Print
E-mail
Comment
Rate
Share
Nauvoo man authors book about Mormonism
Chris Faulkner
Staff Writer
Rocky Hulse has been speaking and writing about the Church of Jesus Christ-Latter Day Saints - the church he was baptized and raised in - for quite a few years now.
That's often followed by charges of bigotry or hatefulness or, at best, stirring up unnecessary dissension between faith groups.
Undaunted, Hulse has written a book about the subject of the Mormon faith and how it relates to church members in public office. Once again, he puts in numerous disclaimers to his being bigoted.
The book is: When Salt Lake City Calls: Is there a conflict between Mormonism and the public trust? It's published by Christian publishing company Xulon Press.
Although Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney is not named specifically, the timing of the book's release is no coincidence, with the 2008 presidential election looming on the horizon.
The back cover, however, shows that Hulse is not just focusing on the office of the president. “From the White House ... to the local school board ... the principle remains the same! Can Americans trust Mormons in public office?”
The central premise of Hulse's book is that in order to be a Latter-Day Saint in good standing a person - in this case a candidate for public office - must cast his allegiance first and foremost to the church and its Prophets. (The Prophet is the current leader of the Church.)
From Chapter 7, Page 224, in what is a regular end-of-chapter summary feature, Hulse writes, “This book is about a principle: absolute allegiance/obedience to the Mormon Church through its governing agent, the Priesthood. As has been amply chronicled in previous chapters, the dogma to “Follow the Prophet” is the primary tenet of Mormonism. However, under the agent of the Priesthood the local level Priesthood leaders are to be followed as well or the Mormon could be ‘endangering their own salvation.' This brings the conflict between Mormonism and the political arena to the local level.”
Hulse took the first three chapters to give an overview and outline of the Church of Jesus Christ-Latter Day Saints. Despite his critics' claims, Hulse wrote that in writing about and evaluating the church he's simply taking doctrinal statements and proclamations from actual Mormon sources - both in the early days of the church founded by Joseph Smith and in more recent times.
He then took the next five chapters to discuss the LDS Church's views on its heirarchy and its teachings and spiritual doctrines and how they relate to the political world.
It is Hulse's contention - and his claims are heavily footnoted and documented - that LDS members are to place their primary source of guidance on church leaders, who are anointed by God.
Hulse addressed the question that has been brought up, comparing the fears about a Mormon president with the fear in 1963 that John F. Kennedy - the first Catholic to run for president - would take his marching orders from the Pope.
Hulse reprints Kennedy's speech to a Baptist group and said that is in stark contrast to the Mormon Church's beliefs about political activity.
As for the concept of separation of church and state, the third Mormon Prophet, John Taylor, wrote in 1867 that Mormons are to be led politically by their Priesthood. “We used to have a difference between church and state, but it is all one now,” Taylor wrote.
Hulse finished the book with two chapters on historical tragedies: one in the early days of the Church and one in the mid-1980s. Space prevents a detailed accounting of the Mountain Meadows Massacre 150 years ago (1857) and the Mark Hoffman Murders (1985). But Hulse brought those events in to show how the LDS church covered up heinous crimes and circumvented current laws to protect the church. Hulse expressed concern that a Mormon in public office would have a greater loyalty to the many oaths and covenants of his church than to the laws of the land and the people who elected him.
“The fully documented position of the book,” Hulse said, “is that a Mormon is bound by oath and covenants to the Mormon Church above all other obligations in this life. Any oath of office they may take is secondary to the oaths and covenants of Mormonism.
“In that context, the requirements of Mormonism place Mormons squarely in opposition to the American democratic ideal of independent representation,” Hulse said.
“The Mormon Church is the ultimate lobbyist and cannot be legislated away.”
Staff Writer
Rocky Hulse has been speaking and writing about the Church of Jesus Christ-Latter Day Saints - the church he was baptized and raised in - for quite a few years now.
That's often followed by charges of bigotry or hatefulness or, at best, stirring up unnecessary dissension between faith groups.
Undaunted, Hulse has written a book about the subject of the Mormon faith and how it relates to church members in public office. Once again, he puts in numerous disclaimers to his being bigoted.
The book is: When Salt Lake City Calls: Is there a conflict between Mormonism and the public trust? It's published by Christian publishing company Xulon Press.
Although Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney is not named specifically, the timing of the book's release is no coincidence, with the 2008 presidential election looming on the horizon.
The back cover, however, shows that Hulse is not just focusing on the office of the president. “From the White House ... to the local school board ... the principle remains the same! Can Americans trust Mormons in public office?”
The central premise of Hulse's book is that in order to be a Latter-Day Saint in good standing a person - in this case a candidate for public office - must cast his allegiance first and foremost to the church and its Prophets. (The Prophet is the current leader of the Church.)
From Chapter 7, Page 224, in what is a regular end-of-chapter summary feature, Hulse writes, “This book is about a principle: absolute allegiance/obedience to the Mormon Church through its governing agent, the Priesthood. As has been amply chronicled in previous chapters, the dogma to “Follow the Prophet” is the primary tenet of Mormonism. However, under the agent of the Priesthood the local level Priesthood leaders are to be followed as well or the Mormon could be ‘endangering their own salvation.' This brings the conflict between Mormonism and the political arena to the local level.”
Hulse took the first three chapters to give an overview and outline of the Church of Jesus Christ-Latter Day Saints. Despite his critics' claims, Hulse wrote that in writing about and evaluating the church he's simply taking doctrinal statements and proclamations from actual Mormon sources - both in the early days of the church founded by Joseph Smith and in more recent times.
He then took the next five chapters to discuss the LDS Church's views on its heirarchy and its teachings and spiritual doctrines and how they relate to the political world.
It is Hulse's contention - and his claims are heavily footnoted and documented - that LDS members are to place their primary source of guidance on church leaders, who are anointed by God.
Hulse addressed the question that has been brought up, comparing the fears about a Mormon president with the fear in 1963 that John F. Kennedy - the first Catholic to run for president - would take his marching orders from the Pope.
Hulse reprints Kennedy's speech to a Baptist group and said that is in stark contrast to the Mormon Church's beliefs about political activity.
As for the concept of separation of church and state, the third Mormon Prophet, John Taylor, wrote in 1867 that Mormons are to be led politically by their Priesthood. “We used to have a difference between church and state, but it is all one now,” Taylor wrote.
Hulse finished the book with two chapters on historical tragedies: one in the early days of the Church and one in the mid-1980s. Space prevents a detailed accounting of the Mountain Meadows Massacre 150 years ago (1857) and the Mark Hoffman Murders (1985). But Hulse brought those events in to show how the LDS church covered up heinous crimes and circumvented current laws to protect the church. Hulse expressed concern that a Mormon in public office would have a greater loyalty to the many oaths and covenants of his church than to the laws of the land and the people who elected him.
“The fully documented position of the book,” Hulse said, “is that a Mormon is bound by oath and covenants to the Mormon Church above all other obligations in this life. Any oath of office they may take is secondary to the oaths and covenants of Mormonism.
“In that context, the requirements of Mormonism place Mormons squarely in opposition to the American democratic ideal of independent representation,” Hulse said.
“The Mormon Church is the ultimate lobbyist and cannot be legislated away.”
Share this Article
Article Rating
Reader Comments
The following are comments from the readers. In no way do they represent the view of dailydem.com.
Alan wrote on Dec 9, 2007 8:06 AM:
" What nonsense! This book reminds me of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, a anti-semitic hoax. Scary.
I have been a Mormon for 35 years and the most my priesthood leaders have asked me to do is to serve others unselfishly. For example, once we helped a single mom insulate her home for winter. Often we help people move.
I hope to move to Ft Madison when I retire and hope to be a good neighbor and have good neighbors, whatever religion they say they believe. "
Ron Wright wrote on Dec 9, 2007 10:27 PM:
" Rocky Hulse is an expert on Mormonism and the inner workings of the LDS. This book is a part of his crusade to help Mormons everywhere find the light of real Christiandom and move away from the second largest cult in the world.
It is well worth reading and deep thought for every Mormon or Christian who is apathetic to the political world engulfing us. "
Frank Kirkman wrote on Dec 10, 2007 9:45 AM:
" Rocky Hulse knows more about the Mormon religion than 99% of the members of the 60 billion dollar corporation do. Alan’s remarks are typical of most members of his cult. Alan I am sure is a very good person, neighbor and helping individual but he needs to read the book as he would be shocked to find out how bizarre his cults beliefs are. Alan is no different than a Mormon President; they will both follow the cult leadership without question. "
Brad Teare wrote on Dec 10, 2007 10:48 AM:
" Wow! Who ever guessed that anti-Mormonism is so fervently embraced by modern day Nauvoo citizens.
Incidentally, I doubt Rocky Hulse is an expert on anything no matter how many foot notes he may have in his book. Tabloid journalism is still tabloid journalism. There was one incident of a heinous crime in all of Mormon history and that was in the context of a declared war against Utah Territory, certainly a low point in Protestant history. I wish writers like Hulse used the same standard when judging Mormonism as they do Protestantism. "
Wayne A. Capurro wrote on Dec 10, 2007 11:42 AM:
" Rocky is the best spokesman out there to deal with whether Mormonism should be an issue in this presidential election. If Mitt Romney were a Muslim, we wouldn't be so squeamish about asking deep and probing questions about the influence of his religion. They didn't refer to Joseph Smith, Jr. as the American Mohammed for nothing. No one, Mormon, Muslim, Baptist, Catholic, Jew, Hindu, Buddhist or Atheist should expect to keep their faith off limits when it comes to seeking the position of "most powerful person on the face of the earth". We should expect more from our journalists than an abdication of their responsibility to vet the motives, aspirations and foundations which likely form the basis for these candidate's decisionmaking. Mr. Hulse is a man who has seen both sides, is articulate and has much of importance to say. Buy his book and read it. "
Vicki wrote on Dec 10, 2007 12:09 PM:
" Sorry, I haven't read the book,yet. However, I am anxious to have a better understanding of Mormonism in the public arena, past and present.
I have Mormon friends, who will not read anything but 'faith promoting' materials that are authored by LDS members. They are even critical of LDS members, who do unbias research on LDS history and doctrine....and also, comments and teachings by past LDS Authorities !! I guess thats why they are 'so thankful for a living prophet, today;' to help clear up the confusion.
I love my Mormon friends and non-Mormon friends. And, am thankful for people like Rocky and Helen, who are in a position that exposes them to persecution in order to educate and minister to them with the love of Christ. God bless you. "
Brad Teare wrote on Dec 10, 2007 1:30 PM:
" So far most comments by protestants have been condescending along the lines of "Mormons are good people BUT... they are deceived, protestants know more about Mormonism than Mormons do", etc. I guess to some protestants there is no such things as a disgruntled person with an ax to grind. Every anti-Mormon is given the benefit of the doubt, yet Mormons are held to the highest ethical and historical standard.
Incidentally, the book Hulse wrote is from a "Christian" book-on-demand publisher which means that his ideas were not reviewed or edited by any publisher. Such publishing is much more akin to vanity publishing.
For the record Mormons are collectively the highest educated of all American religions and have a higher likelihood of devotion the more education they have. This runs counter to almost all other religions. The allegation that Mormons do not know about objections some protestants raise against the church is complete nonsense. The only difference between me and anti-Mormons is that I keep our history in balance with the excesses of protestantism. I wish more protestants could follow that example. "
Frank Kirkman wrote on Dec 10, 2007 7:56 PM:
" I am related to over twenty victims of one of the Mormons heinous crimes the Mountain Meadows Massacre and I have a question for Mr. Teare. Where in Mr. Hulse’s book do you find tabloid journalism? Mr. Teare, must have his head in the sand thinking there was only “one heinous crime” committed in Mormon history. What about Joseph Smith’s Danites (Secret Police) in Missouri and Nauvoo were they out doing mission work? What about the castration of the young member of the Manti Ward by its Bishop? There are plenty more my Mormon friend! I think Mr. Teare is very either very naïve or is blinded by his loyalty to his CULT. "
Rocky Hulse wrote on Dec 10, 2007 8:30 PM:
" May I respond to Alan's comment of 12/9/07 8:06 AM. The book isn't a hoax Alan. Staff writer Chris Faulkner points out in the article that the book is "doctrinal statements and proclamations from actual Mormon sources." So read the book and respond to the facts instead of berate what you haven't read. Have you ever held an elected political office? The quotes from Mormon leaders in the book clearly state the Mormon Church belief that meddling in civic affairs is proper "protocol" for Mormon Prophets. "
Rocky Hulse wrote on Dec 10, 2007 9:40 PM:
" May I respond to Brad Teare 12/10/07 10:48 AM & 12/10/07 1:30 pm. Accurately reporting what Mormon scripture and Mormon leaders say doesn't make one anti-Mormon; it makes me a reporter. You haven't read the book, yet you are able to label it as "tabloid journalism." Do you work for the Psychic Channel? Your recounting of Utah history contradicts history reported by anyone except the Mormon Church. It's obvious you single source your opinions. Your condescending remarks about Protestants knowing more about Mormonism than Mormons do is because you only get your information from what the Mormon Church wants you to know. Protestants multi-source, research and compare; perhaps you could learn a lesson. Could my use of Xulon Press be that they are the largest Christian Publisher in the country? Perhaps, I also published through them because I finished the book the second week of September and only Xulon could guarantee 6-8 weeks to publish instead of waiting months and months to get through publisher red tape and committees - naw, you're a psychic, it must be my vanity. Get the book and accurately refute it Brad, instead of just launching personal attacks without any knowledge of the book. "
Frank Kirkman wrote on Dec 10, 2007 9:43 PM:
" In response to Mr. Teare’s message posted on 12/10/2007 1:30pm: “Mormons are held to highest ethical and historical standard” is an absolute joke. The shooting and robbing of over 120 unarmed men, women and children by cowardly Mormons dressed as Indians is “ethical”? Then leaving their stripped naked bodies for the wolves and vultures because they wanted the US Army to believe that the Paiute Indians had done the robbing and killing of the richest wagon train to ever pass through the area. The Mormon Church is writing a book on the Mountain Meadows Massacre and they have been going back and forth on who to blame this time? The cover-up of the Mountain Meadows Massacre by the Prophets (Young though Hinckley) of the LDS corporation isn’t what I would call the highest historical standards. Lying for the lord is of course considered part of the “highest ethical and historical standard”. "
Peter wrote on Dec 11, 2007 6:46 AM:
" If Rocky Hulse is an expert in the faith of Mormons, then I am the man in the moon. The only thing he's done is take the same old tired anti-mormon rhetoric and repackaged it. I'd like to see some original research - but unfortunately Hulse, like the press, is too busy trying to sell sensationalism to make a few dollars while praying on the emotions of people. The bible says that in the last days we would "call evil good and good, evil." Sounds like we are there! "
Robert F. Bell wrote on Dec 11, 2007 8:03 AM:
" Oh this is just great, non-biased reporting. Chris Faulkner can put his little pom poms away now. He calls himself a reporter? No wonder the bigots are having a great time in Iowa with garbage like this being passed off as reporting. And to add to the garbage level the comments area includes comments from anti-Mormons like Wayne Capurro and Frank Kirkman who either have an ax to grind or way too much time on their hands. If this bigotry represents the heartland America is in trouble. "
Are you afraid wrote on Dec 11, 2007 8:27 AM:
" Are you afraid of Rocky, the facts he speaks of or the truth? I think Rocky's book contains factual information and he speaks the truth. You need not be afraid of the truth, it will set you free. "
Frank Kirkman wrote on Dec 11, 2007 12:17 PM:
" The reason our Mormon friends have resorted to name calling and are taking such a defensive posture is that the truth really hurts. They are afraid to go out and research their cult such as Mr. Hulsey did after he was confronted. The consequences of leaving the Mormon Cult is not easy and can be a very serious situation in some cases even life threatening. God bless our Mormon friends and Grace be with you. Chris Faulkner your little pom poms apparently are getting some readers attention! "
A Real Historian wrote on Dec 11, 2007 1:55 PM:
" Hulse knows about as much about Mormonism as the politician Mitt Romney—and that ain't much. If anyone really wants to know about the beginnings of Mormonism, try H. Michael Marquardt, The Rise of Mormonism: 1816-1844, also by Xulon Press. Marquardt is also a former Mormon, but he's a real historian, not a tabloid writer, who advocates understanding and Christian fellowship rather than ostracization and violence. "
Sharon wrote on Dec 11, 2007 2:36 PM:
" According to the article, Mr. Hulse reached his conclusions through researching the authoritative teachings of Mormon leaders. He has documented his sources so readers can check context, etc. But the critical comments left here don't even bother to address the issues raised in the book. No one has offered anything more than personal anecdotes or personal attacks against Mr. Hulse's abilities, motives and character. I, for one, would like to know how the Mormon Prophet would counsel President Mitt Romney if the prophet received a new revelation from God specifically directed at the president. What is the official teaching of the Church in this circumstance? To whom does Mr. Romney owe his allegiance if what is imparted via alleged revelation does not appear to be the best move for the nation -- or even the world? If Mr. Romney were to choose to place his presidential oath above his temple oath, would he lose his shot at Godhood? Mormons may talk about their own experiences all they want, but what I want to know is what Mormon leaders say and expect. It seems to me that Mr. Hulse's book provides that information. I can't wait to read it. "
Brad Teare wrote on Dec 11, 2007 3:27 PM:
" Forgive me for getting involved in this discussion. Good luck with your book and best wishes. "
Rocky Hulse wrote on Dec 11, 2007 10:16 PM:
" Responding to Peter 12/11/07 6:46 AM. Peter I hope you like cheese, and watch out for the cow jumping over your moon. You haven't read the book, so you are using the same old tired Mormon defense statements based on blind obedience instead of using facts and reasoned arguments. If you'd like some original research, read the book, because I do present new original research - unlike your dismissal based on the indoctrination regiment you have succumbed to being a Mormon. You provide no facts, no evidence, just the standard marginalization tactics that are the party line for Mormons. You denegrate the "Daily Democrat" here when they did their homework; they checked out the facts. What a hypocrite! I believe you are embarrassing yourself Peter! "
Rocky Hulse wrote on Dec 11, 2007 10:38 PM:
" I must respond to "A Real Historian." As a part of my position as the President of the Nauvoo Christian Visitors Center, I have written nearly 50 monthly newsletters, the scripts for over 200 weekly TV shows, and have produced 4 different seminars on Mormonism. With all of this "Historical" research, I've been challenged just twice, two TV shows. We came back and proved the challenges were in error; so, I guess if I'm such a poor historian, Mormons are worse yet! Since you haven't read the book, to label me as a "tabloid writer" simply shows you are purely agenda driven, not truth driven. However, your statements associating me with "ostraciszation and violence," are irresponsible and blatantly false. I have never advocated any such thing towards Mormons or anyone else; however, my wife and I have received death threats that have been tracked to Mormons. Mr. "Real Historian" your comments show your true colors. Shame on you. "
Bob Jones wrote on Dec 12, 2007 9:34 AM:
" It is hard to believe that anyone including this paper would consider this local yokel Rocky Hulse an expert on anything let alone such a complex subject as a major religion. Rocky's sole claim to fame is that his "religion" seems to take pride in defaming someone else's faith. How sad, contemptible and pathetic "
Rocky Hulse wrote on Dec 12, 2007 12:53 PM:
" Wow, Mr. Jones, what is really pathetic is that all you can resort to are personal attacks against me and this newspaper. Where are the facts. If you have ever read anything I've published, or watched any of our TV shows, you have had every opportunity to show that I am falsifying information. Since you bring nothing, but just resort to personal attacks shows you have nothing to offer. I work with facts - you on the other hand have demonstrated you work with insults; that Mr. Jones is what is really contemptible and pathetic! I would welcome any kind of objective, reasoned argument. If you can do that, let's talk. If you just what to roll around in the gutter, you defame yourself. "
Maria Schneider wrote on Dec 12, 2007 2:14 PM:
" I want to thank Rocky for writing this book and for all the work and research he does to inform others about the truth concerning Mormonism. Mormons are good at making accusations, but poor in backing them up. Anything that they don't agree with or reveals unflattering information about the church they call "Anti-Mormon". Well you know who prints the best "Anti-Mormon" material? The Mormons! By their own records, which is their down fall, counterdict themselves. Anyone can make a statement, then deny it later, but when you put the statement on paper and print it, you can no longer deny it. People from the Mormon church are so brainwashed they can't see the forest on account of the trees. When there is evidence provided as proof and you still don't believe, then you are either brainwashed or just plain dumb. Thank you Rocky and Helen for all you do. My God bless, provide and protect you! "
Wayne A. Capurro wrote on Dec 13, 2007 12:05 AM:
" That Mormons are obviously wading in on this discussion is good. But would you please desist with the personal attacks and the percieved persecution? Just because someone writes a book you can't find in the Desesrt Bookstore doesn't mean he's a 'Mormon Hater'. There are many good books written on the history of the LDS. Linn, Lee, Hickman, Stenhouse, Brodie, Backus, Brooks, Bagley, Wixom, Sessions, Hilton and Schindler have all contributed rich historical documentaries, most of their works meticulously footnoted. Nearly all of these writers are, or were Mormon. Few of their works can be found in the Mormon approved bookstores. They all tell a fascinating story about a fascinating people. That I don't happen to believe their story is divinely inspired, or that their Prophet was of God, doesn't mean I hate them... or even that I have some sort of ax to grind. It just makes me an unbeliever who happens to find them, and their story, terribly fascinating. Maybe someone could actually read Rocky's book and we can begin to have an intelligent discussion about an important topic. "
Peter Smith wrote on Dec 13, 2007 1:02 AM:
" Intelligent people will rise above all this anti-Mormon garbage. If not, then let me suggest a diversion. Did you know that the Southern Baptist Convention has dozens of anti-Mormon articles on their website? Did you also know that the LDS website has nothing negative about the SBC? Let's see - which would I rather have, a devisive Huck who lies when he says he doesn't know about Mormons (seems that if he were an ordained minister in the faith, he'd know about the anti-mormon material they publish) - or a man who is honest about what his faith means to him. Even if I don't vote for Mitt, I sure as hell won't vote for a man who is openly bigotted about religion. Hulse, maybe you should go study something else.
"
Eric Hoffman wrote on Dec 13, 2007 10:31 AM:
" Peter,
Quit with the strawman arguments. I have not seen you bring one slight iota of evidence proving otherwise. Perhaps this conversation is better suited in the Celestial Room. But that will not work either due to the fact that I do not possess the necessary bar coded temple card to enter.
In Him,
-Eric
Deal with your religion or get a new one! "
Rocky Hulse wrote on Dec 13, 2007 10:35 AM:
" Peter, Mormonism begins with the "First Vision," which is now Mormon Scripture. In the book of Joseph Smith 1:19, Joseph claims God the Father and Jesus appeared to him in a vision and Joseph asked them which church he should join. According to Joseph, Jesus answered: "19. I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt;..." So Peter, aren't you being just a tad dishonest in saying the Mormon website says nothing negative about the SBC. Maybe it doesn't, I haven't reviewed the whole website; nonetheless, Mormon scripture in one sentence condemns all of Christianity - All churches are wrong - All creeds are an abomination (Christian Creeds are simply Christian Doctrine) - and all professors of Christianity are corrupt. When Christians defend themselves from the all out attack levied against them by Mormon scripture, they are vilified. Mormons then falsely claim, our church never says anything bad about other churches - I just provided concrete evidence showing that Mormonism first attacked all of Christianity and now plays the innocent victim. "
Wayne A. Capurro wrote on Dec 13, 2007 11:41 PM:
" So Mitt believes that one Prophet of God in all this world resides in his Church. Or does he? Does the simple fact that this is of concern to me make me a religious bigot? Does Huck believe in any doctrine similar to this? Sincerely Peter, I'm asking? Can we have a discussion about these very simple questions. I'm leaning more toward Giuliani myself. "
Keith Shurtleff wrote on Dec 15, 2007 12:54 PM:
" I would like to thank Rocky Hulse and his supporters for demonstrating in our day, how it was that the religious leaders in Jesus' day, could hate, malign, and crucify the very God they professed to serve. The difference between Hulse and Caiaphas is only the century in which they live. Truly Rocky and his gang fit Our Savior's description of being Whited Sepulchers. Thankfully an analytical and factual response to claims such as theirs can be found in the book "Whited Tombs" "
Renee wrote on Dec 15, 2007 2:13 PM:
" Please read this book before you make out of hand comments. I've just read the first two chapters of Mr. Hulse's book. They're great. Mr. Hulse gives the facts and allows the reader to draw his own conclusions. I especially like the notes to the original sources which enable the reader to see the documents for herself in their entirety if she so chooses.
He does empasize the LDS doctrine but that is necessary to help the reader understand the differences between LDS teachings and traditional Biblical teachings.
I've been studying Mormonism for over 18 years and still I learned a few things I didn't know; probably because I've been focused on doctrinal issues not the politics of Mormonism. Thank you Mr. Hulse for giving me another reference to use in my ministry. "
Scott Fancher wrote on Dec 16, 2007 9:22 AM:
" I haven't yet had an opportunity to read the book, but hope to do so soon. I have to say that I am absolutely amazed at the lack of his distractors (Bob, Real Historian, Alan, Brad) to butress their criticisms with references to errors in his scholarship. Debate the premise please: does the priesthood require loyalty to the Church over everything else? Name calling is childish and counterproductive. I don't care what Alan's priesthood leaders asked him to do - he's not likely to be president of the United States. Refer me to authoritative Mormon sources which demonstrate that Rocky is wrong. "
Wayne A. Capurro wrote on Dec 16, 2007 10:28 PM:
" Keith. Your accusations about hating, maligning and crusifiction are way over the top. They render your comment ridiculous and your effort pointless.
I'm almost finished reading Rocky's book. When I'm done I'll have some comments of my own to post. They will be analytical and hopefully relevant. "
Wayne A. Capurro wrote on Dec 17, 2007 2:58 PM:
" I highly recommend "When Salt Lake City Calls" to anyone interested in LDS influence over Mormons running for public elected office. Hulse is so even handed the reader will quickly see that cries of 'persecution' or 'Mormon bigotry' are inappropriate. Prior to this read, I was only concerned about what influence the Church might have on a Mormon President. Now I'm not sure I'd support one for "dog catcher" unless I knew a great deal more about his/her thinking. Hulse's analysis of the 'Mark Hofmann Murders' was brilliant. His synopsis of the 'Mountain Meadows Massacre' was exceptional... a conservative, detailed chronology that not even apologetic LDS historians can , or will, attempt to refute. The early chapters challenge the reader to reconcile 'Mormon Doctrine', past and present, with American Public Interest. Though repetitive at times, once the reader gets used to the authors use of emphasis to make a point, this is more helpful than annoying. How the Mormon Priesthood, including Prophets at the top of this order, have played a governing role of undue influence in the Mountain Meadows and Hofmann crimes makes for a powerful finish. Five Stars. "
Keith wrote on Dec 19, 2007 2:21 PM:
" Like the humans in Charlottes Web, some people will believe anything simply because it is in writing. Claiming a book is well documented means only that it correctly cites numerous sources; it does not mean that the sources cited are true. To assign truth to anything man has written is to" trust in the arm of the flesh." Any honest historian will tell you that all history is both biased and revisionist. Furthermore, if the premises of Hulse's arguments are logically examined, it forces the conclusion that no person with convictions, no one with a loyalty to anyone or anything other than themselves, would be fit for office. Whether it is prayer, a Pope, the Bible, a prophet, or the Constitution, which governs a person's moral choices and informs their decisions; under Hulse's biased logic they would be disqualified from service. That only leaves unprincipled people, who will do or "write" anything, as potential candidates. Finally Wayne, I am sure the Pharisees of old felt the same way about those who supported Jesus. Don't trust in the "arm of the flesh", seek spiritual guidance. Read Whited Tombs! "
Rocky Hulse wrote on Dec 19, 2007 5:46 PM:
" Keith - Your post is what Mormons are really good at - I call it a "Drive-by Smear." You haven't read the book, you provide no specific evidence (because you haven't read the book), no quotes that are out of context or incorrectly quoted (two reasons here: 1) they're not out of context or incorrectly quoted, 2) You haven't read the book), yet you can analyze my thoughts and reasoning. Typical Mormon behavior - "Drive by and smear" with nothing to support your position. You really make the point of my book for me - Mormons are led by blind obedience and allegiance to the "Church" and the Mormon Priesthood. The momment anyone comments on Mormonism the programmed Mormon goes instantaneously into the "protect the Church at all costs mode." Evidence, facts, who cares; just lash out and protect the Church at all costs. You haven't read the book, so you must work for the Psychic Channel or perhaps Miss Cleo herself, in order to evaluate what you haven't read. I'll be honest and not comment on the book you're pushing because I haven't read it. Would you extend to me the same courtesy? "
Wayne A. Capurro wrote on Dec 19, 2007 8:45 PM:
" Keith. Thank you for your post.
"Claiming a book is well documented means only that it correctly cites numerous sources; it does not mean that the sources cited are true."
Rocky's scources are Mormon scources. Personally, I don't believe they are true... but they were correctly cited.
"To assign truth to anything man has written is to" trust in the arm of the flesh."
Many, if not most, of the citings in Rocky's book are from LDS Prophets. I guess that's the issue with me. I suspect these supposed Prophets were mere men... and I don't believe them.
I agree with your comment about history and historians. That is why it is important to read from many, not just one, compare what each has claimed and how they differ, and then use one's own independant judgement to determine what to believe.
The issue, for me, is not so much what test a candidate must pass to qualify. It's a question of "Do I believe they think independantly enough to make important decisions." In Mitt's case, would I have to place that confidence Gordon B. Hinkly? Read Rocky's Book. "
Suzanne wrote on Dec 26, 2007 5:23 PM:
" Amazing isn't it that this book had the fantastic timing to come out during a presidential debate time and caucus time. No, I have not read Mr. Hulse's book, and at this point I have no desire to read something that seems to be contrived on lies and half truths. This country was founded on religious freedom. It is also amazing that a religion that has been around for over 150 years is still considered a cult by some uninformed people. I will make my decisions based upon a politicians plan and not their own religious affiliations. "
Rocky Hulse wrote on Dec 27, 2007 9:32 AM:
" Suzanne - actually its not amazing at all. The book is meant to help educate the American electorate about the fact that there are conditions that exist in requirements for membership in the Mormon Church that are contrary to our American Democratic Ideals of having representation in the halls of government that are free and unencumbered. You don't publish a book about educating people concerning the problems in elections when there's no election going on - you must'nt have made that connection. You say there "seems" to be contrived lies and half truths. Well how would you now if you haven't read the book! You're like a jurist that doesn't want to sit in that "boring trial" and have to listen to all that "boring evidence"; let's just vote on it so I can go home and watch TV. Actually Suzanne, uninformed people are judging Mormonism without looking at the evidence - based on your statements, that would be you. Samuel Johnson made a statement that is unquestionably appropriate to this discussion and I include it in the front of the book: "Fraud and falsehood only dread examination. Truth invites it." Suzanne, I invite examination. I'm sorry you don't. "
Ted wrote on Dec 28, 2007 4:50 PM:
" I see little difference between Romney's allegiance to his church and the allegiance of the NeoCons like Bush and his cabal to the right-wing Christian churches and to the lobbyist money of Israel and Zionists. We fought in Iraq for Israel. We prepare to fight in Iran for Israel and fundamentalist Christians support Israel as well. What is the difference? Who controls our Congress if not for money from lobbyists and Israel? "
Rocky Hulse wrote on Dec 28, 2007 11:50 PM:
" Ted, there is a huge difference. Whatever you may believe with respect to Christian churches, lobbyists, Israel or Zionists, none of these can have a direct effect on President Bush's eternal state. That is what you have with a Mormon. Their belief is that their Prophets from Joseph Smith to the Judgment,and the Mormon Apostles that served with those Prophets will judge Mormons on Judgment day and tell Jesus what to do with them. Therefore, if a Mormon in public office were to defy the dictates of Mormon leadership, they will face them on Judgment Morning. That is a doctrinal vice that places a Mormon in an extremely difficult decisionary situation between the short term of earth life compared to the eternities - how do you think a Mormon will react? If they defy Mormon leadership they may pay for that defiance for trillions upon trillions of years in eternity. That condition doesn't exist for the rest of the world, only for Mormons. That is the reason for the book. It exposes this unique doctrinal position of Mormonism that directly contradicts our American Democratic Ideals! The American voter deserves to know about this condition!! "
Ted wrote on Dec 31, 2007 6:41 PM:
" Mr Hulse, I believe you missed my point. The American presidency has been bought and paid for by lobbies and big money for at least the past fifty years, if not since the beginning of our nation. Money always buys influence. Substitute voter blocs for money and you have the influence of right wing Christian groups that have essentially elected the past presidents from Reagan to Bush II.
It is well known that AIPAC, an Israeli lobby and influence peddler, has bought and paid for congressmen and presidents alike. Why do you think Bush and Cheney schedule speeches to AIPAC gatherings? Anyone who has examined politics in the US for the past fifty years (as I have) knows that our presidents are selected by money and influence and not by voters. Why else do we have only TWO parties of consequence? With all the good candidates in this country, we elect an actor and a fool in the past 30 years. You ever wonder why? "
It is well known that AIPAC, an Israeli lobby and influence peddler, has bought and paid for congressmen and presidents alike. Why do you think Bush and Cheney schedule speeches to AIPAC gatherings? Anyone who has examined politics in the US for the past fifty years (as I have) knows that our presidents are selected by money and influence and not by voters. Why else do we have only TWO parties of consequence? With all the good candidates in this country, we elect an actor and a fool in the past 30 years. You ever wonder why? "
Ted wrote on Dec 31, 2007 7:06 PM:
" I think Peter Smith said it about as well as anyone could. What we do NOT need is an evangelical Baptist preacher trying to make foreign policy with his zealot's attitude about Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism or any other non-Christian group. Mike Huckabee must not be president nor any other right-wing Christian zealot whose religion will cloud their good sense. "
Rocky Hulse wrote on Jan 2, 2008 10:21 PM:
" Ted, you are so right!! We shouldn't let anyone with a religious conviction cloud their good sense. In fact let's go back in our history and use our Constitutional freedoms to erase the names, and all work they did, of those who expressed their Christian beliefs as part of who they were and what they did. Yikes - we wouldn't have a Constitution if it wasn't for all those nasty right wing Christian zealots. Only about 98% of those involved in the writing of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution identified themselves as Christians. Oh my Ted, weren't they just despicable people? "
Ted wrote on Jan 3, 2008 10:52 AM:
" Rocky, wrong again. Most of the early Americans who sought separation from England were Deists. You could hardly call them right-wing Christians. Jefferson, Franklin and other leaders were followers of Locke and other English philosophers who were less Christian and more inclined to be free thinkers. Something no one could ever accuse you of. Please let us know where you got your information about how "98% of early Americans" were Christians. Who took that poll? "
Ted wrote on Jan 3, 2008 10:57 AM:
" Just for the historical record, Rocky, most Europeans didn't come to North America for religious freedom. They came because of free land and the constant European wars. Germans came here mostly because of the dire situation after and during the Thirty Years War that devastated central Europe in the 1600s. Perhaps some came here for their religious beliefs, but most of them came here for land and a better life. "
John wrote on Jan 3, 2008 4:15 PM:
" I won't read this book. From what I've read of his articles in the paper, I sense that he is right and no one else is. Why can't people let others believe in what they want. And in my opinion all religions are cults. "
Rocky Hulse wrote on Jan 4, 2008 9:06 AM:
" So John, when you were in school, you didn't need or read any textbooks because your sense told you what was right. Perhaps the research I do proves something. But, since you will never read it, then ignorance is bliss. Knowledge really is fearful to some people. I guess your "sense" is the arbiter of all truth. "
Rocky Hulse wrote on Jan 4, 2008 9:16 AM:
" Ted - You are the one who attacked anyone who identified themselves as having a Christian faith as a "right-wing Christian zealot whose religion will cloud their good sense." I guess the term "Deist" then eliminates the Founding Fathers in your mind as Christians. But, Ted, lest we forget what this article was written about. It was written about a book that clearly shows that Mormons are bound by oath and covenant of absolute obedience and allegiance to their "church" and it's living male hierarchy. So, Ted, there are lots of blogs and other forums that you can discuss all day long your aversion to anyone professing to be a Christian. This article wasn't about that. Perhaps you could read the article again to help refresh your memory, or better yet read the book, "When Salt Lake City Calls" upon which the article was written. "
Ted wrote on Jan 4, 2008 11:05 AM:
" Rocky, my comments were about YOUR bigotry, narrowmindedness and lack of understanding. And yes, you get one point... Deists do not consider themselves Christians, but could be Christians. They were openminded. Your book and your attitude is what is going to bring this nation down: narrowmindedness and lack of tolerance. We have had eight years of intolerance, lack of judgment and stupidity. Bush is your poster child. "
BigRiver wrote on Jan 4, 2008 6:26 PM:
" ignorance=fear=hate=violence.
As humans, we are afraid of those things we don't understand or know about. We don't like to fear things; that is a weakness, and so we begin to hate the things we fear. Hate can consume us to the point of violence. I find it rather sad that someone would devote so much of their time, to tearing down another's religion. Time would be better spent doing what we can to uplift our fellow man, and helping them. I believe that is more in line with the teachings of Christ.
ANY religion bashing is nothing more than a promotion of ignorance! Just ask any of the six million victims of Nazi Germany. We say nothing like that could happen here, but it starts, with little things like this book. Our time would be better spent getting to know our neighbors, not worrying about their religion. If all you can see is a person's religion, you have become blind, and I feel sorry for you. "
As humans, we are afraid of those things we don't understand or know about. We don't like to fear things; that is a weakness, and so we begin to hate the things we fear. Hate can consume us to the point of violence. I find it rather sad that someone would devote so much of their time, to tearing down another's religion. Time would be better spent doing what we can to uplift our fellow man, and helping them. I believe that is more in line with the teachings of Christ.
ANY religion bashing is nothing more than a promotion of ignorance! Just ask any of the six million victims of Nazi Germany. We say nothing like that could happen here, but it starts, with little things like this book. Our time would be better spent getting to know our neighbors, not worrying about their religion. If all you can see is a person's religion, you have become blind, and I feel sorry for you. "
Rocky Hulse wrote on Jan 4, 2008 7:05 PM:
" Good grief Ted, what in the world does George Bush have to do with a researched book about Mormonism? Once again, Ted, I researched this issue and accurately reported on it. You accuse me of being narrowminded; yet that is the very position you are operating from. You won't read the book because you're afraid your Mormon Church will find out, or take the position, "Don't confuse me with facts, my mind is already made up," and you have the audacity to accuse me of being narrowminded. You're a laugh a minute Ted.
How about doing something other than the "Drive-by Smear." Here's an idea Ted, try something novel, bring some evidence to this forum - oh, I forgot, you can't bring forth any evidence because your "Church" won't allow you to look at anything not approved by them. Well, Ted, my book certainly isn't "approved" by "The Brethren." So it's your choice Ted, you can read my book, and see some researched information or remain under "mind control." The choice is yours. So who's narrowminded? "
How about doing something other than the "Drive-by Smear." Here's an idea Ted, try something novel, bring some evidence to this forum - oh, I forgot, you can't bring forth any evidence because your "Church" won't allow you to look at anything not approved by them. Well, Ted, my book certainly isn't "approved" by "The Brethren." So it's your choice Ted, you can read my book, and see some researched information or remain under "mind control." The choice is yours. So who's narrowminded? "
Rocky Hulse wrote on Jan 8, 2008 10:44 PM:
" "Big River-hasn't read the book, but can equate its content to the holocaust!"
You haven't read the book so you are ignorant of its content. So I say to you Big River "Ignorance=fear=hate=violence"
That's exactly what you have done to this book: you are "ignorant" of its content, so you "fear" it; your "fear" translates to the "hate" of comparing my writing of this book to the beginnings of the holocaust: you "Big River" do "violence" to honest research and "Freedom of Speech" and "Freedom of the Press."
Read the book "Big River" and provide evidence, facts, or a logical argument based on the content of the book. Not having read the book, yet making the comments you have is intellectually dishonest. "
You haven't read the book so you are ignorant of its content. So I say to you Big River "Ignorance=fear=hate=violence"
That's exactly what you have done to this book: you are "ignorant" of its content, so you "fear" it; your "fear" translates to the "hate" of comparing my writing of this book to the beginnings of the holocaust: you "Big River" do "violence" to honest research and "Freedom of Speech" and "Freedom of the Press."
Read the book "Big River" and provide evidence, facts, or a logical argument based on the content of the book. Not having read the book, yet making the comments you have is intellectually dishonest. "
keith shurtleff wrote on Jan 13, 2008 6:35 PM:
" Just thought I would weigh in on Rocky's basic premise one last time.
Jesus Christ said; The Son can do NOTHING of himself, but what he Seeth the Father do, John 5:19, I do nothing of myself but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things, John 8: 28, My meat is to do the will of him that sent me, John 4:34.
Isn't it interesting that He who will reign as King of Kings and Lord of Lords, He upon whose shoulders the government will one day rest, WOULD NOT, under Rocky's basic premise, be eligible to run for president.
Any premise that would restrict the greatest being who ever lived from holding public office, simply because of his strict submission to the high moral and ethical principles of his Father, GOD, which incidentally appeared to His enemies to be dogmatic, is a premise that must be rejected.
The true issue here is not a candidate's submission to a higher power, however that is expressed. The issue is Rocky's biased belief that Mormon's submit to the wrong highest power.
"
Jesus Christ said; The Son can do NOTHING of himself, but what he Seeth the Father do, John 5:19, I do nothing of myself but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things, John 8: 28, My meat is to do the will of him that sent me, John 4:34.
Isn't it interesting that He who will reign as King of Kings and Lord of Lords, He upon whose shoulders the government will one day rest, WOULD NOT, under Rocky's basic premise, be eligible to run for president.
Any premise that would restrict the greatest being who ever lived from holding public office, simply because of his strict submission to the high moral and ethical principles of his Father, GOD, which incidentally appeared to His enemies to be dogmatic, is a premise that must be rejected.
The true issue here is not a candidate's submission to a higher power, however that is expressed. The issue is Rocky's biased belief that Mormon's submit to the wrong highest power.
"
Rocky Hulse wrote on Jan 14, 2008 9:59 AM:
" Thank you Keith for making the very premise of my book. The book documents that the Mormons don't submit to the God of the Bible, they submit to a living male hierarchy. The Mormons very belief is that their living male Priesthood leaders are in fact God's living oracles on earth and therefore absolute submission to a bunch of old men in Salt Lake City is submission to the God of the Mormon Church Himself.
Once again you comment on a book you haven't read. I don't comment on Mormonism from an ignorant position as you have done on this book. When I comment on Mormonism it is with their very statements in my hand. I do the research before I comment. You however, are just a "Drive-by Mormon." You have just driven by and smeared me without even knowing who or what you are smearing. But then, that makes the point of the book as well - you can't help yourself. You are bound by absolute oaths and covenants to defend Mormonism at all costs - you are just doing what you have been indoctrinated to do. The book explains this, with documentation, as well. "
Once again you comment on a book you haven't read. I don't comment on Mormonism from an ignorant position as you have done on this book. When I comment on Mormonism it is with their very statements in my hand. I do the research before I comment. You however, are just a "Drive-by Mormon." You have just driven by and smeared me without even knowing who or what you are smearing. But then, that makes the point of the book as well - you can't help yourself. You are bound by absolute oaths and covenants to defend Mormonism at all costs - you are just doing what you have been indoctrinated to do. The book explains this, with documentation, as well. "
Keith wrote on Jan 14, 2008 4:23 PM:
" Jesus said: You shall know them by their fruits! There is ample evidence of your true nature, and fallacies, in your responses to all who have written. Reading your book is not necessary. Your hypocrisy in calling me "Drive By Mormon", in essence smearing me while complaining of being smeared, reveals hypocrisy. Anyone reading over your comments below will see that you frequently commit toward writers the same acts you chastise them for. Your claims made below are false. No amount of documentation will change that absolute truth. Reading your book will not make them true. For the neutral reader the choice is easy. Trust your hateful claims, backed by the "arm of the flesh" you call documentation, or ask God. Those who trust God, can through prayer, know spiritually that your claims are false. I feel real hatred in your responses, and in each I see the reflection of the Pharisees. It is sad how fanatical and indoctrinated you are. Please see that history is revisionist and biased, but Peter taught us a better way, that is, revelation from God is what leads to truth. "
pat wrote on Jan 15, 2008 6:43 PM:
" i read the book .it is very well writing.i thought anybody doesnt read the book and makes snap judgements about the book and rocky hulse and about his information he presents all doctimation .he very nice person.he puts all the facts out there.for everyone to prove that his lying about what wrote.i just cant belive people would that are that stupid makeing snap jugements or threating people for telling the truth . "
Rocky Hulse wrote on Jan 16, 2008 8:52 AM:
" Thank you Pat.
Keith, once again you make the point of the book. When dealing with a Mormon, the indoctrination is so strong that evidence doesn't matter, who cares about facts, and logical and reasoned arguments are foolish - at least in a Mormon's mind. Mormons are indoctrinated from the time that they can speak, that Mormonism is "The only true Church on the face of the earth"; and that "Joseph Smith was a modern day Prophet of God, as is the current Prophet, Gordon B. Hinckley, and Joseph restored the only true Church to the earth." The major indoctrination that Mormons just can't see past is that anything that is written about their Church, but not by the Church, is ANTI-MORMON material and is false and is not to read. A more perfect means of mind control simply can not be found! This indoctrination process is so strong and ingrained in Mormons, that trying to talk to a Mormon about their religion, with facts and evidence is like trying to talk to the exhaust side of a jet engine. Keith is a perfect example - "Don't confuse me with facts, I've been indoctrinated!!" "
Keith, once again you make the point of the book. When dealing with a Mormon, the indoctrination is so strong that evidence doesn't matter, who cares about facts, and logical and reasoned arguments are foolish - at least in a Mormon's mind. Mormons are indoctrinated from the time that they can speak, that Mormonism is "The only true Church on the face of the earth"; and that "Joseph Smith was a modern day Prophet of God, as is the current Prophet, Gordon B. Hinckley, and Joseph restored the only true Church to the earth." The major indoctrination that Mormons just can't see past is that anything that is written about their Church, but not by the Church, is ANTI-MORMON material and is false and is not to read. A more perfect means of mind control simply can not be found! This indoctrination process is so strong and ingrained in Mormons, that trying to talk to a Mormon about their religion, with facts and evidence is like trying to talk to the exhaust side of a jet engine. Keith is a perfect example - "Don't confuse me with facts, I've been indoctrinated!!" "
Keith wrote on Jan 16, 2008 2:20 PM:
" Conversely, it proves my point, getting through to indoctrinated, self-deceived, anti-Mormon, fanatics is difficult.
"Do not confuse me with SPIRITUAL evidence, heaven revealed truth, prayer or the Holy Word of God. I've got a man produced book!!!"
Contrary to your indoctrinated claims, I have read much Anti-Mormon literature and engaged in many religious discussions with dogmatists and sincere seekers alike. I have documented their fallacies, and over time that practice has taught me how much like the Pharisees', their tactics are. Interestingly, like those who persecuted the early Saints, some even believe they "do God a service!"
They did claim Jesus had a devil
They now claim Mormons are brain washed
Similarly, in the end their Pharisaical dogma and hate clouds their spiritual reasoning to the end that they will stick to man-made claims over God sent revelation every time. Hatred and prejudice are really the perfect form of mind control. How very sad.
It is also sad that Pat forgot to seek wisdom from God to verify the claims he now accepts as truth. I feel no hate, no anger, just indoctrinated compassion. "
"Do not confuse me with SPIRITUAL evidence, heaven revealed truth, prayer or the Holy Word of God. I've got a man produced book!!!"
Contrary to your indoctrinated claims, I have read much Anti-Mormon literature and engaged in many religious discussions with dogmatists and sincere seekers alike. I have documented their fallacies, and over time that practice has taught me how much like the Pharisees', their tactics are. Interestingly, like those who persecuted the early Saints, some even believe they "do God a service!"
They did claim Jesus had a devil
They now claim Mormons are brain washed
Similarly, in the end their Pharisaical dogma and hate clouds their spiritual reasoning to the end that they will stick to man-made claims over God sent revelation every time. Hatred and prejudice are really the perfect form of mind control. How very sad.
It is also sad that Pat forgot to seek wisdom from God to verify the claims he now accepts as truth. I feel no hate, no anger, just indoctrinated compassion. "
pat wrote on Jan 16, 2008 9:27 PM:
" keith did you read the book .and what do you got against people speak out about false teachings.i hold nothing againsted mormon people .but this book inlighted me about their religionso what do you got against freedom speech. "
keith wrote on Jan 17, 2008 11:29 AM:
" Pat.
I have nothing against freedom of speech or speaking out against false teachings, that is what I am doing! I also have nothing against the free exercise of religion. What have you got against Free Exercise? It is the Mormon faith, not Rocky's religion, if he has one, that is being challenged. My only question for you is why you claim Mormon teachings are false based on a book written by a man. Man is fallible, and subject to prejudice, bias and hatred. Historians can and do write anything they want. Current trends in history are to malign great leaders and cite other writings to document their claims, without acknowledging that those base writings are also biased. It seems to me that it would be wiser to ask of the perfect God, through prayer, before deciding if a faith group's teachings are false, or their religion is in error. Failure to do so is to be indoctrinated by man.
Revelation over Research is all I am saying, and many anti-Mormons would agree with that premise, at least in the area of evolution! "
I have nothing against freedom of speech or speaking out against false teachings, that is what I am doing! I also have nothing against the free exercise of religion. What have you got against Free Exercise? It is the Mormon faith, not Rocky's religion, if he has one, that is being challenged. My only question for you is why you claim Mormon teachings are false based on a book written by a man. Man is fallible, and subject to prejudice, bias and hatred. Historians can and do write anything they want. Current trends in history are to malign great leaders and cite other writings to document their claims, without acknowledging that those base writings are also biased. It seems to me that it would be wiser to ask of the perfect God, through prayer, before deciding if a faith group's teachings are false, or their religion is in error. Failure to do so is to be indoctrinated by man.
Revelation over Research is all I am saying, and many anti-Mormons would agree with that premise, at least in the area of evolution! "
Erin wrote on Jan 17, 2008 3:39 PM:
" I find it interesting, that in 50-postings, no one has brought evidence to the table to challenge the information in Mr. Hulse’s book. Could that be because the book provides accurate language from leaders of the Mormon faith? What this dialog has gotten away from is the question that Mr. Hulse is giving us information to answer: Will a politician service his Mormon faith over those who voted him/her into office? Mr. Hulse-Would you be able to give me a clear understanding of what you think the difference is between Romney and Huckabee; and how their religions would affect their potential presidency? "
Rocky Hulse wrote on Jan 18, 2008 4:32 PM:
" Erin: the difference.
Mr. Huckabee makes no excuses for his beliefs and moral foundation being centered in Jesus Christ and Biblical principles. For a Christian, there is no one on earth who can say "I speak for God." Christians can and should receive counsel from many sources, the Book of Proverbs tells us to do that, so I agree with receiving wise counsel.
Mormonism says that their living male Priesthood leaders, culminating in their "Prophet" have the "right, authority and power to speak the mind and will of God." The evidence of the book "When Salt Lake City Calls" clearly shows that under the doctrines of Mormonism, if the Mormon Prophet, or other Priesthood leadership tell Mr. Romney to do something, he is bound by absolute oath and covenant to do it.
If the President of the Southern Baptist Convention, Mr. Land, was to tell Mr. Huckabee to do something, Mr. Huckabee is under no such obligation like the the Mormon is. Mr. Huckabee could tell Mr. Land: Thanks, but no thanks.
Mr. Romney on the other hand, could lose his very standing in eternity if he should refuse Mormon authority. That's the difference. "
Mr. Huckabee makes no excuses for his beliefs and moral foundation being centered in Jesus Christ and Biblical principles. For a Christian, there is no one on earth who can say "I speak for God." Christians can and should receive counsel from many sources, the Book of Proverbs tells us to do that, so I agree with receiving wise counsel.
Mormonism says that their living male Priesthood leaders, culminating in their "Prophet" have the "right, authority and power to speak the mind and will of God." The evidence of the book "When Salt Lake City Calls" clearly shows that under the doctrines of Mormonism, if the Mormon Prophet, or other Priesthood leadership tell Mr. Romney to do something, he is bound by absolute oath and covenant to do it.
If the President of the Southern Baptist Convention, Mr. Land, was to tell Mr. Huckabee to do something, Mr. Huckabee is under no such obligation like the the Mormon is. Mr. Huckabee could tell Mr. Land: Thanks, but no thanks.
Mr. Romney on the other hand, could lose his very standing in eternity if he should refuse Mormon authority. That's the difference. "
Rocky Hulse wrote on Jan 18, 2008 4:46 PM:
" Keith, please show me where the Bible says: Just pray about it. In fact 1 John 4:1 says to try the spirits to see if they are from God. How do you do that? By comparing all things to Gods Word, the Bible. What did Jesus use to confront Satan in the wilderness? Each attack by Satan was dealt with by Jesus quoting the Word: "It is written."
What was Paul's modus operandi? He went first to the synagogue and read from the Word. Paul didn't just tell the Jews or Gentiles "Pray about it." Paul "reasoned" with them through the scriptures. In Acts 17:11, the Bereans are applauded for not believing Paul and checking him out via the scriptures.
If validation is through prayer, the Muslims got you beat 5 times a day by over a billion believers. Why are their prayers, their "spiritual" convictions not true, while yours are?
The standard used throughout time has been the Bible, not a spiritual experience. II Cor 11:14 tells us that even Satan can appear as an angel of light. Spiritual experiences can be deceptive. I Thes 5:21 says "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." "
What was Paul's modus operandi? He went first to the synagogue and read from the Word. Paul didn't just tell the Jews or Gentiles "Pray about it." Paul "reasoned" with them through the scriptures. In Acts 17:11, the Bereans are applauded for not believing Paul and checking him out via the scriptures.
If validation is through prayer, the Muslims got you beat 5 times a day by over a billion believers. Why are their prayers, their "spiritual" convictions not true, while yours are?
The standard used throughout time has been the Bible, not a spiritual experience. II Cor 11:14 tells us that even Satan can appear as an angel of light. Spiritual experiences can be deceptive. I Thes 5:21 says "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." "
pat wrote on Jan 18, 2008 8:32 PM:
" keith if the book that rocky wrote is false .then prove it that what he wrote is false. i belive in freedom of speech and freedom purse your relgion in what you belive in .but how can you call morman religoin a religion .when the prohpets or leaders have there followers not think for them self. total devotion.and take oaths every week .and not to qustion the leaders decsion . and to also belive that all other religions are false .also keith why you prove that what information in rockys book is not true .prove him wrong .and show everyone the tuth about morman religion .instead prove it. "
Keith wrote on Jan 20, 2008 5:37 PM:
" Erin:
My focus has been the news article and comments. My premise: Revelation is the most reliable source of truth. Please prayerfully consider these evidences:
Read: Doctrine and Covenants 98: 5-10, 101: 77-80, & 109:54, Book of Mormon 2 Nephi 2:26-27 & Mosiah 29:1-40, Pearl of Great Price, Moses 4:3 To truly understand a faith group, review THEIR scriptures. These uniquely LDS scriptures are esteemed by Mormons as the word of God. These verses teach what true Mormons really believe about Politics and Government. Note that agency (free will) is defining! Joseph Smith explained; "I teach them correct principles and THEY GOVERN THEMSELVES! The Handbook of Instructions, which governs administration within the church states: "while affirming the right of expression in political and social issues the CHURCH IS NEUTRAL regarding political parties, platforms, and candidates…Nor DOES IT ADVISE MEMBERS HOW TO VOTE!
There is so much more. Search political topics on the church's website it will reveal what I cannot fit here. If you reject those evidences, the Co-existence of Senators Harry Reid (Liberal Democrat) and Orrin Hatch (Conservative Republican) (both Mormons) proves the claim reported in the article is false! "
My focus has been the news article and comments. My premise: Revelation is the most reliable source of truth. Please prayerfully consider these evidences:
Read: Doctrine and Covenants 98: 5-10, 101: 77-80, & 109:54, Book of Mormon 2 Nephi 2:26-27 & Mosiah 29:1-40, Pearl of Great Price, Moses 4:3 To truly understand a faith group, review THEIR scriptures. These uniquely LDS scriptures are esteemed by Mormons as the word of God. These verses teach what true Mormons really believe about Politics and Government. Note that agency (free will) is defining! Joseph Smith explained; "I teach them correct principles and THEY GOVERN THEMSELVES! The Handbook of Instructions, which governs administration within the church states: "while affirming the right of expression in political and social issues the CHURCH IS NEUTRAL regarding political parties, platforms, and candidates…Nor DOES IT ADVISE MEMBERS HOW TO VOTE!
There is so much more. Search political topics on the church's website it will reveal what I cannot fit here. If you reject those evidences, the Co-existence of Senators Harry Reid (Liberal Democrat) and Orrin Hatch (Conservative Republican) (both Mormons) proves the claim reported in the article is false! "
keith wrote on Jan 20, 2008 7:42 PM:
" Rocky: Your point about prayer also applies to Christians. Many denominations interpret the Bible differently. What makes yours right? Millions of Muslims believe the Qur'an is God's word, not you. What makes you right? How do you know the Bible is God's word, if not by the Spirit? Tradition? Science? Knowledge of Torah was NOT the source of Peter's witness, but revelation from God: Matt16:13-18. Interestingly, the scriptorians of Peter's day REJECTED Jesus! Thus Peter later taught that scripture is not for private interpretation. 2Peter1. Paul, as Saul, knew the scriptures but still assented to Stephen's death. The written word didn't convert him, Jesus did, through the Spirit, and Paul later taught, THE TRUE WITNESS comes from the Holy Ghost! ICor 12:3. Satan, the angel of light, deceives the physical senses, not the spiritual. Interpreting scripture w/o the spirit is subject to the same deception, since it relies on the physical! IJohn 4 really teaches that we should judge by the spirit's message through revelation like that at Pentecost, the sweet power of the Spirit that Satan cannot fake! But thankfully God promises wisdom to all who seek. James1:5 "
Keith wrote on Jan 20, 2008 9:16 PM:
" Pat:
You are obviously not understanding my point. I will simplifiy. God, Our Heavenly Father, has revealed to both my heart and my mind, by the power of his Holy Spirit, that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons) is the true and restored gospel of Jesus Christ upon the earth.
That is my proof!
I further witness to you that the beleifs you express about the church are in error!
You are free to reject my testimony. You can ignore my witness. My only point is that before you do, you ought to at least ASK GOD ABOUT IT! Please rely on God and not man!
Blessings! "
You are obviously not understanding my point. I will simplifiy. God, Our Heavenly Father, has revealed to both my heart and my mind, by the power of his Holy Spirit, that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormons) is the true and restored gospel of Jesus Christ upon the earth.
That is my proof!
I further witness to you that the beleifs you express about the church are in error!
You are free to reject my testimony. You can ignore my witness. My only point is that before you do, you ought to at least ASK GOD ABOUT IT! Please rely on God and not man!
Blessings! "
Ed Mauss wrote on Jan 20, 2008 9:29 PM:
" Just one question: What exactly did Mitt Romney do (or didn't do) as Mass. governor that would make anyone believe he would take orders from an LDS prophet? Not sure I see a reason to be afraid. "
William Tell wrote on Jan 21, 2008 1:23 PM:
" This thread is now getting attention in California. Go to the ocregister (Orange County Register) website, find “Publish Your Stuff” on the opening page, click “Blogs,” and then scroll to “Mormons and Fruits: Judging Romney’s Church.” "
pat wrote on Jan 21, 2008 3:59 PM:
" keith im not questioning your faith but my point is why not prove that rocky book is false .why dont you prove that is wrong .i challange you to prove that is full of false teachings .i belive there is a god.and i also belive that god made us to use or minds .not to be mindless followers .why dont you question your leaders about why they lead you . "
Keith wrote on Jan 22, 2008 8:59 AM:
" Pat:
If you will not accept revelation from God as proof, then no amount of man made/provided evidence will convince you.
Please prayerfully review the informaiton I provided to Erin below! It will provide you with an ample understanding of the truth on this topic! "
If you will not accept revelation from God as proof, then no amount of man made/provided evidence will convince you.
Please prayerfully review the informaiton I provided to Erin below! It will provide you with an ample understanding of the truth on this topic! "
Helen wrote on Jan 22, 2008 9:22 AM:
" One common theme runs through the comments: Those who have read the book are positive, and those who have not are negative. A quick read of the comments will show that those who have not read the book only attack the person who wrote it. There is no inflammatory language or sensationalism to be found in the book; only logical and systematic details of Mormon doctrines that clearly show there is a conflict between Mormonism and the public trust. The book "When Salt Lake City Calls" by Rocky Hulse, will seriously challenge your knowledge of Mormon doctrinal beliefs and how they affect those Mormons serving in public office. "
pat wrote on Jan 22, 2008 7:02 PM:
" keith will you answer a few things i would like ask you .1 did you read the book.2nd why dont you prove what rocky wrote in his book is false.and my belive is cathlic . my religion only has one book.the bible .and how many does morman relgion have. "
Keith wrote on Jan 22, 2008 10:38 PM:
" Helen, I see two other themes.
First, those who support the article above and the book it reports on, each reveal in their comments a pre-existing bias against Mormons.
Second, almost without fail the same persons ignore counter points, and dismiss others' views simply because the presenter "has not read the book," even though this blog and its comments were supposed to focus on the news article and not the book!
There is sufficient fallacy in both the claims reported in the article and the dogma in the comments below to cast doubt upon all other assertions. Do you honestly believe that the author was a religiously neutral party writing about Mormons and politics out of sincere curiosity and with no preconceived notions? Both the article and subsequent comments seem to reveal that the book was purposely written against an already despised faith, and with a specific agenda and timing. Finally there is plenty of inflammatory language and sensationalism in the comments below to indicate the true purposes of its supporters. Luke 6:45
"
First, those who support the article above and the book it reports on, each reveal in their comments a pre-existing bias against Mormons.
Second, almost without fail the same persons ignore counter points, and dismiss others' views simply because the presenter "has not read the book," even though this blog and its comments were supposed to focus on the news article and not the book!
There is sufficient fallacy in both the claims reported in the article and the dogma in the comments below to cast doubt upon all other assertions. Do you honestly believe that the author was a religiously neutral party writing about Mormons and politics out of sincere curiosity and with no preconceived notions? Both the article and subsequent comments seem to reveal that the book was purposely written against an already despised faith, and with a specific agenda and timing. Finally there is plenty of inflammatory language and sensationalism in the comments below to indicate the true purposes of its supporters. Luke 6:45
"
Greg: Agree with Keith... wrote on Jan 23, 2008 1:21 PM:
" I agree with Keith that if the Mormon Church "dictates" how political figures who happen to be Mormon should act, then it is giving mixed signals. Keith wrote "...the Co-existence of Senators Harry Reid (Liberal Democrat) and Orrin Hatch (Conservative Republican) (both Mormons) proves the claim reported in the article is false!"
The leading Democrat in the house (Reid)is so far "left" of Republican Utah Sen Orin Hatch who is far to the "right," that it is difficult to believe either could be in the same room, let alone espouse the same religion.
But there you have it. The church apparently can't be feeding both of them their political thought. Both are LDS members held in high regard. There has never been a "censure" of political figures for their ideas or politics. This book will not add anything of value to the discussion.
Rocky: Your obsession with Mormon's is not healthy. You don't like them. We get it. Please try to focus on something productive.
I will sincerely pray for you. It is my hope that you will find happiness in this life and somehow be able to let go of the anger. "
The leading Democrat in the house (Reid)is so far "left" of Republican Utah Sen Orin Hatch who is far to the "right," that it is difficult to believe either could be in the same room, let alone espouse the same religion.
But there you have it. The church apparently can't be feeding both of them their political thought. Both are LDS members held in high regard. There has never been a "censure" of political figures for their ideas or politics. This book will not add anything of value to the discussion.
Rocky: Your obsession with Mormon's is not healthy. You don't like them. We get it. Please try to focus on something productive.
I will sincerely pray for you. It is my hope that you will find happiness in this life and somehow be able to let go of the anger. "
Keith wrote on Jan 23, 2008 1:24 PM:
" PAT: My Answers. 1.No, my comments are to the claims in the article above and comments below. Reading the book is not required. Besides if you wrote a book about personal experiences in time travel, and documented it well, with testimonials of those who believe they do it regularly, it would still be WRONG at face value, and a waste of time to read. But, you should expect criticism from scientists and deep thinkers alike, based on the claim itself, w/o their having to read the content. No need to read pornography to know it's wrong for my family. I needn't smoke pot to know it is evil, nor practice extortion to know it displeases God.
I am glad you are a Catholic, since that means you do pray. WILL YOU read and pray about the resources I mentioned to Erin below?
By the way, your Bible is really a compilation of many books, in fact some books in your Bible are REJECTED by Protestants. All Bibles mention missing scriptures. So it should not seem unusual for Mormons to accept additional revelations as God's word!
God Bless "
I am glad you are a Catholic, since that means you do pray. WILL YOU read and pray about the resources I mentioned to Erin below?
By the way, your Bible is really a compilation of many books, in fact some books in your Bible are REJECTED by Protestants. All Bibles mention missing scriptures. So it should not seem unusual for Mormons to accept additional revelations as God's word!
God Bless "
Rocky Hulse wrote on Jan 24, 2008 7:30 AM:
" Wow Keith, your analysis of Helen's comments essentially says anyone who reads the article but doesn't attack the article and the book it is written about has a pre-existing bias against Mormonism. The Mormon programming of the "Persecution Factor" and the "Victimization Factor" is coming through loud and clear. Anyone who makes any comment or observation about Mormonism that doesn't follow the "Officially Sanctioned" statements from Salt Lake City is "Anti-Mormon." Psychology 101: Negatively label someone, then you can marginalize them.
You denagrade Helen's comments about talking only about the book and not addressing the article. Well, Keith you have posted 11 times on this thread without one actual point of refutation. You have provided no evidence that Mr. Faulkner's article or my book have misquoted, taken out of context, falsified, altered or deleted informamtion. All you have done is attack both authors personally. You don't have a leg to stand on Keith. You attack Helen from a totally unsubstantiated position.
Keith, where is your evidence? Where is your proof to support your claims. Leave the Mormon position of "Personal Revelation" at home. Neither Jesus, nor His Apostles, roamed the countryside and told people "just pray about it." "
You denagrade Helen's comments about talking only about the book and not addressing the article. Well, Keith you have posted 11 times on this thread without one actual point of refutation. You have provided no evidence that Mr. Faulkner's article or my book have misquoted, taken out of context, falsified, altered or deleted informamtion. All you have done is attack both authors personally. You don't have a leg to stand on Keith. You attack Helen from a totally unsubstantiated position.
Keith, where is your evidence? Where is your proof to support your claims. Leave the Mormon position of "Personal Revelation" at home. Neither Jesus, nor His Apostles, roamed the countryside and told people "just pray about it." "
Keith wrote on Jan 24, 2008 12:33 PM:
" Rocky. You've reverted to your old tactics. Doing what you claim others do to you. Could it be your own Anti-Mormon "victimization" and "persecution" factors that make you feel attacked? I merely claim that your aggressive, angry comments and my sincere review of the article, demonstrate that you have a deep bias. Deny it if it is not so. Deny that you had a prejudice against Mormons before writing the book! You call me brain washed, and indicate I am fraught with victimization and persecution complexes, what are those but negative labels? You ignored my biblical points, and my evidences provided to Erin, isn't that marginalization? The Bible scriptures I provided support that Jesus and his disciples DID tell people to pray. Add Matthew 7:7-11 to the mix and it's clear that prayer leads to absolute truth. What greater witness is there than from God? I am sorry if you feel personally attacked. If contradicting false claims and pointing out error feels to you like a personal attack, maybe you should revisit Psychology 101. Still waiting your response to my 20 JAN, 7:42 answer. "
anonymous wrote on Jan 24, 2008 3:18 PM:
" Rocky,
It wouldn't do any good to present you with any "evidence" that you are wrong because:
1) You wouldn't believe it anyway and it would be a waste of time.
2) You already have access to all the evidence you could ever want, through numerous resources on the web and elsewhere but it's useless to you because you choose not to believe anything that's not negative with regards to the LDS faith. Also, why should you have to depend on us bloggers for the evidence when it is so readily available.
3) You have the testimony of millions of LDS members, and even many non-LDS people, that you are wrong but you will never accept that as evidence, even though most of them are much better acquainted with the overall workings of the church leadership hierarchy and functioning than you are.
As for reading your book:
1) I have much better uses for my limited and valuable time
2) I don't want to support your misguided efforts.
But again, it's really a waste of time to argue with you on anything because you won't agree on anything we say.
"
It wouldn't do any good to present you with any "evidence" that you are wrong because:
1) You wouldn't believe it anyway and it would be a waste of time.
2) You already have access to all the evidence you could ever want, through numerous resources on the web and elsewhere but it's useless to you because you choose not to believe anything that's not negative with regards to the LDS faith. Also, why should you have to depend on us bloggers for the evidence when it is so readily available.
3) You have the testimony of millions of LDS members, and even many non-LDS people, that you are wrong but you will never accept that as evidence, even though most of them are much better acquainted with the overall workings of the church leadership hierarchy and functioning than you are.
As for reading your book:
1) I have much better uses for my limited and valuable time
2) I don't want to support your misguided efforts.
But again, it's really a waste of time to argue with you on anything because you won't agree on anything we say.
"
Rocky Hulse wrote on Jan 24, 2008 8:43 PM:
" Keith, I have no problem with prayer and the conviction of the Holy Spirit; however, Mormonism revolves around ignoring everything, but "personal revelation." Jesus didn't say, "just pray about it." The Bible is a complete whole. A single verse of scripture does not a doctrine make. Jesus dealt with Satan by refuting him with the Word. Every attack of Satan was dealt with "it is written." Why were the Messianic Prophecies left for the world. So, evidence could be evaluated to prove that Jesus was who the prophecies said He was. Mormonism asks the person to disregard evidence and concentrate on a feeling. A feeling outweighs specific evidence contradicting what the feeling is supposed to confirm. Jesus never asked us to do that, and neither do I. I'm not asking anyone to believe my opinions. I fully documented my book and the author of the article this post is about, looked at the evidence before he wrote the article. Your desire is to have everyone ignore evidence and search for a feeling inspite of evidence. Christianity stands as a perfect mix of evidence and the affirmation of the Spirit; however, the evidence contradicts Mormonism. "
Keith wrote on Jan 25, 2008 9:09 AM:
" Rocky:
You just showed anonymous is right!
You do not deny your bias and ill feelings about Mormons.
You ignored the Biblical evidences I provided.
You characterize the Mormon view, and thereby contradict your own original claims. If Mormon's "ignore everything but personal revelation," then they are completely free from external influence and impervious to "Salt Lake City calling" and safe to be elected!
You misrepresent the Bible as complete. Where are: Paul's First letter to the Corinthians? 1COR5:9. Paul's letter to Laodicea COL4:16. The Books of Samuel, Nathan and Gad? 1CHRON 1:29. Just a few examples!
From Peter's witness to the Day of Pentecost, the Holy Spirit witnessed of truth, before the New Testament was compiled or its books written.
You do expect others to accept your opinion and that of your documented sources. The evidence I provided to Erin, examined with prayer and the spirit contradict that opinion!
The Bible must be studied in the power of the Holy Spirit, to reveal truth. Please do not let anger, hatred, or prejudice blind you to your Lord, as it did the Scribes and Pharisees in Jesus Day! "
You just showed anonymous is right!
You do not deny your bias and ill feelings about Mormons.
You ignored the Biblical evidences I provided.
You characterize the Mormon view, and thereby contradict your own original claims. If Mormon's "ignore everything but personal revelation," then they are completely free from external influence and impervious to "Salt Lake City calling" and safe to be elected!
You misrepresent the Bible as complete. Where are: Paul's First letter to the Corinthians? 1COR5:9. Paul's letter to Laodicea COL4:16. The Books of Samuel, Nathan and Gad? 1CHRON 1:29. Just a few examples!
From Peter's witness to the Day of Pentecost, the Holy Spirit witnessed of truth, before the New Testament was compiled or its books written.
You do expect others to accept your opinion and that of your documented sources. The evidence I provided to Erin, examined with prayer and the spirit contradict that opinion!
The Bible must be studied in the power of the Holy Spirit, to reveal truth. Please do not let anger, hatred, or prejudice blind you to your Lord, as it did the Scribes and Pharisees in Jesus Day! "
Concerned Taxpayer wrote on Jan 25, 2008 3:38 PM:
" What troubles me about all of this is that this book is obviously a play by a 501(c)3 tax exempt organization to influence an election, specifically by speaking against a candidate for office. In several interviews Rocky has given he has mentioned Mitt Romney a number of times.
Perhaps this should be reported to the IRS. "
Perhaps this should be reported to the IRS. "
Rocky Hulse wrote on Jan 25, 2008 8:14 PM:
" Anonymous, I can't believe I'm responding to someone who doesn't even have the guts to identify themselves.
Your three statements couldn't be more wrong. I did the research, I provided the documentation, that is hard evidence - can you understand that anonymous.
Where does the information for Mormon websites come from: The Mormon Church. The testimonies of millions of Mormons is built upon fabricated information that any real research can easily disprove. Anonymous, I've done the research - millions of Mormons haven't, and it's apparent you haven't either.
I have taken the Mormon "facts" and torn them apart with documentation. I'm not afraid of anything the Mormon Church has or will produce. The evidence against the history provided by the Mormon Church is irrefutable, there simply is no question; but, as you have said, anonymous, you'll never look at it. So, there's nothing I, nor anyone else, can say. Obviously, your mantra is: don't confuse me with facts, my mind is already made up.
So, you who are afraid to even divulge your name, take the easy road and don't look at the evidence, it may require the courage to be intellectually honest. "
Your three statements couldn't be more wrong. I did the research, I provided the documentation, that is hard evidence - can you understand that anonymous.
Where does the information for Mormon websites come from: The Mormon Church. The testimonies of millions of Mormons is built upon fabricated information that any real research can easily disprove. Anonymous, I've done the research - millions of Mormons haven't, and it's apparent you haven't either.
I have taken the Mormon "facts" and torn them apart with documentation. I'm not afraid of anything the Mormon Church has or will produce. The evidence against the history provided by the Mormon Church is irrefutable, there simply is no question; but, as you have said, anonymous, you'll never look at it. So, there's nothing I, nor anyone else, can say. Obviously, your mantra is: don't confuse me with facts, my mind is already made up.
So, you who are afraid to even divulge your name, take the easy road and don't look at the evidence, it may require the courage to be intellectually honest. "
Rocky Hulse wrote on Jan 25, 2008 8:30 PM:
" Sorry Keith, Anonymous makes my point. They refuse to even look at any evidence. So, Mormons blindly accept their chain of prophets as legitimate without ever checking them out. Joseph Smith the founding prophet of Mormonism delivered 56 false prophecies during his lifetime. In Deuteronomy chapters 13 and 18 we find that any prophet who gives just one false prophecy is a false prophet.
So Keith, Anonymous reinforces the premise of the book that Mormons are bound by oaths and covenants of absolute obedience and allegiance to the Mormon Church and it Priesthood, that is led by their "Prophet."
Anonymous has already told us that they'll never look at anything not provided by the Mormon Church; what better way to control what your people know then to train them to be single source on everything. You can bet your last dollar that that if Anonymous was to receive a phone call from the "Prophet" of the Mormon Church to do anything, they'd do it. Blind obedience is a wonderful thing, if you're the leaders of the Mormon Church!! "
So Keith, Anonymous reinforces the premise of the book that Mormons are bound by oaths and covenants of absolute obedience and allegiance to the Mormon Church and it Priesthood, that is led by their "Prophet."
Anonymous has already told us that they'll never look at anything not provided by the Mormon Church; what better way to control what your people know then to train them to be single source on everything. You can bet your last dollar that that if Anonymous was to receive a phone call from the "Prophet" of the Mormon Church to do anything, they'd do it. Blind obedience is a wonderful thing, if you're the leaders of the Mormon Church!! "
Rocky Hulse wrote on Jan 26, 2008 4:01 PM:
" Nice try "Cocerned Taxpayer," to try and use the IRS to censor information about the Mormon Church; but alas, all is quite legal.
(1) The book isn't written by a 501(c)3, it was written by a private citizen.
(2) The book doesn't endorse, or non-endorse any candidate. The book simply provides information for a voter to make an informed decision.
(3) The book "When Salt Lake City Calls" never mentions any candidates name - the book simply defines Mormon doctrine.
(4) The Nauvoo Christian Visitors Center, for whom I am the President, does not endorse or non-endorse any candidates. The NCVC simply provides information about the teachings and doctrines of Mormonism.
So, "Concerned more about silencing information than compliance with the law" go ahead and call the IRS, we are in complete compliance with the law. If you wish to silence me, why don't you show that the information in the book is false? Oh, you can't, because I didn't make this stuff up; so, instead of bringing forth evidence to refute me, you're hoping the IRS can do it. Well, sorry to disappoint you, but all is above board. "
(1) The book isn't written by a 501(c)3, it was written by a private citizen.
(2) The book doesn't endorse, or non-endorse any candidate. The book simply provides information for a voter to make an informed decision.
(3) The book "When Salt Lake City Calls" never mentions any candidates name - the book simply defines Mormon doctrine.
(4) The Nauvoo Christian Visitors Center, for whom I am the President, does not endorse or non-endorse any candidates. The NCVC simply provides information about the teachings and doctrines of Mormonism.
So, "Concerned more about silencing information than compliance with the law" go ahead and call the IRS, we are in complete compliance with the law. If you wish to silence me, why don't you show that the information in the book is false? Oh, you can't, because I didn't make this stuff up; so, instead of bringing forth evidence to refute me, you're hoping the IRS can do it. Well, sorry to disappoint you, but all is above board. "
Keith wrote on Jan 26, 2008 4:19 PM:
" Rocky, you've totally ignored my points and scriptures, repeating the same old dogma. You refuse to respond intelligently. So I will end my blogging with this. If you believed the moon to be made of cheese. If you wrote a book, quoting others who vehemently agreed, and carefully, meticulously, reviewed your quotes, ensuring them to be contextually accurate, it would not change your error. Your documentation could be perfect, but the claim would still be FALSE. As a Mormon actively involved in politics, a student of law and world religions, a writer of books and reader of many Anti-Mormon and other religious writings, I contend that your basic premise is prima facia false. A faithful Mormon president would no more endanger the Constitution or our nation, then an Evangelical. In fact, historically some Evangelicals might BE dangerous to elect. For example, a "born again" pseudo-Christian, who demeans other faiths and dogmatically makes his/her private interpretation of the Bible, the "inerrant" word of God! Horrible historical injustices have been perpetrated by dogmatic false Christians, claiming to act for God! Rocky sees Mormons, as Machiavelli (The Prince) saw Christians? Read Acts 5:38-39. "
Rocky Hulse wrote on Jan 28, 2008 9:35 PM:
" Keith, your criticisms are fully addressed and answered in my book; but alas, you won't read it, so just what are we supposed to discuss Keith, a psuedo strawman you conger up in your mind?
Since you like the moon made of cheese example, did you know Brigham Young believed the moon and sun were inhabited? “Who can tell us of the INHABITANTS of this little planet that shines of an evening called the MOON? When we view its face we may see what is termed 'the man in the moon,' and what some philosophers declare are the shadows of mountains. But these sayings are very vague, and amount to nothing; and when you inquire about the INHABITANTS of that sphere you find that the most learned are as ignorant in regard to them as the ignorant of their fellows. So it is in regard to the INHABITANTS OF THE SUN. Do you think it is inhabited? I rather think it is. Do you think there is any life there? NO QUESTION OF IT; IT WAS NOT MADE IN VAIN.” (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 13, page 271)
"
Since you like the moon made of cheese example, did you know Brigham Young believed the moon and sun were inhabited? “Who can tell us of the INHABITANTS of this little planet that shines of an evening called the MOON? When we view its face we may see what is termed 'the man in the moon,' and what some philosophers declare are the shadows of mountains. But these sayings are very vague, and amount to nothing; and when you inquire about the INHABITANTS of that sphere you find that the most learned are as ignorant in regard to them as the ignorant of their fellows. So it is in regard to the INHABITANTS OF THE SUN. Do you think it is inhabited? I rather think it is. Do you think there is any life there? NO QUESTION OF IT; IT WAS NOT MADE IN VAIN.” (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 13, page 271)
"
Keith wrote on Jan 29, 2008 1:04 PM:
" Did it again. No response to scripture, no thought or reasoning, just more Anti-stuff. Heard it all before. You must have had a very bad experience to hate Mormons so much.
Honest researchers seek to make real discovery, instead of seeking evidence to fit preconceived notions. But your biases appearing here demonstrate that you do not seek real discussion. Reading the book would be a waste of time, your shallow reasoning overshadowing real analysis. Case in point: Your example below parallels the logic of those who stopped following Jesus, based on his "plain language" about eating His flesh. (Imagine how John 6:53 would sound in an "Anti-Jesus" book). Failure to seek the spirit blinded them; pride crippled their understanding, so they left their Lord. Please don't follow them.
BTW1, Taxpayer's point was that your 20+ comments below and the article's assertions about timing, seem to indicate that you and your organization are one, Anti-Mormon in the extreme, with an agenda to unendorse Romney! Attempts to veil it behind the actions of an individual appear transparent!
BTW2, Thanks for your service to our Nation, made me want to try once more to enlighten you. Out! "
Honest researchers seek to make real discovery, instead of seeking evidence to fit preconceived notions. But your biases appearing here demonstrate that you do not seek real discussion. Reading the book would be a waste of time, your shallow reasoning overshadowing real analysis. Case in point: Your example below parallels the logic of those who stopped following Jesus, based on his "plain language" about eating His flesh. (Imagine how John 6:53 would sound in an "Anti-Jesus" book). Failure to seek the spirit blinded them; pride crippled their understanding, so they left their Lord. Please don't follow them.
BTW1, Taxpayer's point was that your 20+ comments below and the article's assertions about timing, seem to indicate that you and your organization are one, Anti-Mormon in the extreme, with an agenda to unendorse Romney! Attempts to veil it behind the actions of an individual appear transparent!
BTW2, Thanks for your service to our Nation, made me want to try once more to enlighten you. Out! "
Helen wrote on Jan 29, 2008 4:58 PM:
" Christian View of the Bible-Accurate:
"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works." (2 Tim. 3:17)
LDS Church View of the Bible-Corrupted:
"We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God." (8th article of faith)
Keith, you throw around the words scripture a lot, but never say which one, your Mormon view of the Bible or the Chrisitan view of the Bible?
If you are a TBM, your words seem to lead one to believe you are, then we know where you stand..."AS FAR AS IT IS TRANSLATED CORRECTLY..." if the Bible doesn't support Mormonism, then it is corrupted! That is your 8th article of faith statement, just own it.
"
"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works." (2 Tim. 3:17)
LDS Church View of the Bible-Corrupted:
"We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God." (8th article of faith)
Keith, you throw around the words scripture a lot, but never say which one, your Mormon view of the Bible or the Chrisitan view of the Bible?
If you are a TBM, your words seem to lead one to believe you are, then we know where you stand..."AS FAR AS IT IS TRANSLATED CORRECTLY..." if the Bible doesn't support Mormonism, then it is corrupted! That is your 8th article of faith statement, just own it.
"
Rocky Hulse wrote on Jan 29, 2008 9:00 PM:
" Keith - The article and the book aren't about your diversions to scripture. The article and the book are about the oaths and covenants of Mormonism that require absolute obedience and allegiance to the Mormon Church and its living male hierarchy. You've spent a lot of time trying to discredit me without being willing to actually talk about my work. You could silence my statements by actually taking my work and discrediting it. You say you won't. I can only assume you are afraid of my work. It may actually require you to be intellectually honest. I can understand your fear as a Mormon. I was once a Mormon and when the evidence is brought forward, Mormonism is indefensible. So, I understand your fear. On the other hand, I am not afraid to tackle anything the Mormon Church, or any other anti-Christian organization, may say. Cristianity can, and has, stood the test of time. "
Keith wrote on Jan 30, 2008 12:22 PM:
" Thanks Helen: I'll own it, when you understand it. Your "Christian view" means your private interpretation. Catholics have more books. Protestants using various translations disagree on essential doctrines, (i.e. once saved always saved)? The NIV's very existence is a statement that the King James was not translated correctly. Skeptics claim numerous errors in all Bibles. Even the earliest manuscripts are copies of copies. It is naive to believe in one universal "Christian view" or interpretation of the Bible. Thousands of different denominations prove that!
The Real LDS view is: The missing books,(cited below), the influence of the creeds,(i.e. the non-biblical view of the trinity) and the problems with translations over time, caused by frail humans, missing records, deterioration of time, can be overcome, if we read the Bible, whatever version, and interpreted it under the influence of the Holy Spirit. That is why the spirit is so important. The Pharisees interpreted scripture by man's knowledge and rejected Christ. Peter was convicted by the spirit and served him.
So yes, reading the Bible by the spirit gives you the true inerrant word of God. Yes, that word supports the Restored Gospel of Jesus Christ. "
The Real LDS view is: The missing books,(cited below), the influence of the creeds,(i.e. the non-biblical view of the trinity) and the problems with translations over time, caused by frail humans, missing records, deterioration of time, can be overcome, if we read the Bible, whatever version, and interpreted it under the influence of the Holy Spirit. That is why the spirit is so important. The Pharisees interpreted scripture by man's knowledge and rejected Christ. Peter was convicted by the spirit and served him.
So yes, reading the Bible by the spirit gives you the true inerrant word of God. Yes, that word supports the Restored Gospel of Jesus Christ. "
Keith wrote on Jan 30, 2008 4:27 PM:
" Rocky either you haven't read, or don't get, my comments. Thankfully neutral parties will see from them, why I feel that reading your book would waste my time. I have no fear of your book or comments. Don't project your fears upon me. The fears behind why YOU hate what YOU once embraced. Fear that makes YOU refuse to respond to my evidences. Fear that prompts YOU to refuse to admit your bias. How can you use the words intellectual honesty, when you know your book targets your enemy? You admit your book is not about scripture, but make comments about scripture. You refuse to tackle my points, then claim you are not afraid to do just that. True Christianity CAN stand the test, but not your own personal version of Christianity! God's evidences will discredit any book or life work that is hate based! Do you really believe that your dogmatic adherence to your version of angry Christianity is any less compelling upon you than the oaths you say compel Mormons? I guess we're through, unless you really want to dialogue. Lets start with deeper issues, like Absolute Truth? "
Helen wrote on Jan 30, 2008 6:23 PM:
" Keith, your owning it has nothing to do with me, whatsoever, you missed the point. You choose to spit out a bunch of scriptures, why? I don't care to discuss them, that isn't the issue!
Mormonism falls apart without the BOM, DC, POGP, and JST. However, it's the Mormon priesthood which should concern Americans. The book "When Salt Lake City Calls" by Rocky Hulse without a doubt shows anyone clearly that the Mormon Priesthood controls the Mormon people. That's the issue of this article and the book.
"
Mormonism falls apart without the BOM, DC, POGP, and JST. However, it's the Mormon priesthood which should concern Americans. The book "When Salt Lake City Calls" by Rocky Hulse without a doubt shows anyone clearly that the Mormon Priesthood controls the Mormon people. That's the issue of this article and the book.
"
Keith wrote on Jan 30, 2008 7:05 PM:
" Rocky never mind about dialogue on absolute truth: Truth appears to not be your thing!
I just saw your Anti-Mormon website "Nauvoo Mormon Mecca" and discovered:
1. You mislead viewers by posting comments from this site and claiming they were written about your book. Then quote this news article in another place apart from the comments!
2. You leave out your posted comments giving a false impression.
3. You post only selected comments!
4. Helen is one of your disciples, decidedly not neutral!
Any reason to doubt that such bias, agenda or tactics would also apply to all you do? I think not. What was that you said about intellectual honesty???? I truly am sorry for you and whatever happened that so filled you with bias! I will continue to pray for you! Signing off now to find honest discussion! "
I just saw your Anti-Mormon website "Nauvoo Mormon Mecca" and discovered:
1. You mislead viewers by posting comments from this site and claiming they were written about your book. Then quote this news article in another place apart from the comments!
2. You leave out your posted comments giving a false impression.
3. You post only selected comments!
4. Helen is one of your disciples, decidedly not neutral!
Any reason to doubt that such bias, agenda or tactics would also apply to all you do? I think not. What was that you said about intellectual honesty???? I truly am sorry for you and whatever happened that so filled you with bias! I will continue to pray for you! Signing off now to find honest discussion! "
Keith wrote on Jan 31, 2008 11:59 AM:
" Helen, I'll not respond to Rocky anymore, but you deserve one last try! SCRIPTURE IS THE ISSUE. It is not Mormonism that falls apart in light of the Bible, but YOUR personal twist on the Bible, YOUR hate based motivations, and YOUR creedal Christianity that fall apart. That is REALLY why you "don't care to discuss them". Mormonism is perfectly consistent with a spirit led, prayer based, interpretation of the Bible, whatever version you use! The Mormon Priesthood is no more controlling on Mormons, then your simplistic "Inerrant Word" view of the Bible is binding upon you. Admit it. You owe allegiance to God above all governments of men, and that God, your personal God, manifests himself and His will THROUGH your personal interpretation of the Bible! Add to that your irrational fear of Mormons and inner need to try and attack them, and your private God, your Fear and Anger, bind and control you more than any Mormon I know! Please break free now: John 8:32 "
Walter wrote on Jan 31, 2008 1:08 PM:
" I have found it near impossible to have a meaningful dialogue with a Mormon because they are not interested in discussing the origins, revisions, contradictions, and anomalies of their religion. Instead, they give circuitous arguments based on additional faulty Mormon positions and tenets, capped by the claim that the Holy Spirit testifies to them personally as to the veracity of their position. It’s hard to engage in a dialogue with someone who will not consider other evidence and who is convinced that a personal revelation by the supposed Holy Spirit is the ultimate exclamation point authenticating their position. "
A.S. wrote on Jan 31, 2008 2:02 PM:
" I can't believe that people can be so negative! No, I don't believe in Mormanism or support it, but I respect them for having their own beliefs. Isn't this why we live in America-the Land of the Free? I'm Catholic, and I have LOTS of people that tell me I'm not a Christian. This is just getting ridiculous. Look at the positive things, and let's not be so negative! Is this how Jesus would act? "
Renee wrote on Jan 31, 2008 2:07 PM:
" Wow! I can't believe how negative people can be! Let's have a little respect. I'm a Catholic and I have LOTS of people tell me I'm not a Christian. I don't believe in Mormonism, nor do I support it. However, that doesn't mean that I shouldn't respect Mormon's for what they believe. This is why we live in the Land of the Free - so we can believe what we want. So, let's all be a little more positive! I know Jesus wouldn't act like this! "
Helen wrote on Jan 31, 2008 2:22 PM:
" Keith Shurtleff wrote on Dec 15, 2007 12:54 PM: " I would like to thank Rocky Hulse and his supporters for demonstrating in our day, how it was that the religious leaders in Jesus' day, could hate, malign, and crucify the very God they professed to serve. The difference between Hulse and Caiaphas is only the century in which they live. Truly Rocky and his gang fit Our Savior's description of being Whited Sepulchers. Thankfully an analytical and factual response to claims such as theirs can be found in the book "Whited Tombs" " (hmmm? "
Helen wrote on Jan 31, 2008 2:30 PM:
" Keith wrote on Jan 16, 2008 2:20 PM:
" Conversely, it proves my point, getting through to indoctrinated, self-deceived, anti-Mormon, fanatics is difficult.
"Do not confuse me with SPIRITUAL evidence, heaven revealed truth, prayer or the Holy Word of God. I've got a man produced book!!!"
Keith, did you write this book? Why didn't you tell everyone it was you when you wrote these words?
Thankfully an analytical and factual response to claims such as theirs can be found in the book "Whited Tombs". "
" Conversely, it proves my point, getting through to indoctrinated, self-deceived, anti-Mormon, fanatics is difficult.
"Do not confuse me with SPIRITUAL evidence, heaven revealed truth, prayer or the Holy Word of God. I've got a man produced book!!!"
Keith, did you write this book? Why didn't you tell everyone it was you when you wrote these words?
Thankfully an analytical and factual response to claims such as theirs can be found in the book "Whited Tombs". "
Robin wrote on Jan 31, 2008 6:02 PM:
" And Satan rears his ugly head, in the guise of defense of religion. Sad that precepts of the past are being brought to the forefront. Each man must choose for himself, and their deeds will give them their home. Rocky knows nothing but what is whispered into his ear by an evil cunning one. Mormons know nothing either. Find the Lord and you then will know the truth. "
Erin wrote on Jan 31, 2008 9:14 PM:
" Thank you Rocky and Keith for the additional information you provided. I have already processed through the evidence Keith provided and am currently reading Rocky's book. Again, thank you both for sharing your opinions/information on the Mormom faith. It's given me the opportunity to come to my own conclusion. "
Helen wrote on Feb 1, 2008 4:37 PM:
" A.S. & Renee say they are Catholic. Both of you have the right Jesus, as defined in the Bible. You say Mormons are such nice people, no problem. However, do you know what the Mormon Church and its members think of you and other Christian Churches? According to Mormon scripture POGP, Joseph Smith 2:18-19 "...Jesus says all churches are wrong...all their creeds are an abomination in His sight..." In Mormonism Catholics are the Whore of Babylon and all Protestant Churches are her harlot daughters. Every Sunday Mormons carry this, their scrpiture to their ward meetings. "When Salt Lake City Calls" by Rocky Hulse is a book that pulls back what has been hidden about the doctrines of the Mormon Church. Read the book and judge what is written in it. Facts and documention can be tested and should be, but those judging something they haven't read is wrong. Attacking a person for writing a book is worse!
"
"
Rocky Hulse wrote on Feb 1, 2008 7:56 PM:
" Keith, you accuse me and Helen of hate, hate, hate.
How about just an ounce of truth on your part. As a Mormon you beleive in the "First Vision," right? Yes! What does the "First Vision" say?
"I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt..."
So in one sentence Joseph Smith condemns all churches as wrong, all creeds (Christian doctrine) as an abomination, and all who profess Christianity as corrupt.
It is the epitome of hypocrisy for you to claim hate of a Christian trying to defend their belief from the all conclusive attack on every Christian church, every Christian doctrine and anyone who professes Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior by the Mormon Church.
This all out attack on Christianity is day one, hour one, minute one, second one, of Mormonism. You then, Keith, have the audacity to come on here as a Mormon and pretend to be the victim and accuse others defending their faith as haters.
Incredulous!
"
How about just an ounce of truth on your part. As a Mormon you beleive in the "First Vision," right? Yes! What does the "First Vision" say?
"I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt..."
So in one sentence Joseph Smith condemns all churches as wrong, all creeds (Christian doctrine) as an abomination, and all who profess Christianity as corrupt.
It is the epitome of hypocrisy for you to claim hate of a Christian trying to defend their belief from the all conclusive attack on every Christian church, every Christian doctrine and anyone who professes Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior by the Mormon Church.
This all out attack on Christianity is day one, hour one, minute one, second one, of Mormonism. You then, Keith, have the audacity to come on here as a Mormon and pretend to be the victim and accuse others defending their faith as haters.
Incredulous!
"
Keith wrote on Feb 3, 2008 6:05 PM:
" A warning to my Catholic friends AS and Renee: DO NOT feel overly comfortable with Helen's "Same Jesus" comment. Anti-Mormons, use the same tactics as Anti-Catholics. It's doubtful Helen and her type accept Transubstantiation, The Immaculate Conception of Mary's Mother, or belief in Saints. It seems clear from their comments in this column that they would abhor your belief in the Pope as the mouthpiece of God! It is very unlikely that their protestant concept of grace, would embrace your concepts of works and repentance. In fact, Catholic views on those issues are much closer to the LDS views then to contemporary Christians. Her comment seems very similar to the ancient Pharisee's claiming that the HATED Caesar was THEIR ONLY KING, merely to achieve their desired result of destroying Jesus. "We have no King but Caesar" is really no different then "We are all Christians but those hated Mormons!"
Also remember. God knows what is in Rocky's Book, as he knows Rocky's heart! Check out all the claims in prayer, trusting not in the Arm of Flesh, and you WILL know the truth! "
Also remember. God knows what is in Rocky's Book, as he knows Rocky's heart! Check out all the claims in prayer, trusting not in the Arm of Flesh, and you WILL know the truth! "
Keith wrote on Feb 3, 2008 6:32 PM:
" Hopefully My Last!
My discussions with clergy of many faiths reveal that those SECURE in their faith, are open to sharing. The INSECURE feel threatened and resort to anger, hatred, and dogma. Anti-Mormons are so oppressed by fear and hatred, they cannot possibly read or understand anything Mormon in its spiritual context. For example, READ the entire "First Vision" Rocky mentions below, applying spiritual context, and you will see NO HATRED. In fact the cited verse is no more hate inspiring then Luther's 95 Thesis. But discounting the Holy Spirit and revelation, Rocky et. al. will, no doubt continue attacking! So consider this! TO TRUST ANY, HATE OPPRESSED, Anti-Mormon's, claims about Mormonism IS AS RIDICOULOUS AS FOR A 1st Century Judean to trust the Sanhedrin's claims about Jesus! Please check out the full context of future claims and investigate other NEUTRAL sources. Then take your findings to God in prayer, and accept His revelation. In the end GOD'S opinion is the only one that really matters. Not mine, not Rocky's, not Helen's. I know Jesus' promise (Matthew 7:7-11) is true. I trust Heavenly Father above any human and invite un-poisoned, neutral, truth seekers to do likewise! "
My discussions with clergy of many faiths reveal that those SECURE in their faith, are open to sharing. The INSECURE feel threatened and resort to anger, hatred, and dogma. Anti-Mormons are so oppressed by fear and hatred, they cannot possibly read or understand anything Mormon in its spiritual context. For example, READ the entire "First Vision" Rocky mentions below, applying spiritual context, and you will see NO HATRED. In fact the cited verse is no more hate inspiring then Luther's 95 Thesis. But discounting the Holy Spirit and revelation, Rocky et. al. will, no doubt continue attacking! So consider this! TO TRUST ANY, HATE OPPRESSED, Anti-Mormon's, claims about Mormonism IS AS RIDICOULOUS AS FOR A 1st Century Judean to trust the Sanhedrin's claims about Jesus! Please check out the full context of future claims and investigate other NEUTRAL sources. Then take your findings to God in prayer, and accept His revelation. In the end GOD'S opinion is the only one that really matters. Not mine, not Rocky's, not Helen's. I know Jesus' promise (Matthew 7:7-11) is true. I trust Heavenly Father above any human and invite un-poisoned, neutral, truth seekers to do likewise! "
Helen wrote on Feb 4, 2008 5:39 PM:
" Keith, you just have spoken like the Anti-Christian, you truly are a temple Mormon. You tell those in the Catholic faith, that the Jesus, I believe in is not the same Jesus, as their's is pure nonsense! You have no idea what Church I belong too and besides, that is not the issue. What is the issue? It has now become your Mormon arrogance. You are now telling people to pray about Rocky's book to know if it is true? You sound just like a Mormon missionary giving a lesson on the Book of Mormon, just pray to see if it's true! "
Keith wrote on Feb 5, 2008 12:39 PM:
" Helen needs to take a walk; breath deeply, set aside her anger and prejudice, then re-read ALL I wrote:
I did NOT say her Jesus is not the same as the Catholics. Deciding who has the REAL JESUS is the job of Anti-Mormon fanatics; I've learned that painfully through the years! Personally I know and love many wonderful Christians, Protestants and Catholics! My ACTUAL POINT was that Helen's same Jesus remark was NO GUARANTEE of unity in purpose or doctrine, accurately pointing out that Protestants and Catholics have many differences on core doctrines. Read in context, "an almost impossible task for Anti Mormons," my comments debunk Helen's "Universal Christianity vs. Mormons" as a false dichotomy. Hatred knows no bounds. Anti Mormons will not hesitate to attack others who challenge or disagree with them. Just review all the comments below! Finally, IF proclaiming that God, Our Heavenly Father, is the only perfect and absolute source of truth, is arrogance, IF encouraging people to verify human claims through prayer to God is pride, I'm guilty. But, a hate free and un-fettered reading of the Bible reveals I'm in good company, starting with Jesus! "
I did NOT say her Jesus is not the same as the Catholics. Deciding who has the REAL JESUS is the job of Anti-Mormon fanatics; I've learned that painfully through the years! Personally I know and love many wonderful Christians, Protestants and Catholics! My ACTUAL POINT was that Helen's same Jesus remark was NO GUARANTEE of unity in purpose or doctrine, accurately pointing out that Protestants and Catholics have many differences on core doctrines. Read in context, "an almost impossible task for Anti Mormons," my comments debunk Helen's "Universal Christianity vs. Mormons" as a false dichotomy. Hatred knows no bounds. Anti Mormons will not hesitate to attack others who challenge or disagree with them. Just review all the comments below! Finally, IF proclaiming that God, Our Heavenly Father, is the only perfect and absolute source of truth, is arrogance, IF encouraging people to verify human claims through prayer to God is pride, I'm guilty. But, a hate free and un-fettered reading of the Bible reveals I'm in good company, starting with Jesus! "
Helen wrote on Feb 5, 2008 3:18 PM:
" Read your words Keith:" A warning to my Catholic friends AS and Renee: DO NOT feel overly comfortable with Helen's "Same Jesus" comment. Anti-Mormons, use the same tactics as Anti-Catholics. It's doubtful Helen and her type accept Transubstantiation, The Immaculate Conception of Mary's Mother, or belief in Saints. It seems clear from their comments in this column that they would abhor your belief in the Pope as the mouthpiece of God! It is very unlikely that their protestant concept of grace, would embrace your concepts of works and repentance. In fact, Catholic views on those issues are much closer to the LDS views then to contemporary Christians."
Shame on you 'cause you are lying and you know it. Only the Mormon Prophet speaks for God in ALL things. Only the Mormon Church is the ONE true Church. That is not bigotry, that's the truth! In Mormonism your church does not teach the Virgin Birth of Jesus. Jesus and Satan are brothers. Nothing I have just said sounds Catholic or protestant, it is pure Mormon which is Anti-Christian!
"
Shame on you 'cause you are lying and you know it. Only the Mormon Prophet speaks for God in ALL things. Only the Mormon Church is the ONE true Church. That is not bigotry, that's the truth! In Mormonism your church does not teach the Virgin Birth of Jesus. Jesus and Satan are brothers. Nothing I have just said sounds Catholic or protestant, it is pure Mormon which is Anti-Christian!
"
Helen wrote on Feb 5, 2008 7:56 PM:
" MEET THE REAL KEITH:
DAVID KEITH SHURTLEFF
Former Navy JAG Officer,
Ethics Instructor
Current LDS Chaplain, U.S. Army
Born and raised in the Mormon faith:
LDS missionary to Venezuela
Various Callings: High Counselor, Bishop,
Young Men's President(Stake and Ward),
Temple Worker, High Priest.
Wow folks, do a Google search on his name and then his Mormon Church. It's enlighting. No one needs to believe me, find out for yourself. I have ask him or stated that he is a Mormon several times. However, he has just chosen to ignore, that he is in fact a Mormon. What he does instead is a lot of double speak and lots of name calling. I will say it again, pure Mormon arrogance!
"
DAVID KEITH SHURTLEFF
Former Navy JAG Officer,
Ethics Instructor
Current LDS Chaplain, U.S. Army
Born and raised in the Mormon faith:
LDS missionary to Venezuela
Various Callings: High Counselor, Bishop,
Young Men's President(Stake and Ward),
Temple Worker, High Priest.
Wow folks, do a Google search on his name and then his Mormon Church. It's enlighting. No one needs to believe me, find out for yourself. I have ask him or stated that he is a Mormon several times. However, he has just chosen to ignore, that he is in fact a Mormon. What he does instead is a lot of double speak and lots of name calling. I will say it again, pure Mormon arrogance!
"
Rocky Hulse wrote on Feb 5, 2008 9:27 PM:
" Keith's Feb 5 12:39 "Helen needs to take a walk; breath deeply, set aside her anger and prejudice, then re-read ALL I wrote:"
I did re-read ALL you've written, and here's the results: 23 posts, 20 times you use some form of the word hate; 6 times anger; 5 times prejudice, 5 times compares people to Pharisees; you sprinkle in malign, crucify, compare Rocky to Caiaphas, persecutors, Satan deception, despisers, inflammatory language, sensationalism, aggressive angry comments, ill feelings, shallow reasoning, attack, abhor, attacking and people who disagree with you are poisoned.
Based on your own words, who's angry here?
Wow, for an Army Chaplain, you display a profound amount of caustic language in your discourses with people; I never found that to be true of Navy Chaplains.
Oh yes, no less than four times did you intimate that you weren't going to post here any more. I certainly don't control this site, and I would welcome you to continue, if you'd simply be less caustic and more respectful of the people posting here. Your language here, in my opinion as a retired commissioned officer in the Navy, is unbecoming of an officer!
"
I did re-read ALL you've written, and here's the results: 23 posts, 20 times you use some form of the word hate; 6 times anger; 5 times prejudice, 5 times compares people to Pharisees; you sprinkle in malign, crucify, compare Rocky to Caiaphas, persecutors, Satan deception, despisers, inflammatory language, sensationalism, aggressive angry comments, ill feelings, shallow reasoning, attack, abhor, attacking and people who disagree with you are poisoned.
Based on your own words, who's angry here?
Wow, for an Army Chaplain, you display a profound amount of caustic language in your discourses with people; I never found that to be true of Navy Chaplains.
Oh yes, no less than four times did you intimate that you weren't going to post here any more. I certainly don't control this site, and I would welcome you to continue, if you'd simply be less caustic and more respectful of the people posting here. Your language here, in my opinion as a retired commissioned officer in the Navy, is unbecoming of an officer!
"
Keith wrote on Feb 5, 2008 9:50 PM:
" Helen claims I am lying, and to be fair, in her oppressed mind its possible that she sincerely believes it…but then that is the tragedy and power of prejudice.
Now, I profess with clear conscience that I am not lying and that my opinions and comments are sincere and truthful. I know what Mormons truly believe, and denounce the many mischaracterizations and false claims made by Anti-Mormons on this thread.
Helen, will likely never be convinced, for she has chosen to trust her own reason, relying on the arm of the flesh, trusting in the words and claims of humans over God.
Thankfully there is no need for others to follow Helen's course. Jesus promises to all His children that His Father will answer their prayers, and that truth will set them free!
God's revealed truth is the only one anybody should ever rely upon! "
Now, I profess with clear conscience that I am not lying and that my opinions and comments are sincere and truthful. I know what Mormons truly believe, and denounce the many mischaracterizations and false claims made by Anti-Mormons on this thread.
Helen, will likely never be convinced, for she has chosen to trust her own reason, relying on the arm of the flesh, trusting in the words and claims of humans over God.
Thankfully there is no need for others to follow Helen's course. Jesus promises to all His children that His Father will answer their prayers, and that truth will set them free!
God's revealed truth is the only one anybody should ever rely upon! "
Rocky Hulse wrote on Feb 5, 2008 10:08 PM:
" Keith -
Just came from your website. On the Blog part of your website you there's an automated picture of a door with an arrow flashingly pointing at this door. Words above the door say:
"Profanity, vulgarity, coarseness and anger are tools of the ignorant..."
Below the door it says:
"Please check them at the door."
I take it when you leave your own website, your requirements of others doesn't apply to you!
Perhaps as a chaplain, you might be familiar with that little scripture about the "beam" in your own eye.
You haven't used profanity, or vulgarity, however, I showed in my last post your use of coarse and angry language.
Your hypocrisy is now fully documented for anyone to see who would care to do the investigation.
Keith, I fully document my work.
I noted on your website that you're an "ethics instructor." On your next post could you explain the ethics of your leaving the "ethics" you require of others on your website when you come to this one. Please be ethical in your explanation; because that would be ethical, don't you know! "
Just came from your website. On the Blog part of your website you there's an automated picture of a door with an arrow flashingly pointing at this door. Words above the door say:
"Profanity, vulgarity, coarseness and anger are tools of the ignorant..."
Below the door it says:
"Please check them at the door."
I take it when you leave your own website, your requirements of others doesn't apply to you!
Perhaps as a chaplain, you might be familiar with that little scripture about the "beam" in your own eye.
You haven't used profanity, or vulgarity, however, I showed in my last post your use of coarse and angry language.
Your hypocrisy is now fully documented for anyone to see who would care to do the investigation.
Keith, I fully document my work.
I noted on your website that you're an "ethics instructor." On your next post could you explain the ethics of your leaving the "ethics" you require of others on your website when you come to this one. Please be ethical in your explanation; because that would be ethical, don't you know! "
Keith wrote on Feb 21, 2008 6:16 PM:
" The neutral reader will see that my words used to describe Anti-Mormons posting here, are descriptions of what I FELT FROM THEM. Their words indicate anger and hatred towards me and other Mormons. My words WERE NOT expressions of what I felt toward them. A careful reading reveals my feelings as being sorrow for their bondage to prejudice, a desire to help them recognize their anger, to see their likeness to the Pharisees. Rocky considers my words to be caustic. But not his own? I consider my words as tough love. An LDS scripture explains the disconnect. "The guilty take the truth to be hard, for it cutteth them to the very center" It is Rocky, Helen and gang whose whole lives revolve around attacking. They are on the offense. They write the books, attack the faith, and demean all who defend the Mormons. I merely pointed out their fallacies, hypocrisy, and what their fruits reveal is their true motivation. Their misunderstanding of my actions proves my point. They simply cannot understand, because they are too blinded by prejudice. They see my actions as hate, because hate motivates their own. "
Keith wrote on Feb 21, 2008 6:19 PM:
" Strange that a man with years of service to America would forget his solemn oath to defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign AND DOMESTIC. Writing a book that calls for what amounts to an establishment of religious tests, a concept adamantly reject by the founders and blatantly unconstitutional, is in my mind, an attack upon the Constitution. Hate groups who would keep a person from public office, simply because of their faith, are in many ways similar to the core concepts of the Taliban and Al Qaeda. But since such groups are home grown, they more appropriately fit the title DOMESTIC ENEMIES of the Constitution. The honorable officers I knew and served with as a Navy JAG, would never support a group, founded solely on bias, hatred and prejudice. They worked far too hard and sacrificed far too much, to allow such groups to oppress any faith group. They saw the danger such groups pose to liberty, like the cultural revolutions of socialist regimes. In my mind to profess to be a servant of our nation, while simultaneously working to oppress a faith group, is both immoral and unethical. "
Keith wrote on Jan 25, 2009 9:41 PM:
" Jack's spelling is about as accurate as Rocky's assessments and his comments as scholarly as most Anti-Mormons. As the spirit of Christmas present said, "beware them both, but mostly the boy!" "
Jason wrote on Apr 7, 2009 11:30 AM:
" Mormons always go for the ad hominem attacks, sadly because they have no foundation. "
Missy wrote on Apr 19, 2009 11:56 AM:
" keeping this article posted it allows others to make my up their own minds. "
chsoldado wrote on May 13, 2009 12:55 PM:
" I find it both humorous, and typical, that Jason denounces Mormons for using "ad Hominem" attacks, with his own "ad Hominem" attack?
Further, if use of Ad Hominem attacks necessarily means there is no legitimate foundation for their points, then that same must hold true for the numerous "Ad Hominem" attacks in the comments of Rocky and the other Anti-Mormons entered on this site! "
Further, if use of Ad Hominem attacks necessarily means there is no legitimate foundation for their points, then that same must hold true for the numerous "Ad Hominem" attacks in the comments of Rocky and the other Anti-Mormons entered on this site! "
dan holman wrote on Dec 7, 2007 7:04 PM: