How One's (Mormon) Religion Should Affect Your Decision for 2008

Kalvin you are misqouting the man and you know you are. If you truly have studied. You would fully understand the weekly sacrament. Again when Christ was crucified, his death replaced the blood sacrifices. That is why they were done in representation of the sacrifice. That is why Christ had the last sacrament. The bread and water you take part in weekly on sunday is the representation of the blood sacrifice. You are taught this in the sacremental payers as well. Really now. You are exploiting and misqouting for what reason. All I can see is for you to spew anti mormon attitude. If you are a practicing mormon you would know that the church would not ever revert to blood sacrifices due to the death and sacrifice of Christ.

 

So your final answer is that Daniel H. Ludlow (a Mormon) in "A Companion to Your Study of the Doctrine and Covenants" (an LDS publication) is miquoting Joseph Fielding Smith.

Okay.

So why would Mr Ludlow misquote JFS?

The sacrament is done "now" and in the LDS church building. JFS is talking about a future animal blood sacrifice in a future temple that hasn't been built yet.

So I'm not sure how you can put those two together.

I know that, and you know that but why then would Daniel H. Ludlow quote JFS talking about an animal blood sacrifice?

From http://www.ldsces.org/inst_manuals/dc-in/dc-in-011.htm

This is how Joseph Smith (the LDS founder) explained it:

That's an official LDS church web-site for the "Church Education System."

They quote the whole thing under D&C 13

Search the page for "What Is Meant by the Sons of Levi Offering an Offering of Righteousness unto the Lord?"

So are they misquoting Joseph Smith, the founder of the church?

 

Kalvin, re: economics, you need to wake up my friend. It isn't all good.

http://forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?t=673629

Now is not the time for imperial hubris. Save the Republic.

 

Again must I say the sacrament on Sundays replaces the blood Sacrifices done in the Old Testement. When Christ was born and crucified replaced the blood sacrificies. I really dont think you are mormon or really know the religion. You would know the church teachings and know that the sacrament represents the sacrifice and that why would the church revert. That would say the church has not recognized the death of Christ or the weekly sacrement the members particpate in.

So my question Kalvin why does the LDS church have the weekly sacrament?

 

I'll stay away from addressing the OP's declarations about the LDS faith. There is a wide and long paper trail of documentation of the numerous differences between LDS doctrines and the doctrines of historical Christianity.

That being said, I am a committed voter for Mitt Romney. Why? Tons of reasons, none of which either criticizes or praises his faith:

• He is a man who has consistently displayed family values. That is an increasing rarity among political figures today.
• He is a spectacularly successful businessman with proven skills at the highest levels.
• He is eminently qualified educationally — with a law degree and a Master of Business Administration degree (MBA), both from Harvard.
• He was thrown in at a late date to try to rescue the failing Salt Lake City Olympics, which were riddled with scandals and a massive budget deficit. Romney turned it all around and presided over a very successful Olympics and left them with a budget surplus of tens of millions of dollars.
• Most other current presidential candidates are past or present U.S. Senators. Their often-touted "experience" is in passing laws. They are legislators. Governor Romney's experience is much more of a presidential nature. He has been a highly successful businessman — he knows how to to be a chief executive. And he has served as governor of Massachusetts. In sum, if he wins the primaries, then in the general elections for "Chief Executive", Gov. Romney, a highly successful executive in both the private and public sectors, will be facing a Legislator (all the remaining Democratic candidates with any chance of the nomination are past or present Senators). He is the hands-down winner in all comparisons of "executive experience".
• To borrow a term the Democrats in 2000 and 2004 used pejoratively against George W. Bush, Governor Romney clearly has the "gravitas" to be president.

All religious questions aside, Governor Romney, in this voter's opinion, is eminently qualified to lead the USA as its next president.

 

I agree with you. That's what the Bible teaches. But the question is why does the LDS Church teach about the return of blood sacrifice with no mention of Sunday sacrament on their own educational web-site?

Is the LDS CES web-site quoting a bunch of church leaders out of context?

I have to say I would not be entirely disappointed if Romney got the nomination. My view is that the top three candidates all bring something different to the office of the presidency. They would each serve the country well in their area. Being more concerned with foreign affairs, I think McCain should take the top position. For those who put the economy at the top, Romney is the logical choice. Huckabee would make a good VP. His ideas are not important enough that he should be president. Getting rid of the IRS would be nice but he could serve a lower position and get the ball rolling on that.

It would serve Romney well if his supporters would follow his advice and drop any discussion of his religion. There is no way you can turn his religion into a positive for anyone except members of the LDS church. I'm willing to believe that he can do his job without letting his religion in the way.

Some non-LDS may make the mistake of thinking blood sacrifice is a current thing. I think most non-LDS who have studied the LDS church are aware it's a future thing. Everyone would rather just not hear about it. I'd highly recommend never bringing it up again.

You're better off with the line "some people think LDS members have horns!" That's rediculous and only LDS members believe that non-members think that but it's harmless. Nobody actually thinks that LDS members have horns. "Animal sacrifice" as you've found out, is a very serious issue.

Write that down: never bring up animal sacrifice again and never put the focus on Romney's religion.