Mormonism has come under increased scrutiny as Mitt Romney finally seems to have a decent chance of winning the GOP nomination, and some folks go nuts in horror that someone who believes such incredibly goofy things, religiously, could be our next president. I mean, buried gold tablets and after-death planet ownership and Lost Tribes of Israel in America and …
In some ways, some of the most cogent (if somewhat differently approached than my own) commentary on the whole mockery of Mormonism's ostensibly zany bits has come from the atheist community. To wit: orthodox Christianity has it's own goofiness, if it weren't so simply familiar.
So consider (as a tiny fraction) things like the Virgin Birth (not to mention the Immaculate Conception). Or a heaven of winged, robed folks with halos spending eternity singing in an endless choir. Or Transubstantiation. Or the ritual cannibalism of Communion. Or the Trinity. Or the Book of Revelations, and the (competing) theologies of the End Times. Or the various stories of Jesus activities in the New Testament and how, despite all the conflicts and contradictions, and the scholarly analysis of how long after the actual events the Gospels were put down, some people think it makes a single, perfect, inerrant, divinely dictated narrative. Or the very idea of, after some brief period (between a decade and "four-score years and ten") that someone ends up in eternal joy in the presence of God or else frying in pools of brimstone, tormented by demons …
Too many orthodox Christians assume what they believe in is (through familiarity) perfectly natural and normal and non-controversial (and, of course, True and Virtuous and Necessary). It's not. It's the tradition they've been brought up in, "normal" only because it's the current norm, and, from an outsider's perspective, no less oddball than some of the things that people poke fun at in Mormonism. #ddtb
Embedded Link
Y’know, if you say that Jesus performed magic, you’d be stoned by a mob. If you say Pagans perform miracles, same thing–but the outcomes can be pretty much the same, no matter the mechanism.
I’m not sure I’d call the Mormon Church a cult, but the Scientologists are both a cult and a con job. While I think I believe that Romney or Huntsman would separate themselves, were they POTUS (which, for non-spiritual reasons, I hope not), as Kennedy meant to do, I still don’t want to elect either of them.
Same goes for Gingrich. I don’t know how many of his former wives are still around, but if he wants to marry in the Catholic Church, and a living ex-wife had children by him, those children are going to kill him if he tries for an annulment. Why any clearheaded woman would “look his way” confuses me, given how he’s treated his wives and one supposes, mistresses, in the past. Of course, if all you want is a roll in the hay with someone famous, your head is not clear in any way, shape, or form.
@Marina – Agreed on pretty much all counts.
I actually don’t worry all that much about specific policy intrusions of faith on the potential presidential actions of Romney, Huntsman, or Gingrich. The first two seem relatively level-headed about their religion, the third is an opportunist whose actions seem unconnected to any particular religious belief.
I’d worry more about Perry or Bachmann or Santorum … but it seems (praise the Maker) that none of the three are likely to make it to the nomination.