August 30, 2010

"Who else thinks Beck is more of a tent revivalist than a political pitchman, and that his ultimate goal is to win souls for the L.D.S. Church?"

That's a question from Reihan Salam, which Ross Douthat answers in the most absurdly equivocal way:
I don’t know if the Fox News host actually has any soul-winning ambitions. But you could, if you were so inclined, regard him as a kind of ecumenical outreach coordinator, working to burnish Mormonism’s image among conservative evangelicals.

135 comments:

Fen said...

Oh please. I agree with most of what he says, but Beck is just a performer.

If you are so desperate to demonize a clown, have at it.

And while you're at it:

But you could, if you were so inclined, regard Obama as a kind of ecumenical outreach coordinator, working to burnish Islam's image among libtard democrats.

GMay said...

I wonder if the Defenders of Islam™ are going to shriek about this type of criticism as well?

As an aside, it's just so heartwarming to see the Cabal rallying to keep Weigel's career alive.

rcocean said...

You can always count on the New York Times for an objective, balanced, view of populists or conservatives.

Fair and Balanced - that's their motto.

Oh, wait.

LonewackoDotCom said...

I guess you could consider him a pitchman for Mormonism, if it weren't for that huge Goldline banner on his site as well as the fact that he's putting a religious sheen on a corrupt movement designed - unbeknownst to its useful idiot followers - to financially benefit a small group of very rich people. So, yeah, it's all about the Mormonism! (If you're a sheltered establishment idiot).

Here's an example of someone who's helping Beck despite the fact that Beck is working with someone who'd gladly make him employment chances even worse.

sunsong said...

I don't follow Beck - so I don't really know what he is about. I do watch the show right after him and often catch a bit of the ending of his. If I were to guess, I would describe him as fundamentally anti-Obama while trying to appeal to something far more noble than raw hatred.

My oldest sister is Mormon - with eight kids - and always counting the number of grandkids. It seems to be a Mormon thing - to brag about the number of progeny one has. At least here in Utah.

Beck is friends with John Huntsman Sr (whose son is the ambassador to China) and may, indeed, have some intention of making Mormons look better to *real* Christians. I emphasize the word *real* because it is one of the main things that turns me off to the republican party.

The inability or unwillingness to be gracious and kind - let alone embracing - regarding difference.

"If you don't believe *exactly* what I believe - not only are you not a *real* Christian - you are probaly not a *real* American and certainly not a *real* conservative" - yada yada yada.

To me, that kind of *my way or the highway*, is such a turn off. What those who cannot deal with differences miss...

But anyway - Glenn Beck will have them talking and speculating for a good while I am sure.

rcocean said...

And no, Althouse, I'm not going to slog through Ross "I'm a Kosher conservative" Donuts attack on Beck.

LonewackoDotCom said...

sunsong: here are some facts about Jon Huntsman Jr. that Beck's useful idiots will have some trouble wrapping their minds (such as they are) around.

Fen said...

And I expected the link would lead to the NYTs. Ha. Must be the smell.

Look! There's Ross Douthat, the "conservative" who thinks the Big Story re JournoList was that private correspondence was published:

The real story here isn’t Weigel’s public embarrassment — it’s the shame of FishbowlDC for publishing private correspondence, and the disgrace of JournoList for harboring at least one would-be career wrecker.

Yah, like I'm going to entertain the propaganda from Ross.

Fen said...

"I don't follow Beck - so I don't really know what he is about."

He's one of those weirdo mormons dont ya know
the New York Times told me so

Geoff Matthews said...

ross has 0 comments. you have 5. why aren't you writing for the nyt?

Ann Althouse said...

"ross has 0 comments. you have 5. why aren't you writing for the nyt?"

And he wrote his 8 hours ago. I wrote mine a half hour ago.

rcocean said...

Ross Donuts was hired by Sulzberger to do just this-police the conservatives and attack anyone too "extreme", i.e. a real threat to liberalism.

GMay said...

"I emphasize the word *real* because it is one of the main things that turns me off to the republican party."

Because that's what the Republican party is all about.

/eyeroll

rcocean said...

You're assuming the NYT's hires based on merit and writing ability.

Wrong.

Dead Julius said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Dead Julius said...

The fact that he is Mormon is inconsequential. Personally, I didn't even know he was one of the funny-underwear-wearing polygamists until this post.

But he has clearly and unequivocally demonstrated that he thinks of himself as a religious person. His 9/12 Project desires to change America in a way that is mostly sensible, but if you are not a believer in God then you are not welcome to participate. It is requirement #2:

I believe in God and He is the Center of my Life.

So not only do you have to be delusional, you also have to be completely committed to this delusion!

This is the real danger of Beckism. There are very serious problems with America, but if we start to exclude people who are not one of "us" then we will not solve them. Working on division rather than productive endeavors will result in more divisiveness and less productivity.

We need atheists and agnostics involved in rebuilding our damaged country as well as religious people. In a similar vein, we need gay people and pot smokers and Scientologists and Americanized Muslims and Americanized Mexicans. We should not obstruct things that will make their lives easier so long as these things don't bother anyone else. More federalism and more local decisions on issues of importance would help things immensely in this regard.

We need, in all seriousness, a Team America. Beck does seem to want this. But he also seems to want to be able to personally decide who gets to be in Team America and who doesn't. That choice, however, ain't up to him. He is just given the opening because all the leaders who ought to be building and encouraging Team America have abdicated their responsibility, focusing on petty partisan oneupmanship and corrupt dealings instead.

EDH said...

What is go'in on?

When it comes to a Big Tent Revival, a little mystery might not be a bad thing.

'Cause you want people to think you constantly have an erection?

Psota said...

Douthat and Salam wrote a whole book ("Grand New Party") about how the GOP could appeal to the working class, but their policy prescriptions were little more than anodyne Democrat Lite proposals like health savings accounts and tax credits. Meanwhile, Beck goes on TV, denounces Woodrow Wilson, and draws a half million people - most of whom probably fit the Reagan Democrat mode - and to the Mall. But, sure, it's some crazy Mormon thing.

Fen said...

See, here I was going to give a countdown for some libtard to come along and mock Mormon undergarments and link Beck to them.

But we already have a "winner". The NYTs has reached its target audience. With exactly the message they intended.

Glenn Beck must be destroyed. And did you know he was one of those wierdo mormans?

BJM said...

"I emphasize the word *real* because it is one of the main things that turns me off to the republican party."


Is that you Moby?

David said...

Beck's a Mormon. Well, good for him. I didn't know that until this week.

I've never met a Mormon that I don't like and respect, despite some (to me) strange aspects of their creed. I'm sure there are lots of Mormon jerks, but I've never met one.

I've been pretty lukewarm on Beck, but now that I know he believes that angels are still among us, I'm going to give him the benefit of all my doubts.

Fen said...

Beck goes on TV, denounces Woodrow Wilson, and draws a half million people - most of whom probably fit the Reagan Democrat mode - and to the Mall.

Thats what scares the Left the most. They dont like Beck's version of history. And he has a huge audience. The Left is afraid he will tear down all the Myths that have come to be widely (and ignorantly) accepted by the public.

BJM said...

The left is really flummoxed aren't they?

*Please pass the popcorn*

Skyler said...

Wow, the NYT, still being read by some people around here, is trying to scare people by reminding people that Beck is Mormon.

I think mormonosity is one of the screwiest religions I've seen, but I have to say that I've never met a Mormon that wasn't among the nicest people I've known.

But you wouldn't know that mormons were decent people if you lived in NYC and read the NYT's. What a sheltered place that must be, filled with anti-mormon bigots.

Sara (Pal2Pal) said...

As an LDS member, I find the premise insulting and many of the comments here ignorant. This in particular is both ignorant and insulting: "I didn't even know he was one of the funny-underwear-wearing polygamists until this post."

My suggestion to all is take an hour on a Sunday and stop by a Mormon Ward for Sunday Sacrament Meeting. I think you'll find it a normal church service very much like any other denomination, except maybe for the children in attendance rather than relegated to some church nursery out of sight and sound.

As to polygamy, I'm sure most of you know that the the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints outlawed polygamy well over 100 years ago. How Dead Julius knows what perfect strangers wear as underwear is another story. I, for one Mormon, wear a lacy bra and and matching undies which no one has ever told me are funny. Sexy yes, funny no.

Skyler said...

Sara, it's not good argumentive form to reduce yourself to defending your underwear!

sunsong said...

Even though it is not *technically* related to the topic here - I would add - that I suspect if the Mormons wanted to build a Temple two blocks from Ground Zero - there would be one hell of an outcry from the left.

And, moving even further from topic, here is a fun video (if you haven't seen it):

the mom song

Methadras said...

Beck for me is an overproduced pitch man in the vein of Billy Mays. If you yell about something long enough, people will either completely tune you our or come over to see what the fuck you are yelling about.

Methadras said...

Sara (Pal2Pal) said...

I, for one Mormon, wear a lacy bra and and matching undies which no one has ever told me are funny. Sexy yes, funny no.


Rawr!!! Sounds hot. Pics or shens. Let's see some of that hot, tight, mormon ass. YEEEHAWWW!!!

Sorry. I couldn't help myself. You left the door wide open, so to speak. :D

amba said...

David and Skyler, I agree. Mormonism's tenets are weird (um, regular Judaism and Christianity aren't? OK, Mormonism's weirder) but its effects on people's lives are excellent: sobriety, commitment, service. The relief efforts organized by Mormons after Hurricane Katrina were, well, unbelievably organized. There is no proselytizing involved. They just do it. They are disciplined and on top of things to a military degree. They serve without question and ask nothing in return. It's damned impressive.

Seven Machos said...

I will accept that the view that leftists are spazzy, humorless eggheads with wholly unworkable ideas and who can't get laid is a caricature if leftists will accept the view that people who want limited government and who are religious are quite normal and have no nefarious motives.

I am also available for spazzy eggheads if they need pointers about how to get laid.

Seven Machos said...

P.S. Where is Freeman Hunt to describe her undergarments?

Kirk Parker said...

Dead Julius,

"There are very serious problems with America, but if we start to exclude people ..."

Indeed, so I suggest you take a hard look in the mirror w/r/t your 'delusional' bit.

Kirk Parker said...

7m,

"Where is ... to describe her undergarments?"

Hmmmm, I thought this present site was more about breasts.

AST said...

When I listened to Beck's show, I could see the performer part of it, and it turned me off, but when he talks about his personal faith and his belief in religious freedom, you can feel that he feels humbled by it.

He developed his style as a broadcaster before he became a Mormon. He wasn't proselyting for the LDS Church on Saturday. The church has pretty close supervision of its proselyting efforts and this gathering wasn't its style. He was, it seemed to me, expressing his sincere belief that America owes its success to the faith of its founders in the help of Providence. He refers again and again to the last sentence of the Declaration of Independence: "And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor." That was the reason he called it the "Restore Honor" rally.

My own Mormonism informs many of my conservative beliefs, such as the exceptionalism of America, and that America's greatness is linked to the favor of Providence, and that we discard our values at our peril. However, I wouldn't presume to preach church doctrine authoritatively, because it's not my calling.

Members of the the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints view Christ as the real leader of the church, and it is a cheap PR stunt of the various evangelical groups who insist that we aren't Christians, because we don't accept the Catholic doctrine of the Trinity. To me that one God- three incarnations formulation sounds more like Hinduism, but I don't accept anybody's right to tell me that I'm not a Christian expect for Christ himself.

but if you are not a believer in God then you are not welcome to participate. It is requirement #2:

I believe in God and He is the Center of my Life.


I don't see his list of principles as "requirements." Where does it say that? I certainly wouldn't make it one. But I would like to know how you interpret the last sentence of the Declaration. Not all the founders believed in a personal God, some were Deists, some were atheists. I think most of them were leery of letting religious leaders anywhere near political power. I'm happy to associate with anybody to restore the principles on which we were founded. Mormons were essentially driven from the United State in the 1840s and as they were moving to the west an Army officer caught up and asked for recruits to fight in the war with Mexico. That resulted in the Mormon brigade, and the war made the area they had settled, U.S. territory. I'd say that circumstances are more favorable to us now that they were in 1900. Utah tried for 50 years to be admitted as a state, but was denied for religious reasons.

@Skyler: I think mormonosity is one of the screwiest religions I've seen, but I have to say that I've never met a Mormon that wasn't among the nicest people I've known.

That's one of the commonest statements I hear from people about Mormons.

Sara, it's not good argumentive form to reduce yourself to defending your underwear!

You know there are a lot of Victoria's secrets around here in Utah. It's really hard to avert my eyes when I walk past them.

Sara (Pal2Pal) said...

Oh good grief, so many of you are so caught up in your own religious intolerance, you can't see a joke right in front of you. I'm over 60 and neither my undies nor whether they are sexy or not is really not part of my world much anymore.

To me, it is a sign of severe poor self esteem issues for someone to mock or denigrate someone else's beliefs or religious practices.

Seven Machos said...

Sara -- I agree. Except Scientology. We can all laugh at the expense of that tripe.

Methadras said...

Sara (Pal2Pal) said...

To me, it is a sign of severe poor self esteem issues for someone to mock or denigrate someone else's beliefs or religious practices.


Does this include new age charlatanism? Oh, sorry about your geezer pants. :D

edutcher said...

Fascinating that the same people who are so moved by the Ground Zero Mosque as a symbol of religious tolerance will use the fact that someone else's religion isn't an orthodox Christianity to bring down that someone. These are the same people who did to Mitt Romney what Norman Vincent Peale tried to do to Jack Kennedy.

And, as most here know, I'm no Beck fan.

HokiePundit said...

If you go to a Mormon church service, remember that they're probably not giving you the whole picture. Ask about the underwear. Ask if God has a physical body and a wife. Ask if Jesus and the devil are brothers. Ask if God used to be Adam and has since transcended so that he is now the god of his own planet.

Mormonism is not Christianity precisely because it believes so many things that are at odds with Christianity. Yes, they follow an ahistorical version of Christ that denies the Trinity, the hypostatic union, the purpose of the Atonement, and the role of the Holy Spirit today. I'm not sure Islam is all that different, yet no one claims they're Christians.

This is my problem: Mormonism doesn't understand its own place among belief systems, and actively tries to hide the weird beliefs behind a facade of (genuine) niceness and (false) orthodoxy. The Mormons are useful allies to Christians in many ways (as are most people of moderate, traditionalist religions), but it's important to know not only the similarities but the stark differences as well.

Shanna said...

Team America

Would that be Team America, World POlice?

@Skyler: I think mormonosity is one of the screwiest religions I've seen, but I have to say that I've never met a Mormon that wasn't among the nicest people I've known.

I have, but he probably wasn't representative. He was a major jerk though. I had no idea Beck was LDS, but who cares. I don't think people are likely to jump over to LDS just because of somebody like Beck. Actually my coworker is going to deer camp with some mormon's and we were just talking about how Catholic to Mormon is a pretty hard sell.

HT said...

Geoff Matthews said...

ross has 0 comments. you have 5. why aren't you writing for the nyt?

____

Not sure if people on here know or not (probably) but the NYT most often moderates there comments, and them dumps a batch at one time.

Fen said...

If you go to a Mormon church service, remember that they're probably not giving you the whole picture. Ask about the underwear. Ask if God has a physical body and a wife. Ask if Jesus and the devil are brothers. Ask if God used to be Adam and has since transcended so that he is now the god of his own planet.

No. I'll just enjoy the church service and respect their religion. Same as I do when my Jewish friends invite me over the celebrate their religious holidays.

I almost married a Mormon. So I researched her faith and, while I dont agree with most of it, I must confess that the mormons I know are better christians than my christian brethren.

And oh, she was a hotie who rarely wore any underwear.

*waves to Sharon G*

Fen said...

Not sure if people on here know or not (probably) but the NYT most often moderates there comments, and them dumps a batch at one time.

You mean they just make them up.

HT said...

No Fen, that is not what I mean ( and I you probably know it). Of course what I mean is that they read the comments first and then if they can be printed as is (I am guessing) they publish them, and if they find something like attacks and whatnot, they do not publish them. I did not mean they edit them.

AA's in contrast are published right away. Hence the difference.

Pogo said...

Yeah, Mormons freak me out.
Do you suppose these guys are Mormon?

"Two men taken off a Chicago-to-Amsterdam United Airlines flight in the Netherlands have been charged by Dutch police with "preparation of a terrorist attack," U.S. law enforcement officials tell ABC News.

U.S. officials said the two appeared to be travelling with what were termed "mock bombs" in their luggage. "This was almost certainly a dry run, a test," said one senior law enforcement official.

The men were identified as Ahmed Mohamed Nasser al Soofi, of Detroit, MI, and Hezem al Murisi, the officials said. A neighbor of al Soofi told ABC News he is from Yemen.
."




Those Yemeni Mormons are the worst.

Michael said...

Dead Julius opined "Personally, I didn't even know he was one of the funny-underwear-wearing polygamists until this post."

Tolerance on parade.

Kirstin said...

"I think you'll find it a normal church service very much like any other denomination, except maybe for the children in attendance rather than relegated to some church nursery out of sight and sound."

Are you saying that the Mormon church is a Christian denomination?

At my Christian church, children are not "relegated to some church nursery out of sight and sound." Not that there's anything wrong with that.

ndspinelli said...

Isn't anyone here old enough to remember the movie, Network, and Howard Beale? It's Beck.

garage mahal said...

OK, Mormonism's weirder) but its effects on people's lives are excellent: sobriety, commitment, service

Um, ick!?

Scott M said...

My six-year-old attends service with us. The 3-year-old and the 1-year-old go to the nursery. If we don't do it that way, my wife and I spend more time juggling kids than we do on the real reason we're there.

Fred4Pres said...

I suppose you could read a little Elmer Gantry and A Face In The Crowd into Beck's event. While not particularly into spending a Saturday going to church in humid hot DC, I am not that cynical.

I never really bought Beck being a Mormon. Beck's wife is Mormon. I have friends who converted to Judaism, Christianity and Islam to get married. Some really converted. Some just went though the motions because they loved their spouse.

Beck's real church is 12 step. That is the faith I saw displayed at his revivial, not LDS.

peter hoh said...

sunsong: Even though it is not *technically* related to the topic here - I would add - that I suspect if the Mormons wanted to build a Temple two blocks from Ground Zero - there would be one hell of an outcry from the left.

Oh, please.

And I suspect that if President Romney had put in place a health reform plan similar to his Massachusetts plan, Beck would be lauding him for it.

peter hoh said...

And speaking of the "Ground Zero Mosque," here's Orrin Hatch, staking out a position I support:

If the Muslims own that property, that private property, and they want to build a mosque there, they should have the right to do so. ... There’s a question of whether it’s too close to the 9/11 area, but it’s a few blocks away, it isn’t right there. … And there’s a huge, I think, lack of support throughout the country for Islam to build that mosque there, but that should not make a difference if they decide to do it. I’d be the first to stand up for their rights.

Hoosier Daddy said...

At my Christian church, children are not "relegated to some church nursery out of sight and sound."

Most Catholic churches I ever been to always had a 'cry room'.

Hoosier Daddy said...

I would add - that I suspect if the Mormons wanted to build a Temple two blocks from Ground Zero - there would be one hell of an outcry from the left.

Oh, please.


Oh please nothing. If there is one religion that has been the punching bag for leftists its Christianity and every derivation of the faith.

garage mahal said...

Here we go.

AJ Lynch said...

Fen:

Ecumenical outreach coordinator? Sounds like Obama has gotten a promotion from community organizer.

Hoosier Daddy said...

OK, Mormonism's weirder) but its effects on people's lives are excellent: sobriety, commitment, service

Um, ick!?


Which part garage? The sobriety? Committment or service?

Or all three?

Hoosier Daddy said...

Here we go.

You can go anytime.

AJ Lynch said...

BTW I suspect most people would be hard pressed when asked if Beck was a Mormon or a Catholic or a Baptist. I find it revealing the NYT is OK with putting a spotlight on Mormonism.

IMO it's just another religion.

Shanna said...

OK, Mormonism's weirder) but its effects on people's lives are excellent: sobriety, commitment, service

Sobriety leads to shorter lives! Love live alcohol. We decided at lunch yesterday that we would convert to Mormonism before pentacostal! At least they'll let you cut your hair and wear jeans. I had forgotten about the alcohol thing, though.

At my Christian church, children are not "relegated to some church nursery out of sight and sound."

What is wrong with an age appropriate service? How much do you think 3 year olds get out of big church (as we used to call it!).

traditionalguy said...

Mormonism is a traditional American cult based upon one of those special An Angel Told Me this Extra Added Message teachings by a successful deviner of buried treasure in upstate New York near Rochester. It must be a pretty good add on to Christianity since so many seem to enjoy it, but the Apostles Creed is not be acceptable to a Morman.

Joe said...

(the Crypto-Jew)
Most Catholic churches I ever been to always had a 'cry room'.

I will attest to this…as I have discovered in my nocturnal jaunts desecrating Christian Churches I have found many parishes do have “cry rooms” or “mother’s rooms.” It’s a good idea, the little rascals can emit the most ear-splitting shrieks, especially when we Jews are abducting the little ones…and no one wants to hear those deafening shrieks!


And Sarah don't let them get you down, mostly there are nice peole here...just don't talk to jeremy or Cedarford.

narciso said...

The problem with that statement is he's not pitching a particular faith, he wants us to get back to first principles, which he frankly
sees politics as currently practiced
getting in the way of. He has talked
about the early abolitionists like Wilberforce, and their way of drawing
on faith to produce change, but it's more important to hang on to your stereotypes

SteveR said...

The more the left and the NYT (but I repeat myself) look at Glenn Beck as the joke they play up to discredit the consevative/tea party movement, the more desparate they look and ineffective they are.

I hardly ever watch him, he's too dramatic for my tastse. If I were against him and what he stands for, I'd ignore him.

Pogo said...

And them Mormons named Ahmed trying to blow up airplanes all the time really pisses me off.

Clearly, we need to investigate the Mormon church!

Class factotum said...

Most Catholic churches I ever been to always had a 'cry room'.

Unfortunately, though, rarely used.

Rocco said...

Hoosier Daddy wrote:
"Most Catholic churches I ever been to always had a 'cry room'."

Growing up Catholic, my experience was the opposite. I think it's a function of when the church building was actually built. If a RC church has a cry room, it's going to be a modern, post WWII building.

I was always in churches built between ~1840 to ~1930 with the traditional architecture. Even as a small niƱo, if I got bored with the Mass, I could always look around and get lost in the architectural details for a while.

Class factotum said...

"If you don't believe *exactly* what I believe - not only are you not a *real* Christian ...

To me, that kind of *my way or the highway*, is such a turn off. What those who cannot deal with differences miss...


1. It's OK for feminists to decide Sarah Palin isn't a "real" feminist.

2. A group cannot create a definition of what it means to be a member of that group.

Either 1 or 2. You can't have both.

Scott M said...

Most Catholic churches I ever been to always had a 'cry room'.

My mom raised us Catholic until I was about 10, at which time she converted to Lutheranism. I'm not sure why, but the Lutheran churches I've been members of over the years have chosen to have the separate nursery while the Catholic churches I've been to with friends and family have always had them in church with the adults. Ditto for the Baptists.

Kirstin said...

USA Weekend, February 21, 2010:

Raised Catholic, Beck wasn’t a practicing anything when he proposed to his current wife, Tania. She insisted that they find a church to join, concluding that God needed to be a part of their future family’s life. “We tried ’em all,” Beck says. “Unitarian, Episcopalian, Baptist, even a synagogue. We ended up with the Church of Latter-day Saints because I took my daughters from my first marriage there, and they said, ‘Dad, this place makes us feel warm and welcome inside. Can we come back?’ ”

bagoh20 said...

It continues to amaze me how much of our debate is all around the target and never really aimed at it. We spend so much time arguing about the personalities and the style of the people and movements, while ignoring the validity or usefulness of their direct message. Of course it's fun, and we need that, but it totally overpowers the serious business at hand and at great risk.

The nation is at a serious point in its history, and we are evenly and deeply divided about which way to go.

We stand at a crossroads with one road clearly headed off a cliff, yet we stay immersed in discussions of which road has the most flawlessly painted road signs, and seriously deciding to choose based on such drivel.

Unfortunately, we all know this will decide more votes than the facts, history, danger or opportunity at hand.

I hope we get lucky.

DADvocate said...

I didn't know Beck was Mormon until now. I don't watch him but I pay enough attention that if he was pushing Mormonism, I would know it.

Why are so many people afraind of Mormonism? Yes, they have a little bit of a cultist feel about them but they have proven themselves to be fairly harmless over the past 100 years or so.

Jason said...

Let's take a closer look at those undergarments.

Freeman Hunt said...

Beck holds a huge rally telling everyone to act honorably, to love one another, and to honor God, and what is the response?

(1) "The crowd was too WHITE!"
(2) "Beck is MORMON!"

Please.

JAL said...

Catholic to Mormon is a pretty hard sell

Not so much. They both have a person at the top of their organization/church who, when they issue an official position (ex cathedra, I believe it is called in RC), has it become carved in stone like the 10 Commandments.

One of the LDS claims in their proselytizing has been that it's either the LDS or the RC church that is "true" as the other denominations do not have apostles and prophets, and especially The Prophet (can't find The Prophet in The Bible, but hey ...) who speaks for God. (RC = Pope)

So the authority issue is similar (apologies to my RC friends and The Anchoress) and resonates.

As for HokiePokie's post.... yup. That's much of it in a nutshell. There is the inhabiting and populating your own new planet with your spiritual offspring also.

But that aside -- Glenn Beck has become more vocal with his religious content over the past ... 6 months, I'd say. (I listen partially and irregularly to the radio show.)

It used to be more generic God and Christian, but his endorsement of some Mormon historian (?) starts getting him into deeper theological trouble, so to speak.

I used to think -- Glenn -- if you find out what your church *really* believes you mnay have an integrity problem there. But I would hazard a safe bet that as his star was rising the LDS powers that be in SLC and NY/CN have taken a lot more time to groom him and get him up to speed.

One of the pitches / tools used when I was being proselytized for the LDS back in my college days was a list of Mormon celebrities ("Did you know so and so is ...") and the claim that there were more Mormons in Who's Who in America than any other religious groups. (In retrospect I think Jews might be up there ... for Nobels anyway.)

This deal with his spiritualizing a lot of this ("This is NOT politics!!") may not be the best thing. There are a lot of people who don't mind him being a Mormon (his choice / predestination, right?) as much as co-opting everything under the name of God (which one?)and expecting everyone who believes in "God" (?) to go along with it.

Some people have distinctive beliefs and reasons why they believe what they do and don't. Believe it or not sunsong and others, it doesn't make them bigots or intolerant.

And yes, some of the nicest pople I know are Mormon. And also note that Utah has one of the biggest dark records for creating and perpetrating MLM schemes and scams, as well as an alternative herbal industry which drives and funds Orin Hatch and company. (OTOH, several years ago Utah had the dubvbious record of selling more Prozac per capita than any other state in the Union. Mmmm.)

wv baritcuta
Sarah Palin is not the topic of this conversation.

bagoh20 said...

Given a choice between following either a known crook and liar, or a decent but religious man, many people will choose the crook. The anti-religious fear is so strong among many. I'm not at all religious, but it never scared me as it manifests in our society. It's a great feature of American culture that we need to make up religious boogie-men because religion is so unobtrusive here.

GMay said...

Other than the occasional team of two young men in short sleeve button downs with a tie and dark slacks, I didn't have any meaningful contact with a Mormon until the last couple of years of my military career.

I felt the same way about Mormonism that several here do - a bit strange. Then again, that's someone's personal belief system and if that's what helps them out, then more power to 'em.

This guy however, was a model of good conduct, actively strove to better himself in every area he possibly could, worked his ass off, was an incredible self-starter, had a genuine desire to learn, had great confidence, spoke Portuguese, was very humble, and and all around good guy. All at the ripe old age of 22.

I figured if his church had anything to do with that, then it couldn't be all bad.

TMink said...

I am a reformed Presbyterian who considers Mormonism a heretical sect. Now I am sure that my theology is not perfect, and that many Mormons are saved.

But Glenn said nothing of Mormonism. His was basically a deist rally. I was blessed by it, and am so happy I attended, but if Beck is a secret agent for the LDS church, he is a most subtle agent indeed.

I think most of the problem from articles like this comes from people outside Christianity commenting on it without really understanding the religion. I am not sure I can comment on the inner world of the gay community, in fact I am sure I cannot because I am not part of that community and do not know the secret handshake to give my gay friends so that I can get the skinny.

Well, you see what I mean.

Beck is part of an Awakening of American Christians. I would not be surprised if his anger lessens (the people he rails against are people his Savior died for after all) and his focus becomes a tad less political.

But then, I am on the inside. So I understand these things.

Trey

Fen said...

HuffPo: It is time to pop the tea baggers’ favorite balloon.. I hereby offer to negotiate a $100,000 payday to the person who will come forward with a sex tape or phone records or anything else that succeeds in removing Glenn Beck from the public eye forever.

This is just one of the many reasons I hate Liberals and Democrats. And all the "moderates" who enable them.

Shanna said...

So the authority issue is similar (apologies to my RC friends and The Anchoress) and resonates.

I think it’s culturally where they vary the most. (not to mention that there are an awful lot of so called “cafeteria catholics” which I haven’t seen so much with LDS although they may be there and I just haven’t noticed) Culturally I think Baptists would be somewhat closer to mormons (southern Baptists at least) but I would think the religion itself is too different for them to convert easily.

Beck is part of an Awakening of American Christians.

My mom (not LDS) was saying something recently about how there is some sort of revival/awakening every maybe 50 years and we were due. Or something like that. I may not have been paying attention, but apparently it's a thing people are talking about in those circles. Don't know where mormon's would fit in with that.

k*thy said...

Beck holds a huge rally telling everyone to...

"telling" is the key work here, I think. People often naturally recoil to being 'told' what to do or how to think about something and will look for ways to shoot it down (especially within the context of a quasi-political rally).

Now, if these ideas are 'suggested' you often get a much different reaction, because you are offering them the choice to agree or not agree with you, thus empowering them (now I didn't see any of the rally, to know which he was doing, I'm just going by your verb choice).

Shanna said...

if Beck is a secret agent for the LDS church, he is a most subtle agent indeed.

Like Stephanie Meyers.

JAL said...

Just saw Fen's repost of the stupid Huffington thing.

The hilarious thing about this is Beck is sooo transparent about how screwed up he was (and in some ways is) that all that's there is ... already there!

Haven't you heard him tell about what a useless drunk he was?

This is not John Goody Two Shoes Edwards we're talking about here.

roesch-voltaire said...

While Mormons have a strong social support system, there is something odd about the religion which was pulled from a hat and teaches that the bible does not contain the fullness of the Gospel, while the majority in Beck's audience believe just the opposite. But ultimately, I think Beck's religion is the traditional gold standard.

Hoosier Daddy said...

Just saw Fen's repost of the stupid Huffington thing.

Kinda makes you wonder if that person was on Journolist.

holdfast said...

Not a big fan of his show - too much like remedial history for those with a conservative inclination, but not a lot of background. Since I have a degree in history and am a voracious reader, it feels a little elementary to me. The wife, on the other hand, quite enjoys his shows - in many ways she is more of an instinctual conservative than I am, but her post-secondary education was more in he sciences, and so she lacks any real grounding in history and poli sci. I figure if Beck is pushing Hayek and Schlaes, he can't be all bad.

One impressive thing that I've noticed is his outreach to African Americans, including a lot who don't really agree with him. He doesn't pander, but rather takes an approach that says "this is my brand of conservatism, and this is what I think it can do for you. Interested?" To me that seems a lot more respectful than the pandering and false validation you see from most Dems and some 'Pubs.

Quayle said...

If you go to a Mormon church service, remember that they're probably not giving you the whole picture. Ask about the underwear.

[What's interesting is how Mormon's critics always portray these things as secret and scandalous - things that Mormons hide.

But I know of few Mormons that wouldn't patiently explain these very simple and singularly reasonable things.

And, as a Mormon, I always wonder what the critic’s answers are to the underlying core questions they seem to feel Mormons have failed to answer.]

On underwear: Mormons wear religious garb related to their vows. (See e.g. the Jewish tallit katan.)

However, rather than wear them on the outside, as might a Sikh or a Hasidic Jew, Mormons wear them under their clothes. I guess that makes them underwear, but hardly a scandal.

Ask if God has a physical body and a wife.

This relates to the key question of what is the nature of God:

Protestants, who broke off of Catholicism, all traditionally accept the Catholic definition of God, which appears to a Mormon to be a definition that only a committee could have made - the Nicene Creed - which Mormons reject.)

Mormons believe that in 325 the counsel of Nicaea concocted a compromise statement of God, describing Him as an unknowable, un-comprehendible, un-embodied spirit essence comprised of three beings in one and one in three.

Joseph Smith said God was a physical, embodied being and that, as the Bible said, we were literally fashioned in His express image - that He looks like us and we look like Him.

Therefore, Mormons believe the Nicene Creed (a) was highly influenced by Greek speculative philosophy's aversion to the physical as corrupt, (b) runs counter to every revelatory experience recorded in the Bible, and (c) is just plain wrong.

As for God having a wife - Mormons would ask (as have many before), if men are created in the image of God, in whose image are women created?

Mormon’s answer is that there are Women in heaven, as well as men. This may be strange to Nicene Creedists, but at least Mormons have an answer even if other Christians are stumped by that question. We don’t know much about it, but we believe that there are women in heaven that are co-equal with the masculine-labeled Father.

JAL said...

Shanna -- actually I think more Baptists do tend to convert than RCs -- but because of similar lingo / values.

The organizational STRUCTURE of Baptist churches is waaaayy far from the LDS. Baptists are infamous for local congregational autonomy.

How does a RC or a LDS know what to believe? They have an authority: The Pope and The Prophet.


That being said: What Freeman said is correct about the DC rally. The press's take:

1. The crowd was too white!! That didn't get as much traction, so

2. Glenn Beck is Mormon and wears funny underwear!!

How come the MSM isn't asking how/why POTUS can ignore / miss 300,000 people on the Capitol's front lawn?

Talk about clueless.

virgil xenophon said...

FredforPresident@8:04 nails it. It's all about the "Higher Power."

JAL said...

Quayle my good fellow.

Do your homwork.

Mormons believe that in 325 the counsel of Nicaea concocted a compromise statement of God, describing Him as an unknowable, un-comprehendible, un-embodied spirit essence comprised of three beings in one and one in three.

?Ever read the creed?

Quayle said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Quayle said...

If you go to a Mormon church service, remember that they're probably not giving you the whole picture. Ask about the underwear.

What's interesting is how Mormon's critics always portray these things as secret and scandalous - things that Mormons hide.

But I know of few Mormons that wouldn't patiently explain these very simple and singularly reasonable things.

On underwear: Mormons wear religious garb related to their vows. See e.g. the Jewish tallit katan.

However, rather than wear them on the outside, as might a Sikh or a Hasidic Jew, Mormons wear them under their clothes. I guess that makes them underwear, but hardly a scandal.

Quayle said...

Ask if God has a physical body and a wife.

This relates to the age-old key question of what is the nature of God:

Protestants and Catholics traditionally accept the Nicene Creed. To Mormons the Nicene Creed appears to be a definition of God that only a committee could have made.

Mormons reject the idea that God is an unknowable, incomprehensible, unembodied spirit essence comprised of three beings in one and one in three.

Mormons believe that the Nicene Creed (a) was a compromise to achieve political harmony, (b) highly influenced by Greek speculative philosophy's aversion to the physical as corrupt, (c) runs counter to every revelatory experience recorded in the Bible (and recorded by Joseph Smith’s), and (d) is just plain wrong.
Mormons believe God is a physical, embodied God and that, as the Bible says, we were fashioned in His image - that He looks like us and we look like Him. The resurrected Christ said to his disciples, “Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have. (Luke 24:39)

As for God having a wife - Mormons would simply ask (as have many before), if men are created in the image of God, in whose image are women created? A Mormon’s answer is that there are Women in heaven, as well as men. We don’t claim to know much about it, but we believe that there are women in heaven that are co-equal with the masculine-named Father.

Fen said...

Uuhm guys? One of the goals of articles like this is to get Christians arguing with Mormons about God.

Stay focused on the things you agree on. At least until November.

Geoff Matthews said...

"While Mormons have a strong social support system, there is something odd about the religion which was pulled from a hat and teaches that the bible does not contain the fullness of the Gospel,"

Not so strange when you realize that the bible doesn't claim to have the fullness of the gospel.
You see, the bible is a compilation of books written centuries before they were gathered together. The notion of a closed cannon is an invention that came about centuries after Christ's death.

Kirstin said...

"I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel—which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemned!" Galatians 1:6-9

I disagree with Geoff Matthews ...

Fen said...

[meanwhile, the libtard weasels are sneaking in to defile the altar]

Quayle said...

"But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned!"

Yes, but that only begs the question of what gospel was the one preached to [them].

For example, Paul referenced Baptism for the Dead in his refutation of the non-resurrection Sadducees. See 1st Cor. 15:29

Is the gospel preached by protestants now inclusive of this concept of Baptism for the Dead? No.

But the Mormons understand and teach it as the means whereby people that never heard of Christ and died have the opportunity to be "born of the water" by proxy, as Christ said they must.

So, again, I'm all for ignoring the gospel not preached by Paul. But do you think that the gospel of Christ you received by tradition is really the gospel Paul preached?

Where did Paul preach the Nicene Creed?

Joe said...

relegated to some church nursery out of sight and sound

Rolls eyes. The nursery is during the structured classroom meetings (Sunday School and so forth) when people are divided up by ages for various classes for very practical reasons.

During a Mormon sacrament meeting (the congregational meeting) it is often much noisier than other churches precisely because of the number of children and kids in attendance.

If you're going to criticize Mormonism, and there is much to criticize, at least get your story straight first.

(I was once a very active Mormon; now I believe it's bunk, but will defend it from inaccurate depictions.

As for the Mormons aren't Christian charge. If you believe in Christ and follow His teachings, you are a Christian. To say "you don't believe what we believe" even though Jesus didn't even teach such doctrines is beyond absurd--what Jesus is recorded as having taught in the New Testament is pretty basic stuff. I don't believe Christ even existed, but find the fundamental philosophy a pretty good guideline on behavior. I also hasten to point out that traditional protestants don't consider Catholics Christians either.)

Quayle said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
lyssalovelyredhead said...

Holdfast said: Since I have a degree in history and am a voracious reader, it feels a little elementary to me.

I'm curious, since you seem to know a bit about it, do you generally find Beck's take on history to be accurate and fair?

(I'm more like your wife- didn't study history a whole lot (although I've read a bit since school) and find his show interesting.)

- Lyssa

Quayle said...

Ask if Jesus and the devil are brothers.

This gets to the question of where Satan and evil came from, and touches on the question of where we came from before this life.

Mormons don't believe in ex-nihilo creation and are therefore not stumped by the problems and issues that might stem from the notion that God created evil.

Mormons believe that evil is co-existent with God and all of us, and that we all existed before we came to this earth.

Mormons believe that before we came to this earth, we were all spirit sons and daughters of God, and that not only were Jesus and the devil brothers, but we each were all brothers and sisters of Jesus and the devil, under the Fatherhood and in the family of God.

The devil used his free will (freedom to choose and agency also being co-existent with God) and chose to rebel against God, Jesus, and all of us.

He was attempting to sell us all down the river for his own glory. Consequently, he was cast out after some kind of ‘battle’ and now walks the earth attempting to pull anyone away from our Father that he can. It is a story of a family tragedy with an eventual triumph.

Now the devil is unwittingly providing the opposition down here that is a necessary part of our present life, to learn to distinguish good from evil and to prize the good.

For those who care to check, this is all described or alluded to in Isaiah 14:12-20, Rev. 12:7-12, Job 1:7, and Luke 10:18.

Quayle said...

Ask if God used to be Adam and has since transcended so that he is now the god of his own planet.

Mormons have no idea who God used to be, but do not believe him to have been Adam. This is an old saw that Mormon critics always pull out, based on a narrow reading of one single statement Brigham Young made, that no Mormon remembers or ever refers to.

However, Mormons do believe that our paternal and maternal relationship with God is not allegorical, but is real - that we are related to God just as an acorn is related to an oak. (Christ prayed "our father, who art in Heaven". Mormons believe it was a literal declaration, not a symbolic one.)

Therefore, the Mormon answer to the key question of what is the meaning of our existence and where do we go after this life is, in a sense, that we are as acorns and the plan exists for us, in time, to become oaks.

So, all of the above may be wacky to some that can't let go of their inherited traditions, but to others it really has a sensibility to it that is a pretty good foundation for understanding God and one's own life.

Joe said...

Paul referenced Baptism for the Dead in his refutation of the non-resurrection Sadducees. See 1st Cor. 15:29

The Jews did NOT baptize for the dead. They don't believe in resurrection (or heaven or hell for that matter) so why would they? This is the argument Paul is making; if heretics baptize for the dead, they must believe in resurrection so why don't you? It's a horribly lame argument.

Robert Cook said...

"I've been pretty lukewarm on Beck, but now that I know he believes that angels are still among us, I'm going to give him the benefit of all my doubts."

Whereas rational people would be even more leery of someone so brazenly crazy, (assuming he's not merely a common grifter, reason enough to avoid him).

Quayle said...

"it is often much noisier than other churches precisely because of the number of children and kids in attendance."

It can be noisy, especially when the member giving the sermon (Mormons have no regular preachers) is boring, as happens, perhaps too often.

Mormons are not, as a people, the be-all end-all, but rather striving toward an objective, flaws and all, and desiring to understand and embrace any truth that is out in the world, and beyond.

But yes, to sit through a Mormon Sunday meeting, one must be willing to sit through some unpolished sermons to get to those moments when a fellow member speaks straight from the heart, teaches truth from their unique experiences in life, and the room immediately fills with a sense of shared understanding and love.

And I have noticed that when that happens, the kids seems to sense it and they quiet down. That's my observation, anyway.

Kirstin said...

For example, Paul referenced Baptism for the Dead in his refutation of the non-resurrection Sadducees. See 1st Cor. 15:29

Paul merely referenced baptism for the dead. He did not promote it or say that he participated in it. It's the only verse in the Bible about that practice. My understanding is that the Book of Mormon does not promote baptism for the dead, either.

Joe said...

Quayle, Brigham Young made more than a single statement about Adam-God. He preached it from the pulpit in 1852 and continued to preach it to his death. Orson Pratt openly disagreed (try that today!) and set the church straight, though Young continued to push it.

(Modern Mormon doctrine is pretty much what Orson Pratt said it was. Therein lies the biggest problem with Mormonism. Joseph Smith and Brigham Young said lots of weird things and Orson Pratt munged it all together into a fairly coherent doctrine. Problem is that we still know quite a bit of what Smith and Young said and wrote--sometimes emphatically so, speaking by relevation--and all of Pratt's munging and modern Mormon apologia can't get around the contradictions and some serious wackiness.

Ironically, when growing up LDS, I liked the wackiness. I think much has been lost by the Mormonism's drive to become an "acceptable" religion. I also find the modern church's almost fanatic anti-polygamy stance rather off putting given how many of my ancestors were polygamists!)

Quayle said...

JAL, you are correct, I've been sloppy.

Had I made a more accurate citation, I would have written the trinity of the Nicene Creed:

("begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father")

and of the Athanasian Creeds

("Neither confounding the Persons; nor dividing the Essence. For there is one Person of the Father; another of the Son; and another of the Holy Ghost. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, is all one;")

and the unknowable God of the Westminster Confession,

(" a most pure spirit, invisible, without body, parts, or passions, immutable, immense, eternal, incomprehensible,..")

I misstated them. Mormons reject them all.

Shanna said...

traditional protestants don't consider Catholics Christians either.

This is not what most people will say today, even “traditional” protestants. They may disagree with some of the tenants of the Catholic church, but I don’t know any personally who will tell you catholic’s aren’t Christians.

I've never thought about whether Mormons are Christians, but I guess I put them sort of nominally in that category. The extra gospel stuff is problematic, though.

Scott M said...

traditional protestants don't consider Catholics Christians either

As a practicing Lutheran that converted from Catholicism, I wholeheartedly disagree.

lyssalovelyredhead said...

Shanna said: They [protestants]may disagree with some of the tenants of the Catholic church, but I don’t know any personally who will tell you catholic’s aren’t Christians.

I heard that several times growing up Catholic in the South, usually from other kids at school (who had apparently picked it up from their preachers or parents), so it's definitely out there. One friend of mine (sympathetic to Catholicism and looking to convert) claimed that her mother actually had a book on the shelf called "Why Catholics are going to Hell", and there was a Jack Chick-type tract that got passed around with the same message (I guess these didn't actually say Catholics aren't Christian, but they at least said that our Christianity doesn't work, or something).

Anyway, most of the people that seemed to have that idea were facepalmingly ignorant- didn't know anything of the history of the Protestant Church's having come from Catholicism (couldn't have told you who Martin Luther was), believed that Catholics worshiped Mary, weren't really sure that we believed in Christ, etc. But the idea is there in some Southern Baptist circles at least.

- Lyssa

Joe said...

RE: Catholics being Christian. For your reading pleasure:

http://www.born-again-christian.info/catholics.htm

(This cracks me up, but at least protestants and Catholics haven't gone to war... the Thirty Years War, the Huguenots stuff, the English Civil war, Northern Ireland? Never mind.)

Quayle said...

Quayle, Brigham Young made more than a single statement about Adam-God. He preached it from the pulpit in 1852 and continued to preach it to his death. Orson Pratt openly disagreed (try that today!) and set the church straight, though Young continued to push it.

But of course you know, Joe, that the doctrine of living revelation, expressed well in the 4th Article of Faith (We believe that many thing will yet be revealed...) means that the doctrine of the church is embodied in its current practice and what today's leaders say it is.

Citations back in time, even to times as near as Bruce R. McConkie's, without a more recent restatement or reaffirmation by a current leader, must be considered diminished in their persuasiveness (though regrettably such citations are quite common.)

There certainly is deference given to the foundational nature of what Joseph and Brigham said, but even with all Brigham said, when nobody in his position or in the twelve have said much about some topic afterword, one must presume that he, Brigham Young though he was, was simply wrong on that point.

And I think the Twelve vigorously disagree on points today, they just don't air them out in the remote seclusion of the 19th century Great Basin like they used to .

shirley elizabeth said...

I just love it when people come around trying to tell you what you believe. Or that you don't really know what you believe. And they always seem to reference misstated doctrine they heard from some hateful person.

The thing is, many things are taught in every church that take faith to believe. What is stressed to Mormon congregations is to go and find out for yourself that what you're hearing is true, to receive your own witness.

Quayle said...

My understanding is that the Book of Mormon does not promote baptism for the dead, either.

That is correct. In fact, hardly any, if any at all, of the Mormon doctrines or ordinances that are core (temple sealing, baptism for the dead, the endowment ordinance) are referenced in the Book of Mormon.

Which is a curious thing in and of itself, that Joseph Smith put the Book of Mormon out there, but it doesn't really reference or support his most explosive doctrines, except perhaps polygamy, which it condemns unless expressly commanded otherwise by God.

But you also must remember that Mormonism isn't founded on a book, either the Bible or the Book of Mormon. The foundation of Mormonism is modern, current revelation, both Joseph Smith's and the modern leaders'.

In other words, the book comes from the church, the church doesn't come from the book. And they both come from revelation.

Joe said...

Quayle, that's true up to a point, but if God is that confused with his revelations, what is the typical person supposed to believe?

(And, like I said, I don't know why Mormon apologists must dismiss the wackiness. Embrace it!)

shirley elizabeth said...

Men, even prophets, don't always speak for God. Not everything they say is revelation for the church (and when it is, they let us know). I'd say most, even from Brigham Young, is personal speculation.

Shanna said...

But the idea is there in some Southern Baptist circles at least.

I come from a southern Baptist background. I think it used to be there and there may be some older folks who still think this, but it’s hardly true of the majority of protestants. It’s not a very modern way of thinking, I guess is what I’m saying.

traditionalguy said...

The Morman.s real life described by many commenters here is appealing. I also wonder if the Morman Temple ceremonies are largely taken from that other popular cult/religion of the early 1800s called Free Masonry. Is there any truth to that or not?

lyssalovelyredhead said...

You're right, Shanna, I don't think that it is anywhere near the majority of protestants, and it's certainly not the modern way of thinking. I doubt that you'd find it in anyone with a signficant education or who had had many actual conversations with people outside of their faith. But, in a tiny little backwoods southern town, where Catholics are downright exotic, yeah, it's there.

(I sound like one of those liberal elites who are always picking on small towns and the south, don't I? I'm really not that type at all, and it was generally a nice place to live, but I'll admit that it's not perfect. And, just for the record, the town to which I refer was considered, at least in the '90's, a safely Democrat hub in a largely otherwise Republican region.)

- Lyssa

JAL said...

But the idea is there in some Southern Baptist circles at least.

Just for the record, just because a church is Baptist and located in the south does not make it "Southern Baptist."

"Southern Baptist" is a very specific Protestant denomination. Largest in the US -- and maybe largest Christian (including Catholic).

There are many flavors of baptist churches in the south. Some more parochial than others. And not in a Catholic way ;-)

JAL said...

Hey Quayle -- thanks for clarifying.

The "unknowable" claim caught my attention. That's why "the Word became flesh and dwelt among us." He's not.

As for your other thoughts about the Trinity ... some homework there would be useful if you would take the time to read some Biblically orthodox theologians.

You and I both know that Mormons laugh (and worse) at some of what they (you) think gentile Christians believe, I would say, based on a pretty simplistic, early 19th century mischaracterizations. (Are you old enough to have gone through the Temple marriage ceremony pre revision?)

The guys at what used to be called FARMS (can't think what they have re-named themselves) have become more sophisticated, but you are still clinging to individual snippets of verses here which are not seen in context.

Hey -- did you know the DNA evidence speaks against the migration of the lost tribes to America?

Just sayin'.

Shanna said...

I sound like one of those liberal elites who are always picking on small towns and the south, don't I? I'm really not that type at all, and it was generally a nice place to live, but I'll admit that it's not perfect.

Don’t worry Lyssa. I live in the capitol of my state and moved to DC for 6 years, so I may not be typical, but I certainly know people who are. Hell, I roll my eyes at my mother half the time (but you know, with love. Heh). Small towns are probably different (60k doesn’t count as a small town). I just don’t think it’s a popular viewpoint anymore, but I’m sure there are holdouts.

HDHouse said...

tent revivalist?


empty tent.

David said...

The Mormons here must be thinking: "MADE YOU LOOK!"

Mitch H. said...

Am I the only one who was unaware that Beck was a Mormon until people started talking it up after this weekend? I had always assumed he was some sort of evangelical.

And Julius? Speaking as a fairly hard-shell agnostic, I wish to be counted out from your Atheistic-Agnostic Consortium. There is nothing noble about atheism and very little laudable about agnosticism.

We used to have a Mormon family living across the creek when I was a kid - there was this cute girl... I loved the weird stories she told about what her family believed. I worry a little about a "living religion" - historical Mormonism was pretty hair-raising, but as it has aged, the conformist tendency inherent in patriarchal consensus-oriented revelation has turned that wild, weird fantasy into something stolid and earthy and reliable.

Quayle said...

"Quayle, that's true up to a point, but if God is that confused with his revelations, what is the typical person supposed to believe?"

Joe, I just don't think it was ever designed that one person speaks and everyone else can turn their brains and hearts off and follow.

I think the typical person is supposed to take all input and counsel and figure it out for themselves, and I don't think they can or should be able to abdicate their duty to so do by blindly following what someone else said.

Brigham Young were adamant that he didn't want people to just believe what he said, but that they should ask God themselves and get their own confirmation.

That was safety for them, but also for him, in what must be a crushing responsibility.

That's why I don't condemn anyone that has left Mormonism. I assume they are just trying to find their way, as we all are.

Deborah said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
blake said...

There's a whole sub-culture of "Catholics aren't real Christians and are going to Hell", but I'm not well-versed enough in the various denominations to figure out whence it springs. Born-agains, for what use that is as a label.

Also: HD's right! Nobody goes to that tent any more! It's too crowded!

The Crack Emcee said...

"There is nothing noble about atheism and very little laudable about agnosticism."

As an atheist I agree: there's nothing noble about acknowledging the obvious and little laudable about not being sure of it.

All religious/spiritual claims are face-palm moments.

I like Beck's (radio) show, and yeah, I knew he was a Mormon.

I've got a friend who just chased a Mormon Bishop off his property for trying to convert his daughter.

I got a "Prayer of the Day" from a Mormon two days ago - it was very nice. Worthless air, but very nice.

A troublesome, stuck-up, Mormon woman had sex with a friend of mine a few days ago. During the deed, she said the last guy she slept with called her a whore. My friend's reply? "He should've called you a bitch!"

Joseph Smith was a fraud. L. Ron Hubbard was a fraud. They're all frauds.

Religious people exhibit as much evil as the rest of the population (it's how they display God's "omnipotence" when cornered) so there's no point to believing any of it.

Mormons are so gullible Utah hosts special classes teaching them how not to be suckers - unfortunately, it doesn't start with a warning about believing in Mormonism.

"We need atheists and agnostics involved in rebuilding our damaged country as well as religious people. In a similar vein, we need gay people and pot smokers and Scientologists and Americanized Muslims and Americanized Mexicans."

Yea, we need them all to stop being the dorks of "ancient teachings". We of "The New World" should focus on conquering superstition and foolishness once and for all.

As a foster child who never got indoctrinated in this nonsense, religious beliefs make life less worth living - even worthy of suicide - this is an aspect of religious belief the believers don't like to deal with. And if they do - and are fine with others killing themselves because they can't be left alone - then they're so evil they may as well be Satan himself.

Religion is probably the biggest all-around wrong that's ever existed on the planet.

Fen said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Fen said...

Religion is probably the biggest all-around wrong that's ever existed on the planet.

And also the biggest all-around good that's ever existed on the planet.

For every Jerry Falwell, you've got a church lady who sheppards the fatherless kids in her neighborhood.

For every Jihadist, you've got some unsung hero who dedicates his LIFE to feeding Africa.

I understand what you're getting at but, even if you believe religion is all bunk, it serves two pratical purposes:

1) It teaches people Faith. Something we take for granted. I dont think America could have been built without it. And I dont know of a better way to get true Faith that will endure through all misfortune than through religion.

2) People have spiritual needs. If that energy is not directed at a deity, they will displace it towards another man. A God-King. Thats how we get monsters like Hitler and Stalin and Saddam.