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.

sportxmouse

“Duty is a Privilege!”

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#31398 Jan 14, 2014
lol... typo you missed it Pearl *pure

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#31399 Jan 14, 2014
Chief Slave Feather wrote:
[I'm the one with the degree in radiation communication & controls Electronic Engineering that runs the dazzling Christianic Empire radarproof internet and space age fluttering around your head.
You're trying to drink your way out of government housing while screaming into the internet making laws protecting the innocent is wrong.
You were pissed off when we interrupted your murdering slaving rape and molestation ring the Navajo Indians spread as their reign of terror.
Nevertheless we're flying those machines over your head and will be doing so the day you die.
You'll like it or not.
Drink till time goes backward and your brave can bring you back some beads with blood and hair and brains on it.
<quoted text>
And Mormons wonder why everybody thinks they suck.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#31400 Jan 14, 2014
Change in missionary age is beginning to look like a disaster.

http://bycommonconsent.com/2014/01/13/toward-...

"More recently, I have heard several reports of mission presidents in different missions getting word out to members in their missions (in one case through a letter sent to be read in all congregations, including in all auxiliaries such as Primary) that there are so many more missionaries in the mission that they do not have enough people to teach and therefore requesting the members to have missionaries in their homes every single evening to teach principles of the Gospel to the membersí families in order to give the missionaries experience teaching. My heart goes out to such missionaries. I hope and pray that they are led to those whom the Lord has prepared to hear the message of the Gospel so that they feel that they are fulfilling their calling as missionaries to preach the Gospel to nonmembers rather than to member families."

They can now pretend to be teaching converts. LOL!!!

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#31401 Jan 14, 2014
The 5 Stages of LDS Apologetics

http://www.mormoninfographics.com/2013/09/the...

Yeap, that's how it works.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#31402 Jan 14, 2014
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
You just don't expect the Mormons to speak as Christian though, right? Keep crying in your Near Beer. I've laid it out for you, deal with it, or don't respond. I don't care either way.
You need to get this into that thick dense grey matter so much crap is expelled from. You have stated Mormons AREN'T CHRISTIANS. Let me state what you have claimed so you can digest your own statement AGAIN. YOU REPEATEDLY CLAIM AND STATE MORMONS ARE NOT CHRISTIANS.
Therefore it would be ludicrous and ignorant and stupid for me to hold a people of a religion to Christian standards who YOU CLAIM ARE NOT CHRISTIANS. Understand your own fricking logic will you? I do even if it doesn't make sense I understand how you're using it in most cases be it correct or incorrect.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#31403 Jan 14, 2014
pearl wrote:
<quoted text>Okay Surprise, I want to make sure, before we get further involved with this topic, that we understand each others claim. You're saying, and correct me if I'm wrong, MOST humans want to kill other humans, but laws against killing changes human nature so they don't want to kill others? You're actually claiming that one society can change human nature through the use of laws forbidding such nature? And my claim is that's nuts. Are`we on the same page here?
Now you're reading what I wrote. That said let me ask this as we are dealing with human behavior more than human nature as you're confusing the two and your position it's unchangeable as my position is it's changeable.
Human behavior, not nature put the human male as the head of nearly everything because of laws for the last 2700 years. That's fact. In the last 300 years laws have been allowed more and more for females to be treated more and more equal as their male counter parts. Tell me on this day in 2014 that laws haven't changed human nature of males ruling everything to males ruling very little any more. Tell me it wasn't laws that didn't make that change as would be your position, not mine.
Human nature is to exist as any living specie. No law will change that need/will to exist. Now we leave that and go on to human behavior because that is where everything else is defined that we do. And human behavior is regulated by laws and isn't regulated where laws don't exist. Killing, sex, personal interactions with each other, tribe against tribe, that's all human behavior.
So I have reexplained myself and my position on this matter to make any corrections of anything I said incorrectly before. Your turn :)

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#31404 Jan 14, 2014
pearl wrote:
<quoted text>Are these wives you are referring to the same ones who went to court claiming to have his offspring? And do you think they thought of themselves as being adulterers since they were in a celestial marriage?
One wife claimed to have seen Smith and another wife have sex. When the lawyer was done questioning her he proved she was not only a liar but she had given false testimony in a court of law. The other wife that was going to claim sexual relations with Smith having seen what happened to the other wife when thoroughly questioned by the other lawyer literally took the fifth and wouldn't respond if she did or didn't have sexual relations with Smith. So if you have names of any other wives besides these two that claimed sexual relations with Smith while under oath let me have their names so I can read what they said before I answer.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#31405 Jan 14, 2014
Dana Robertson wrote:
I had the creator of this web site threaten to sue me one time because reposted one of his articles on my old web site showing the LDS church "is one of the fastest growing churches" is total BS. So I then just told what the article was about and proved a link to it. He kept changing the link address to try to stop me. LOL!!!
http://m.sltrib.com/sltrib/mobile3/57369318-2...
Only in Mormonism does 4 million equal 12 million.
You realize to criticize how Mormons tally membership is to criticize how every religion in this world tallies it's membership? You know that nearly every religion uses membership records (that don't always exclude the past and or recently deceased) to show how many people belong to that religion? You are aware that not a single religion states it's numbers by how many actually come to church? So your statement should have been....
Only in religions does (put small number here) equal (put large number here).

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#31406 Jan 15, 2014
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
You need to get this into that thick dense grey matter so much crap is expelled from. You have stated Mormons AREN'T CHRISTIANS. Let me state what you have claimed so you can digest your own statement AGAIN. YOU REPEATEDLY CLAIM AND STATE MORMONS ARE NOT CHRISTIANS.
Therefore it would be ludicrous and ignorant and stupid for me to hold a people of a religion to Christian standards who YOU CLAIM ARE NOT CHRISTIANS. Understand your own fricking logic will you? I do even if it doesn't make sense I understand how you're using it in most cases be it correct or incorrect.
Justify your ignorance and hypocrisy all you want. But it's ignorance and hypocrisy. You want to point fingers at me because I believe I'm Christians. Yet Carol thinks she is also and you are fine and dandy with her filth, claiming I'm not a Christian. I get it, you are and idiot and hypocrite, hence my name for you of "No Standards". It makes you a jackass also.

“Too much LDS in the 60's”

Since: Sep 10

Marysville, CA

#31407 Jan 15, 2014
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
You realize to criticize how Mormons tally membership is to criticize how every religion in this world tallies it's membership? You know that nearly every religion uses membership records (that don't always exclude the past and or recently deceased) to show how many people belong to that religion? You are aware that not a single religion states it's numbers by how many actually come to church?
Prove it.
So your statement should have been....
Only in religions does (put small number here) equal (put large number here).
You write what you want, I'll write what I want, But I have proven that when the Mormon church claims 12 plus million people, it is a lie.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#31408 Jan 15, 2014
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
Justify your ignorance and hypocrisy all you want. But it's ignorance and hypocrisy. You want to point fingers at me because I believe I'm Christians.
Mouse is a Mormon you idiot. It doesn't matter what else she claims according to your own back*ssed logic. SHE ISN'T A CHRISTIAN BECAUSE SHE'S A MORMON, ACCORDING TO YOU. Yet you want me to hold her to standards of a Christian when YOU CLAIM SHE ISN'T CHRISTIAN BECAUSE SHE'S MORMON. You're being fricking mentally retarded in the worst way dude. I can't hold her to Christian standards according to you because you claim she isn't a Christian. But you keep whining like some pathetic child that I won't hold her accountable in a way you claim doesn't apply to her that applies to you. Are you that fricking mentally retarded of this issue you have brought to be?
A. Mormons aren't Christians you claim. So by your claim they can't logically be held to Christian standards according to your claim.
B. But you want me to hold Mormons to Christian standards while you claim they aren't Christians..
C. You're fricking mentally retarded in your own logic dude and can't see it.
If you want to call and acknowledge Mormons as much a Christian as you can be, now I can hold them accountable as I hold you accountable to Christian standards. Understand?

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#31409 Jan 15, 2014
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
Prove it.
<quoted text>
You write what you want, I'll write what I want, But I have proven that when the Mormon church claims 12 plus million people, it is a lie.
Prove what? Prove how membership numbers for any one given religion are calculated? I really hate it when you put on your mentally challenged personality. How do you think membership is calculated? By those that died of that religion? Probably. How do you think membership is calculated? By those they think will be members the following year that haven't converted yet? Probably. How do you think membership is calculated? By the number of times the church door is opened and closed on Sundays? Probably. How do you think membership is calculated? By the number they just decide to write down each year? Probably. How do you think membership is calculated? By counting how many people go to another religion on one Sunday and timing that amount by 52 Sundays? Probably. Man are you ever so fricking pathetically stupid at times.
Those that join a religion you fricking pathetic idiot are tallied each year to deduce membership numbers so the leaders of that religion can deduce if they are gaining, remaining the same or gaining less members any given year. If you want proof of this to abate your present mentally challenged mind on this matter, I suggest you visit any local Methodist or Baptist or Presbyterian church that counts new members to have what I said affirmed to you.
It's posts like this of your's that just convince me you have some really mentally challenged problems at times.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#31410 Jan 15, 2014
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
Prove it.
<quoted text>
You write what you want, I'll write what I want, But I have proven that when the Mormon church claims 12 plus million people, it is a lie.
Liar. Do you know anything of the information you'd have to have access to too prove what the membership numbers are of the LDS church? And using someone else's info isn't proving anything. You might as well claimed you've proved their are only a million actual Catholics and no more. You proved nothing. You made a claim without any accompanying evidence at all in this thread. You know that word called EVIDENCE that you don't like to use when you make your regular claims with no evidence? Huh?

sportxmouse

“Duty is a Privilege!”

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#31411 Jan 15, 2014
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
Mouse is a Mormon you idiot. It doesn't matter what else she claims according to your own back*ssed logic. SHE ISN'T A CHRISTIAN BECAUSE SHE'S A MORMON, ACCORDING TO YOU. Yet you want me to hold her to standards of a Christian when YOU CLAIM SHE ISN'T CHRISTIAN BECAUSE SHE'S MORMON. You're being fricking mentally retarded in the worst way dude. I can't hold her to Christian standards according to you because you claim she isn't a Christian. But you keep whining like some pathetic child that I won't hold her accountable in a way you claim doesn't apply to her that applies to you. Are you that fricking mentally retarded of this issue you have brought to be?
A. Mormons aren't Christians you claim. So by your claim they can't logically be held to Christian standards according to your claim.
B. But you want me to hold Mormons to Christian standards while you claim they aren't Christians..
C. You're fricking mentally retarded in your own logic dude and can't see it.
If you want to call and acknowledge Mormons as much a Christian as you can be, now I can hold them accountable as I hold you accountable to Christian standards. Understand?
This is interesting... it's a very logical / thought out / analytical post... unlike Dana's.

“Good day to you!”

Since: Oct 08

Earth

#31412 Jan 15, 2014
sportxmouse wrote:
<quoted text>
This is interesting... it's a very logical / thought out / analytical post... unlike Dana's.
lol....and interjected with logical sarcasm and names that describe his thinking process on this matter...lol
He claims your not a Christian. But he thinks it's unjust that I don't hold you to Christian standards that he claims can't apply to you because he claims you're not a Christian! Is he drinking stupid juice? Maybe his hours for cooking are to long, who knows. But his logic is so fricking mentally retarded on this matter it isn't even funny any more.
pearl

Sandy, UT

#31413 Jan 15, 2014
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
One wife claimed to have seen Smith a'nd another wife have sex. When the lawyer was done questioning her he proved she was not only a liar but she had given false testimony in a court of law. The other wife that was going to claim sexual relations with Smith having seen what happened to the other wife when thoroughly questioned by the other lawyer literally took the fifth and wouldn't respond if she did or didn't have sexual relations with Smith. So if you have names of any other wives besides these two that claimed sexual relations with Smith while under oath let me have their names so I can read what they said before I answer.
You stated, " If Smith was such an adulterer, that makes 40 plus females 15 to 60 simple married & widowed willing to be adulterers and that insinuates they didn't care how they would fair in the public eye if found out. That's a bit tough to believe." Then you go on to state, "The other wife that was going to claim sexual relations with Smith having seen what happened...when thoroughly questioned...took the fifth..." Well, with this scenario, I would have to say that at least the one you mention here didn't care if she was seen as an adulterer, since she, as you stated, "was going to claim sexual relations with Smith." You even point out that she only took the fifth to avoid the same fate as the one who had already testified. Looks like she was afraid of being humiliated or seen as being a liar, but not an adulterer, which she, according to you was willing to claim, in public.

sportxmouse

“Duty is a Privilege!”

Since: Sep 12

Location hidden

#31414 Jan 15, 2014
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
lol....and interjected with logical sarcasm and names that describe his thinking process on this matter...lol
He claims your not a Christian. But he thinks it's unjust that I don't hold you to Christian standards that he claims can't apply to you because he claims you're not a Christian! Is he drinking stupid juice? Maybe his hours for cooking are to long, who knows. But his logic is so fricking mentally retarded on this matter it isn't even funny any more.
well, like he said:
Dana Robertson wrote:
<quoted text>
... I've laid it out for you, deal with it, or don't respond. I don't care either way.
pearl

Sandy, UT

#31415 Jan 16, 2014
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
Now you're reading what I wrote. That said let me ask this as we are dealing with human behavior more than human nature as you're confusing the two and your position it's unchangeable as my position is it's changeable.
Human behavior, not nature put the human male as the head of nearly everything because of laws for the last 2700 years. That's fact. In the last 300 years laws have been allowed more and more for females to be treated more and more equal as their male counter parts. Tell me on this day in 2014 that laws haven't changed human nature of males ruling everything to males ruling very little any more. Tell me it wasn't laws that didn't make that change as would be your position, not mine.
Human nature is to exist as any living specie. No law will change that need/will to exist. Now we leave that and go on to human behavior because that is where everything else is defined that we do. And human behavior is regulated by laws and isn't regulated where laws don't exist. Killing, sex, personal interactions with each other, tribe against tribe, that's all human behavior.
So I have reexplained myself and my position on this matter to make any corrections of anything I said incorrectly before. Your turn :)
Not confused at all friend. And just to reiterate I'll claim again, you can't change human nature by making laws forbidding it. If I had meant to say human behavior, that's what I would have said. You however claim, "human behavior put males at the head of nearly everything," then go on in the same post and say, "Tell me on this day...that laws haven't changed human nature of males ruling everything..." maybe you should rethink that, as it appears you are claiming they are the same thing. A couple of other issues with this post would be; since when do males rule "very little any more"? I don't see a lot of women senators, presidents, CEO's prime ministers. Nope not too many political leaders that are women, so that was kind of a dumb claim. And what do you mean by, "Human nature is to exist as any living specie"? I can't exist as any specie, I can only exist as human. I'm not confused, but your posts are confusing. Anyway like I have said several times now, human nature cannot be changed by making laws forbidding it .All you do is keep giving examples of changing behavior through laws, and who "allowed" those laws anyway, since the male has, as you claim, been traditionally been in charge? Also you say, let me ask this, then there's no question. But yes, just so we are clear, I will "tell" you those laws didn't change human nature.
pearl

Sandy, UT

#31416 Jan 16, 2014
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
Human nature doesn't give statistical data. People recording the actions of people give actual data. And where did you get the notion that laws don't change human nature? That was a really ignorant statement in light of facts of how laws suppressed the human nature of homosexuality to closets and behind closed doors for a couple thousand years. Laws suppress the human nature in MOST humans the want to kill other humans. I could go on but I won't.
Sex be it same or opposite is human nature. But having sex with a person involved with another person use to come with consequences be it verbal and or physical consequences. I realize it isn't that way today as it use to be just a century ago.
And seriously Surprise, do you really think most humans wanted to kill other humans, that is until laws changed that?
pearl

Sandy, UT

#31417 Jan 16, 2014
No Surprise wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes it does. And you better research exactly what human nature is before you go any farther. Human nature isn't to be nice to one another. That's a learned behavior. Children reveal very violent human nature traits when upset with one another with hitting, biting, pushing to mention a few traits parents spend time teaching a child it's not okay to do. Get it? Human nature according to science drove modern humans to help eradicate neanderthals into extinction from a survival instinct to kill. Native American indigenous tribes warred constantly with each other. To kill is an instinct. It's an instinct humans deny themselves by laws forbidding it. Some break the laws but most don't. There isn't a mammal specie that I can think of that doesn't instinctively kill for whatever the reason including humans.
Need a real time example? Laws were made to allow abortions. What is a abortion? It's a need and even an instinct (with or without reasoning) of a human female (in most instances) to kill off an unwanted birth. That's instinctive killing at it's finest definition.
Human nature has been and is at present changed by laws. That's an actual fact you seem to be having a hard time digesting. Why is that?
There's a lot to address in this post, but for now I will address just a couple. Even though it's kind of off topic, I keep hearing on this thread that the tribal people on this land "warred constantly" which is just an acceptance of invaders perspective and not completely correct. Now we know the barbaric people of Europe were constantly warring since they had to eventually band together or against each other. It was how they survived constant invasions, by banding together. Yet, here just in North America alone there were hundreds of different tribes and a varying population in the tens of millions. All living side by side. Sure there were regular battles but not "constant wars", not even close to what this culture claims as war. There is a big difference,
And yes all species kill, not just mammals, but it's not just for "whatever" reason. They all, meaning all species, live by the laws regarding limited competition. Until the mono-theists came along and decided these laws didn't apply to them, hence the constant expansion, constant war, constant forced assimilation.
As for your abortion analogy, I've never claimed that killing isn't instinctive, in the pursuit of survival. But your line of reasoning is off, If these women have a want to kill, as you seem to have claimed earlier, then they would be getting pregnant and aborting on a regular basis, just to fulfill the desire to kill. No, reasonable sane people don't want to kill and it's not because there are laws.

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.

Mitt Romney Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Democrats aim to blast Trump for favoring wealthy 22 hr Trump is a joke 1,193
News GOP at war with itself (Mar '16) Sat Tm Cln 4,241
News Gingrich: Mitt Romney is a liar (Jan '12) Nov 15 anonz 89
News Cain says he won't drop out of GOP race (Nov '11) Nov 14 Alreds Revenge 272
News In Fiscal Cliff Talks, Higher Taxes Vs. Closing... (Nov '12) Nov 12 RayGONE 8
News Romney adviser Gillespie charges Obama campaign... (Jul '12) Nov 8 Kapernick of Madison 3
News Romney to Host Fundraiser for Virginia Hopeful ... (Mar '14) Nov 8 Pocahontas of Cha... 2
More from around the web