Now comes the Beckster, already having declared the President of the United States to be a "racist" with a "deep-seated hatred for white people," yet reaching again into what seems to be an inexhaustible store of libel against the leader of the free world, Beck now declaims upon what he sees as Mr. Obama's "liberation theology":
"It's all about victims and victimhood; oppressors and the oppressed; reparations, not repentance; collectivism, not individual salvation. I don't know what that is, other than it's not Muslim, it's not Christian. It's a perversion of the gospel of Jesus Christ as most Christians know it."
LINK: http://content.usatoday.com/co...beration-christian/1
And just WHO is this self-anointed theologian who purports to instruct us on the faith of the President? Who is telling us that the President's beliefs are "not Muslim...not Christian?" Why, it is a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, otherwise known as Mormons.
Before you apostles of tolerance out there get your panties in a wad and accuse me of that most deadly of sins, INtolerance, be advised of the following documentation concerning just one of the perverted and heretical beliefs of the faith to which Mr. Beck attaches his roly-poly self. What I will reproduce below is from sources within the Mormon Church, including two "Prophets" of that church. The significance of being the Prophet (and there is only one at a time) in that church is that the Prophet is supposed to directly receive revelation from God Himself, such that when the Mormon Prophet (full title "Prophet, Seer and Revelator") delivers doctrine to the followers of Mormonism, that doctrine stands on a plane of equality with the Bible itself. That being said, I wll now provide you with documented information from an online source that explains just how far Glenn Beck's chosen faith has strayed on just one matter, the virgin birth of Jesus Christ. Read this and decide if Beck, a Mormon, is the kind of authority you wish to depend on in matters of theology. Read this and decide whether a belief system that includes the documented, egregiously heretical doctrines described below are anything approaching "Christian." As incentive for you to continue reading what might be an over-long post for some, let me summarize what is proven below. Mormons do NOT believe that Mary conceived through the Holy Ghost. Their highest authorities, their "Prophets," supposedly based on information directly received from God, believe that God had a physical body, fully equipped with male genitalia, and that this Mormon version of God, had physical sexual intercourse with Mary and that she became pregnant thereby.
Read these excerpts from "The Changing World of Mormonism, by Jerald and Sandra Tanner. Their entire, and very revealing, book is online at http://www.utlm.org/onlinebooks/changecontents.htm
Now for the Mormon Doctrine on the virgin birth. Read this, those of you who watched Beck ooze righteousness this past Saturday as he attempted to get America to "return to God." Is it the Mormon "God" he would have this nation return to?
From "The Changing World of Mormonism":
<<<
The idea that God is just an exalted man has led Mormon leaders to proclaim a doctrine about the birth of Christ which is very shocking to orthodox Christians.
Brigham Young once stated: "Now remember from this time forth, and for ever, that Jesus Christ was not begotten by the Holy Ghost" (Journal of Discourses, vol. 1, p. 51).
This statement is in conflict with both the Bible and the Book of Mormon. In Matthew 1:18 and 20 we read: "Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.... for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost." The Book of Mormon agrees with the Bible on this point, for in Alma 7:10 we read: "And behold, he shall be born of Mary, ... she being a virgin, a precious and chosen vessel, who shall be overshadowed and conceive by the power of the Holy Ghost, and bring forth a son, yea, even the Son of God."
In spite of these plain statements, Joseph Fielding Smith denied that the Book of Mormon and the Bible teach that Christ was begotten by the Holy Ghost: "They tell us the Book of Mormon states that Jesus was begotten of the Holy Ghost I challenge that statement. The Book of Mormon teaches no such thing! Neither does the Bible" (Doctrines of Salvation, vol. 1, p. 19).
The reason that Joseph Fielding Smith objects to the teaching that Jesus was begotten by the Holy Ghost is that according to Mormon theology, this would make Jesus the son of the Holy Ghost rather than the Son of God the Father. This idea arises from an improper understanding of the term Holy Ghost. The term Holy Ghost means exactly the same as the term Holy Spirit. The American College Dictionary defines the term "Holy Spirit" as 'the Holy Ghost." Now, since the Bible tells us that God is a Spirit and that He is holy, it is apparent that God Himself must be the Holy Spirit. So we see that there is no contradiction in saying that Jesus was begotten by the Holy Ghost and also is the Son of God.
Since Christians believe that God is a Spirit, they view the conception of Christ as a miraculous event having nothing to with sex or any physical act. Mormon theology, on the otherhand, teaches that God is a man and that Christ was conceived through a sexual act between Mary and God the Father. In other words, the birth of Christ is considered a natural, rather than a miraculous occurrence. Joseph Fielding Smith, Jr., said: "The birth of the Savior was a natural occurrence unattended with any degree of mysticism, and the Father God was the literal parent of Jesus in the flesh as well as in the spirit" (Religious Truths Defined, p. 44).
The late President Joseph Fielding Smith declared: "Christ was begotten of God. He was not born without the aid of Man, and that Man was God!" (Doctrines of Salvation, vol. 1, p. 18).
Apostle Bruce R. McConkie further explains:
"These name-titles all signify that our Lord is the only Son of the Father in the flesh. Each of the words is to be understood literally. Only means only; Begotten means begotten; and Son means son. Christ was begotten by an Immortal Father in the same way that mortal men are begotten by mortal fathers" (Mormon Doctrine, 1966, pp. 546-47)."And Christ was born into the world as the literal Son of this Holy Being; he was born in the same personal, real, and literal sense that any son is born to a mortal father. There is nothing figurative about his paternity; he was begotten, conceived and born in the normal and natural course of events, ... Christ is the Son of Man, meaning that his Father (the Eternal God!) is a Holy Man" (p. 742).
The Mormon writer Carlfred B. Broderick made these comments:
There are two basic elements in the Gospel view of sexuality as I interpret it from the scriptures. The first is that sex is good—that sexuality, far from being the antithesis of spirituality, is actually on attribute of God....
In the light of their understanding that God is a procreating personage of flesh and bone, latter-day prophets have made it clear that despite what it says in Matthew 1:20, the Holy Ghost was not the father of Jesus.... The Savior was fathered by a personage of flesh and bone, and was literally what Nephi said he was, "Son of the Eternal Father" (Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, Autumn, 1967, pp. 100-101).
President Brigham Young had this to say concerning the birth of Christ: "The man Joseph, the husband of Mary, did not, that we know of, have more than one wife, but Mary the wife of Joseph had another husband" (Deseret News, October 10, 1866).
This same type of reasoning led Apostle Orson Pratt to say:
A photograph of The Seer, page 158. Apostle Orson Pratt states that Mary and God the Father associated together in the capacity of husband and wife.
The fleshly body of Jesus required a Mother as well as a Father. Therefore, the Father and Mother of Jesus, according to the flesh, must have been associated together in the capacity of Husband and Wife; hence the Virgin Mary must have been, for the time being, the lawful wife of God the Father: we use the term lawful Wife, because it would be blasphemous in the highest degree to say that He overshadowed her or begat the Saviour unlawfully. It would have been unlawful for any man to have interfered with Mary, who was already espoused to Joseph; for such a heinous crime would have subjected both the guilty parties to death, according to the law of Moses. But God having created all men and women, had the most perfect right to do with His own creation, according to His holy will and pleasure: He had a lawful right to overshadow the Virgin Mary in the capacity of a husband, and beget a Son, although she was espoused to another; for the law which He gave to govern men and women was not intended to govern Himself, or to prescribe rules for his own conduct. It was also lawful in Him, after having thus dealt with Mary, to give her to Joseph her espoused husband.
Whether God the Father gave Mary to Joseph for time only, or for time and eternity, we are not informed. Inasmuch as God was the first husband to her, it may be that He only gave her to be the wife of Joseph while in this mortal state, and that He intended after the resurrection to again take her as one of his own wives to raise up immortal spirits in eternity (The Seer, p. 158).
Brigham Young added that "The birth of the Saviour was as natural as are the births of our children; it was the result of natural action. He partook of flesh and blood—was begotten of his Father, as we were of our fathers" (Journal of Discourses, vol. 8, p. 115).
In a sermon delivered in the tabernacle on April 9, 1852, Brigham Young climaxed his teaching with the following explanation:
I have given you a few leading items upon this subject, but a great deal more remains to be told. Now remember from this time forth, and for ever, that Jesus Christ was not begotten by the Holy Ghost. I will repeat a little anecdote. I was in conversation with a certain learned professor upon the subject, when I replied, to this idea—"if the Son was begotten by the Holy Ghost, it would be very dangerous to baptize and confirm females, and give the Holy Ghost to them, lest he should beget children, to be palmed upon the Elders by the people, bringing the Elders into great difficulties" (Journal of Discourses, vol. 1, p. 51).>>>>>
GLENN BECK, Saturday's spokesman for bringing America back to God! Is the God of Glenn Beck's faith, described above, the God that America should embrace? It is Beck's God! A God of flesh and blood! A sexually-active Deity. If Beck should deny this, then he will be denying his own professed faith, for the above is a true and correct description of Mormon beliefs about the virgin birth! Strange, yes--but true!
Just who does Beck, then, think he is to decide whether the faith of the President is Christian or Muslim or something else?! Beck declares the President's religious faith "...a perversion of the gospel of Jesus Christ as most Christians know it." Can any belief system be further out of the mainstream of Christian belief than the one to which Beck adheres?
