1119
Not that hypocrisy carries any weight on the right, but for those who are keeping score. (alt version in body)
(slrpnk.net)
For those who don't find "far-right" to be an applicable descriptor with what is known currently, I acknowledge that the meme creator could have been more precise with their word choice. However, I feel the difference is academic:
We can replace “far right” with the easily verified “not leftist” without changing the meme whatsoever, primarily because the meme is about Nancy Mace and her mercurial, disingenuous opinion, not (directly) about the shooter.
Edit - I modified it, though I still find it to be a distinction without a difference - alt version for those who prefer (whoops missed one first time)
Wasn't he a Mormon? Didn't he already find Jesus Christ? It didn't seem to make a difference at all...
He doesn’t know the right Jesus. There are too many Jesus’s and everyone thinks their Jesus is the right one.
P sure the plural is Jesi.
I thought it was Jeese?
That's why the government is sending them to El Salvador, right?
No. It’s why people think that they have special circumstances and fuck everyone else’s needs.
There once was a woman named Mrs. McBeavis who had 23 sons and named them all Jesus.
Every family trip was her chance to find Jesus
Lol, but she would also have to lose Jesus at least once for that to happen.
I think as long as you still have the majority of Jesus's then the arguement could be made that Jesus left you.
Mormons aren't Christians, at least according to those Christians who hate Mormons. They might believe in Jesus Christ but they didn't find him. This might seem like a distinction without a difference but only because it is.
Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses and Scientology are all quite similar. They all have some modern founder (Smith / Russel / Hubbard) who has positioned themselves as a Abraham like figure within the religion. Someone who has been charged by god (or aliens) to write the scriptures.
They are all cults of personality, and a lot of American evangelical churches display similar traits. Charismatic preachers who become celebrities within the movement getting fame and power in the process. There seems to be something in the American psyche that gravitates to this kind of movement.
Christian or not - all of these are problems movements in my eyes.
And wealth.
Christian Science as well. It's eerie how many overlaps they have with Mormons: founded by a single person (Mary Baker Eddystone), have a book they treat as scripture (Science and Health), believe they are the "one true way", and tell people to "pray to know if the book [and the religion] is true"
So eerie, in fact, that it was the final nail in the head (so to speak) that allowed me to leave Mormonism for good
https://youtube.com/shorts/8Ed8PGq5_EE
Took me longer than I care to admit 😅
sorry for my lack of red circles
Don't worry, I gotchu
They also think Catholics aren’t Christians either.
Well, Catholics really aren't Christians because they use a weird and theologically wrong handshape while praying /s
No True Scotsman comes to mind.
Ypu are mistaken as to how that argument goes.
The idea is that Christianity is a separate faith from Judaism because they have an entirely different set of texts and a different view of the relationship with God and what is expected of the faithful.
Islam is a separate faith of Christianity and Judaism as it too has additional texts and a different perspective on God than what Judaism and Christianity has (which again differ themselves).
Thus LDS is a different faith because it has a wholly new set of texts, it has a radically different view of the relationship with God than every other Abrahamic faith, and we have a lot of evidence that suggests Joseph Smith was outright fabricating everything. That's a critical difference and suggests it should be seen as something else following the same standards applied to all otherAbrahamic faiths.
I'm not mistaken as how that argument goes. I disagree with it.
In a different reply, I said "There is no authority, no person or group of people, authorized to decide who is a Christian and who is not. " and I stand with that. I didn't deny that you can come up with arbitary criteria to exclude certain groups, especially when you are allowed to use vague language like "different perspective on God".
Do you think Paul wrote all the letters by Paul? How is this a critical difference?
applied by whom? Applied by you and which army?
I wouldn't say "wholly new set," more like "additional set."
The KJB is a foundation of their theology and taught in all their churches.
And yeah, he was making everything up; that's how you start any religion. :)
All of Smith’s texts are wholly new fabricated by him.
The fact is we don’t have the quantity of evidence for the fabrication of most faiths to the extent we have for LDS.
True, it's relatively new compared to the others.
Yet people still follow it, dude literally just made it up