A now for a word from the Mormon Scriptures.

[dead_hobbit]

Bush = God in Utah

I can think of at least 10 Mormon people from Utah who don't like Bush.
Many Mormons like the GOP because the GOP wants to ban Gay marriage and that is something that the LDS church agrees with.
Just because someone is one religion you can't paint them with one brush.
Are all Muslims terrorists?

I've lived in Utah for 12 years, dude. And I'm related to some Mormons.

I'm not saying there aren't Mormons who don't like Bush.

But, in Utah, it's almost a sin to vote Democratic if you're LDS.



Outside of Utah, Mormons are much more sensible when it comes to politics, however.

[Republidog]

I've lived in Utah for 12 years, dude. And I'm related to some Mormons.

I'm not saying there aren't Mormons who don't like Bush.

But, in Utah, it's almost a sin to vote Democratic if you're LDS.



Outside of Utah, Mormons are much more sensible when it comes to politics, however.

I'm not even going to take a side on this issue. However, I lived in Utah for a short time and found what he is saying to be true. Most of the people in predominantly LDS Utah are subserviant to the Fed beast and believe Bush and the Repubs to be God-like.

I met some really awesome people there that this didn't apply to, just agreeing that "conservative" in UT means something totally different than what most think.

[president]

Nicea didn't decide canon, it decided Jesus' full deity in light of the Arian heresy.

So they said one story is to be considered the true story, and another is not.....
I veiw Nicea as the start of the Roman Empire hijacking of christianity. The chruch became a tool of the state.

What is important to understand, though, is that Councils don't establish doctrine.  They never have.  They CODIFY doctrine that is already being taught.

And they condem other doctines. They decide what is to be considered the true doctrine.

I, personally, would have changed the canon a little.

That is great. You want everyone to follow your doctrine.

But then again, its difficult to argue with the experience of the Church Fathers, who are nearly unanimous on the Canon.

Not for me.

As for me, I'm just an ordinary Christian.

No such thing. Do you believe the Nicean creed?

[Caleb]

I don't view religious convictions as something inherently wrong, prez.  If "Christian" is to have meaning, it must represent certain beliefs, and Christians have grappled with exactly that question for centuries:  namely, "What IS a Christian."

Councils are bitter, two-edged swords, which ultimately often lead to divisions within the Church.  The "losers" form their own church.  In a sense, although divisive, this is a good thing, because it allows for much variation in theology. 

I obviously do not support the sword as a method of enforcing Council's decisions.

As for Nicea, I believe it was very poorly executed, but I believe the decision was substantially correct.  Arius wanted to reconcile Jesus as fully divine with his full humanity by essentially denying his divinity.  In the process, he created two Gods, while Christianity demands full monotheism.  Nicea was correctly decided, and in full harmony with the previous doctors of the Church and the Apostles.  However ...

There is absolutely no excuse for the Church seeking Imperial Sanction for the decision, nor allowing Constantine to convene it.  The decision was correct ... for all the wrong reasons.

By the way, Arius was not defeated because he lost Imperial favor.  Quite the reverse actually happened.  What is not so commonly known is that, after Nicea, Constantine quickly changed course and sided with the Arians, and began persecuting orthodox Christians.  His son did likewise.  Orthodoxy prevailed, not because it had Constantine's support, but because it was correct.

Caleb