“For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.” (2 John 1:7)

“Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.” (1 John 2:1

“…He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.” (1 John 2:22)

“And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.” (1 John 4:3)

I agree that the standards of both Evangelicals and Mormons are the same on the moral values issues. If Romney would have followed his religion’s teachings; I wouldn’t have a problem with him. My problem comes with his liberal views when he started his political career. He began his political campaigning by promising to do more for liberal causes than Ted Kennedy. Romney kept his campaign promises. Romneycare provides tax dollars to help pay for abortions. Romney illegally ordered Judges to perform homosexual marriages even though there was no law on the books forcing such an order. Romney obviously doesn’t care much for 1st Amendment rights; because he ordered Catholic hospitals to provide the abortion pill and ordered Catholic adoption agencies to allow homosexual couples to adopt. Then when he decided to run for President he decides to try to make people believe he had this miraculous conversion.

Ann Coulter said Romney had to say he was pro-choice and would fight to promote the homosexual agenda to get elected. Some of his own former staff members said he is totally data driven and would say and do what ever it takes to get elected. Those comments sound like he got into politics to be a normal politician.

By contrast, Huckabee got into politics to be able to do something to promote social values.

“Concerning sticking to the principles that originally drew millions of value voters into the political process Huckabee said, “We need to once again realize that there was a time when there were certain things negotiable: which federal agencies should stay or go, which programs ought to get more or less money. But some things were not negotiable: the sanctity of human life, the definition of marriage, the purpose of freedom, and the opportunity for us to worship as we please. Let us never sacrifice our principles for anybody’s politics … not now, not ever.”

From this link

Huckabee was able to sign some pro-life legislation and the marriage amendment into law in Arkansas. He was also able to improve parks, roads, nursing homes, and schools fiscally responsibly in spite of the huge Democrat majority in the Arkansas state Congress.

“Huckabee offers a lifeline of economic support with solid social conservative credentials. What should McCain choose: 40,000 Club of Growth members or 80 million-some evangelicals? Hmmm.”

From this link

Why should we trust Romney when there are others that have consistently stood for the values we hold dear? Why would I choose to support that type of politician when someone like Huckabee is still in the running? According to another recent poll; “Evangelicals are the Only Faith Segment Obama Hasn’t Won Over.” Read more here

If Evangelicals are the “only faith segment Obama hasn’t won over” and there are “80 million-some Evangelicals;” wouldn’t it make since for McCain to want to keep us by choosing someone we can actually trust? If McCain has already eliminated Huckabee and others like him, and is really considering people like Lieberman, Ridge and untrustworthy Romney; he won’t be that far away from Obama on the values issues. If he chooses to throw the Evangelical base of the Party under the bus; he will lose the election.

As for bigotry. What are you arguing? The pre-primary polls all found that there is about 10% of evangelicals who would not vote for a memeber of the LDS church regardless of any other considerations. When you folks were discussing the bigotry charge on HucksArmy the last day or two, your administrator HAD TO LOCK THE THREAD DUE TO THE COMMENTS OF SOME OF YOUR MEMEBERS THAT, IN FACT, THEY CAN NOT VOTE FOR A MORMON. What are you really arguing about? Romney has alaways known that he has negatives with some evangelicals because of his religion. On the bright side, Romney is usually the choice among republicans.

On a conciliatory note, I appreciate some of your comments and others trying to keep the focus on issues. Our “fued” is, in some regards, silly given how similar LDS and evangelicals feel about the social issues — its just that religion thing i guess.

Brian

PLEASE GRANNY T. GET MY NAME AND E-MAIL ADDRESS OFF THE “LEAVE A COMMENT.” (It’s been on there since I posted a comment weeks ago.)

BDC

Satan and his demons believe there is one God and even have enough sense to tremble. James 2:19 (KJV)”Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.”

But they cannot be sons of God because they refused to accept and/or receive Him.

There are 3 individual parts of God: God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. Man was created in God’s image and has 3 individual parts, too: the spirit, the soul and the body. 1 Thessalonians 5:23 (KJV) “And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.”

The thought of him being the first born also supports the Mormon belief that there must have been a spiritual existence before a moral existence on Earth could take place. If there was no spiritual existence beforehand, then Adam or his first would logically be the firstborn by definition. So, in context of considering the possibility of a spiritual existence of God’s offspring before being born into mortality, is it not possible that God fathered and begot many spirit children with Jesus being the first begotten? If we did not exist as spirit children, as as spirit brothers and sisters before mortality, then how else are we children of a Father in Heaven? The passage you last shared from Psalms 82:7 just goes to confirm that despite the fact that we are all children of the Most High, we were still mortals who would fall and die a mortal death, hence the need for a savior with the power to resurrect us some day after our mortal death.

If we are not sons and daughters of God ourselves, then what of the genealogy laid out in Luke 3 that says Adam was the son of God. I’m not implying that Adam was the only son of God, nor can it be concluded that he was a son of God in the flesh, but it can be concluded that Adam was at least a spirit son of God, and as Adam was a spirit son of God, it can be concluded that all are spirit sons and daughters of God.

Mormons may believe Jesus and Satan existed as brothers, even spiritual brothers to all of us before we were all born into mortality, Mormons certainly don’t hold the two as being equal. Just as a father can punish one child of his for rebelling against the family rules and reward the other for honoring the father’s will, so to did our Heavenly Father eternally punish Satan by casting him out then gave his power and glory to Jesus, his firstborn, to become the redeemer and savior of mankind in their mortality. It makes more sense to me to believe that Jesus, Satan, all angels (whether good or bad), and all of mankind are spirit creations and thus spirit children of God, but of course, none are equal to Christ. We can, if we follow Christ and his ways, some day be joint heirs with Christ in the kingdom of God, as the Bible teaches, but even that will only further exhalt and glorify Christ (the father of our salvation) and God our Father (the father of our spirits). I tend to think of it as a child of a father being able to begot children of his own and thus bringing further glory to his father by making him a grandfather. I believe a God who can begot children with the ability to grow and progress to have the same abilities he has is a more powerful God that only becomes more glorified as His children grow to be like him. We as children of God can never become equal to God any more than a child in this life can become equal to their blood father, but we can become like God. This is something that Satan will never have the ability to do because of his rebellion against God’s will and thus will never even be equal to those of us who have been born into mortality. Satan will never have a physical body and that alone makes all who’ve had a body more powerful than Satan. If it wasn’t so important to have a body, then Christ would have never taken a physical body and then resurrected it after its death. To show his power of death and how important it was for people to know they too would be resurrected some day after their death because of Christ’s power, he showed himself and let people touch and feel his resurrected body with its wounds several times. And then when I consider all this, I don’t understand how so many who do believe that God and Jesus are the same spirit and personage can then believe that God doesn’t have a physical body. These two beliefs seem to contradict each other to me.

Satan is just as evil in the Mormon view as he is in the evangelical view. Given the Mormon belief in the universal Fatherhood of God, I’m not sure what the point of the “Mormons believe Jesus and Satan are brothers” accusation is supposed to be. It doesn’t demote Jesus in any way, or promote Satan in any way.

The fact is, this assertion came up because of it’s sound-bite quality to infer some kind of evil, weird beliefs held by Mormons. When you fully understand the context by actually getting to know Mormon theology, the “belief” becomes much less scandalous.