Lizardets? lol...you never win for losing by your warped logic.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#27795 Sep 5, 2013
NoMo wrote:
<quoted text>
Really, go to town..walk around and buy a corn dog. You need some air
Such an excellent reply to prove my point you continue to prove about yourself over and over and over...
You present a question that needs information that you neglect to give when someone asks for more information so they can maybe answer your question and you go off on them....you're such a fricking sad sack case at times really.
It just would have been easier to give a better description of what took place according to what you know, really.

Since: Oct 08

Location hidden

#27796 Sep 5, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>Maybe you should remember your bit's of venomous sarcasm you have spit all over this thread for Mormon women that stay home. You have said things one can read from a book for how to be a great feminist.
You have proved over and over and over you're a far left liberal extremist. You obviously resent male authority figures. So if a complete reversal was done tomorrow and women and men held the priesthood and still made the same decisions they did before whom you called racist, prejudiced etc, what name would you have for the racist, prejudicial female priests? Lizardets? lol...you never win for losing by your warped logic.
Oh no..lizards only marry virgins. Do you realize how uncomfortable all those meetings, etc will be if women are allowed to attend and have equal voice?

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#27797 Sep 5, 2013
NoMo wrote:
<quoted text>
Lol. Women don't need rulers. Hopefully since you haven't, your kids will figure it out.
What's pathetically sad, is you have just proved you're the far left feminist liberal I stated you proved to be earlier. Only a true blue feminist would state women don't need rulers when the fact is that most relationships develop according to the couples likes and dislikes, not according to the guy being the gal's ruler as you pathetically state happens. You need to figure that out someday just saying.

Since: Oct 08

Location hidden

#27798 Sep 5, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>Such an excellent reply to prove my point you continue to prove about yourself over and over and over...
You present a question that needs information that you neglect to give when someone asks for more information so they can maybe answer your question and you go off on them....you're such a fricking sad sack case at times really.
It just would have been easier to give a better description of what took place according to what you know, really.
Hey, if it hits the press, I'll post a link..the question is...if an employee of the COB is fired after a spotless work record, had worked there 10 years, was temple worthy, single, celibate..is this how the members interpret their "new.."softened stance? He came out and they fired him.

Since: Oct 08

Location hidden

#27799 Sep 5, 2013
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>What's pathetically sad, is you have just proved you're the far left feminist liberal I stated you proved to be earlier. Only a true blue feminist would state women don't need rulers when the fact is that most relationships develop according to the couples likes and dislikes, not according to the guy being the gal's ruler as you pathetically state happens. You need to figure that out someday just saying.
OMG.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Salt Lake City Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Are Aliens Real, if so are they nice or mean? (Oct '12) Aug 15 ray 42
News A police officer ruined their Subway business, ... Aug 14 Overgrownelf79 1
So what's going on with Paul Swenson? Aug 13 Jescrane 2
I love Utah farts Aug 11 JuicyNoodles 1
Prostitutes In Valley Fair Mall.. (Oct '08) Aug 9 Slcnaked 57
why did hamulin get excommunicated Aug 8 kim kardashian 1
why mormon missionaries have sex with married w... (Jun '12) Aug 8 Covenant6080 52

Salt Lake City Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Salt Lake City Mortgages