Was Joseph Smith Really a Prophet of God?

As a Jew the status of Joseph Smith is far less important to me than the behavior of his followers. This has obviously become a front burner issue because of the candidacy of Mitt Romney, who I respect TREMENDOUSLY. A few years back he interviewed my brother for a position at Bain. My brother was SO impressed that he told me about the interview!
My first choice is still the true conservative Fred Thompson, but we'd be darn lucky to have Mitt the Mormon as our President!

Jingoist

Yes I agree. Thompson or even Hunter if he had a chance. But I would put Romney third. I had liked Huckabee but he seems to be kissing up to the left so much, I'm afraid we might have another Jimmy Carter on our hands. Although he too, I would put before Hillary. Incidently, did you read my post where I defended Romney politically?

Hi old pal Bob,
First let me mention that the well-known title 'most High God' means little unless there are also less High Gods.

Now I will paste the following from the LDS FAQ page at http://www.jefflindssay.com:

[quote]
Isaiah 43:10 says "before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me." ... Idols are formed all the time, so the Lord is not referring to idols when he speaks of Gods who are not formed before or after Him. Since God is the first and the last and has always existed, actually nothing can be formed before or after Him. Literally, this verse does not rule out other godlike beings (such as the kinds that are mentioned many times in the Bible), but gives preeminence to the Originator of all, before whom no other being, divine or otherwise, was formed.

Isaiah 44:6-8 states that God is the first and the last, and "beside me there is no God.... Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no God; I know not any." I think this is easily understood in the same sense as 1 Cor. 8:5. Toward that end, the word "beside" needs consideration. McGregor and Shirts explain that it "is used to translate a Hebrew word that could just as well be rendered 'apart from' or 'away from' or even 'not associated with' or 'in preference to.'" (p. 127) Thus, the passage can be taken to mean that all beings, even divine ones, are subservient to God (none are apart from Him) and that we should not have any god in preference to God the Father.
[unquote]

There is much more on this question at the website.

Bryan in AZ