Huckabee Has "Cult" Following

New York Post ^ | December 31, 2007 | Jean Macintosh

[ansel12]

“Like it or not, every candidate has a “cult following”! Where’s the surprise in this?”

---

I wonder which one’s following is listed in all of the books about Cults?

[ansel12]

“We’re not going to have to handle snakes or something if Huckabee is elected are we? :^)”

---

You don’t know anything about America’s largest non Catholic religion?

Did Harding, Truman, Carter, or Clinton handle snakes?

[Star Traveler]

You said — “PS: If you and your ilk continue to rail against the sincere, and often very educated members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as evil, non-Christian cultists, don’t be surprised when the day comes that the secular politicians start persecuting Nicean Christians as un-American, dangerous right-wing radicals. At that day, Mormons will stand by and with you in protecting our Constitutional rights to religion. But you might feel a little chagrin.”

Look here..., the Christians have not begrudged any other religion from starting their own ways and teachings and doctrines and “whatever” about the kind of religion that another group wants to perpetrate and adhere to. That’s not the issue here. You’ve got that freedom of choosing whatever “religion” you want.

What is at issue here is very simply that the religion that you’ve chosen to adhere to (its teachings and doctrines and even its “holy scriptures”) — totally differs from what is the basic, historic and foundational Christianity.

Now, what you (or anyone who does adhere to these teachings and doctrines of the Mormon church) do is come in and say that what Christians teach and what they have for doctrines are *wrong* and are not the kind of Christianity they should be teaching. What you say is that it is a corruption of the (so-called) “true Christianity” that you have (supposedly that Joseph Smith) restored, by the angel that visited him and gave him the plates by which he was able to produce the Book of Mormon.

Well — right there — you’ve basically admitted that you don’t have the basic, historic and foundational doctrines of Christianity. You’re saying that what these folks (who do adhere to these basic and foundational teachings) are teaching the “doctrines of man” and not from the Bible (even though your church has “extra-Biblical materials” for your authority that the Christian church does *not* adhere to).

You’re talking about of both sides of your mouth — *at the same time* — saying that “we’re Christians” — but — “you’re teaching the wrong Christianity” that isn’t right.

You’ve basically set yourself off — against — the basic, historic and foundational Christianity of the centuries, from the time of Christ — by saying that what is being taught now is *wrong*. And then — you wish to have the label of “Christianity” to “paste onto your doctrines” — which don’t adhere to those basic, historic and foundational teachings of Christianity.

So, when it comes to the right of those to choose whatever religion they want to practice for their own personal faith— the Christians will be “right in there” with everyone else (the cults groups and the Christian groups and the Buddhists and so on) to support the right of those to freely choose their own faith and practice (because that is also a “historic Biblical imperative” too).

BUT, what the Christians won’t accept — is that the teachings of the Mormon church is at all the “teachings and doctrines of basic, historic and foundational Christianity”. The Mormon teachings and doctrines are *so far removed* from those Christian teachings and doctrines — that it is *unrecognizable* as Christianity.

Thus, “freedom of choice” in one’s religion has *absolutely nothing* to do with what I’m talking about. The *ability to distinguish* a cult group from basic, historic and foundational Christianity is *entirely* what I’m talking about.

Regards,
Star Traveler

P.S. — Jo, I don’t know if any of your group is interested in the “distinguishing” of Mormon theology and teaching from basic, historic and foundational Christianity. If so, you could let them know about this. I’m sure that the *point* can be made that it is not *bigoted* to defend one’s *doctrines and teachings* as something *totally different* from another group, especially when it’s a “cult group” — such as the Mormon Church (and one that keeps trying to “cloud the issue” of the “distinction” between the two...

[RetSignman]

[silly religious wars]

I agree but whenever there’s an election process for the presidency the democrat media’s attention will be focused on the REPUBLICAN”S faith or lack thereof. The democrat candidates have and always will get a pass, reference Gore/Lieberman, how much media fear was stirred up to the possibility of a Jewish man in the next highest position in government? As I recall, they declared it a breakthrough in politics.

Politicians from both sides AND the media should drop the religious ‘wars’ and try to remember when we ALL meet our Maker, it won’t matter if you are Baptist, Catholic, Jewish, Mormon, Buddhist or any of the many, many derivatives, we can leave all our books behind because the only book that will be opened on that day is His.

[CindyDawg]

Hey Luke. Got scripture for that? We are all brothers and sisters and must stand together as Christian rights are being attacked but even though everyone has the right to believe as they choose, I hope you won’t be offended when I suggest to everyone that they check out what they hear and read here, in scripture in their Bibles.

[claudiustg]

The NXIVM group is America’s largest non-Catholic religion and claims Harding, Truman, Carter and Clinton as devotees?

Oh, my!

[ansel12]

You think that Huckabee is changing religions?

[MrArbitrage123]

No, I think there is plenty of historical precedent because Christianity was thought of a “cult” of Judaism back in the time of the Apostles and early church.

It is fitting that she would call us a cult in that sense. Why not? He has been maligned overwhelmingly for “Christian Leader” being in a campaign ad and the scandalous bookshelf/cross in his Christmas ad.

[unspun]

I’ve seen scandalous books, but I’ve never seen a bookshelf blamed for so much.

I see that Huckabee is still driving the news — for days and days now, headed into the Iowa caucus.

[claudiustg]

Is this a papal bull or just plain old bull?

[GOP_Raider]

cult-n. A faith that holier than thou Bible thumpers don’t like and want stopped.

[Star Traveler]

You asked — “Is this a papal bull or just plain old bull?”

I’m having to figure out what you’re asking here, so the nearest thing I can come up with (since you use the word “papal bull”) is if I’m a Catholic. If so, the answer is no, I’m not.

I think you can tell from my Free Republic “home page” that I’m identified as basically “pre-pre, dispensational”. That pretty much wraps up a lot in just that statement and identification. You’ll find that others that take that designation will take the Bible as literally true (just like the “Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy” states, a “classic document”).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Statement_on_Biblical_Inerrancy

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Chicago_Statement_on_Biblical_Inerrancy

[these are two different links up above...]

These are not “papal bulls” (just in case you don’t know... :-) ... ). They are leading Evangelical spokesmen and they are confronting an issue of current-day Christianity, which has been boiling beneath the surface for the last half-century. They made an authoritative statement on the matter.

I believe you’ll find other “pre-pre, dispensaitonals” taking the same stance on the matter.

On the other hand, you won’t find Mormons taking this stance (on the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy”) at all. They will completely differ from it. And so, all the Mormon doctrines and teachings start to *radically depart* from the basic, historic and foundational Christian teachings, as we’ve had over the centuries...

Regards,
Star Traveler

[pandoraou812]

I thought about the dog too. Shaking my head again lmao...Happy New Year! ~Pandy~

[Star Traveler]

This link has some additional and informational material about the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy...

http://www.bible-researcher.com/chicago1.html

Otherwise, it’s about 98% the same material. It just gives some more historical background. This pretty much documents and establishes this as a foundational doctrine of the Christian church, overall.

Regards,
Star Traveler

[calcowgirl]

If you look at a book that is considered a “standard bearer” to the identification of “cult groups” (from the standpoint of basic, historic and foundational Christianity) — Kingdom of the Cults by Walter Martin and Ravi Zacharias

Wasn't Walter Martin the phony "doctor" who claimed to be a descendant of Brigham Young?

[Star Traveler]

You asked — “Wasn’t Walter Martin the phony “doctor” who claimed to be a descendant of Brigham Young?”

Don’t know about that. But what I do know is that his work, “The Kingdom of the Cults” is considered the authoritative work on the cults and how they are distinguished from basic, historic and foundational Christian teaching and doctrine.

You can see some information on it here —

http://www.amazon.com/Kingdom-Cults-Walter-Martin/dp/0764228218/

Now, Ravi Zacharias has taken it over from Walter Martin (since he died a while back). And Ravi Zacharias supports all the information in that book. You may recall that Ravi Zacharias was given an invitation by the Mormons to speak at the Mormon Tabernacle and a lot of Mormons praised him (seemed to like him somewhat...).

Some information on Ravi Zacharias...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ravi_Zacharias

Some information about Ravi Zacharias speaking at the Mormon Tabernacle (by invitation)...

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2004/novemberweb-only/11-15-11.0.html

You’ll note that Ravi Zacharias is the current maintainer and editor of the “Kingdom of the Cults” and supports all the information contained within it.

Regards,
Star Traveler

[Kevmo]

Huckabee has surged because he won a couple of debates and he’s got evangelical support. If a quick rise can happen to the liberal pro-life evangelical Huckster, it can happen to the conservative pro-life evangelical Hunter.

.

.

.

.

According to Intrade, the winner of the December 12th GOP debate was... Duncan Hunter.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1938773/posts

Why the smart money is on Duncan Hunter
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1926032/posts

In this poll Hunter is up 3% and even with Paul and Thompson.
http://www.wxyz.com/news/local/story.aspx?content_id=3481ef60-8195-46a9-af04-b87b907bcfdd

[yorkie]

OK - I must have missed it; what dog? What happened to it?

(That’s what I get for being mostly offline for the last two weeks.)

[Yaelle]

Puppies everywhere are quivering in fear! /sarc

[yorkie]

Oh, now I remember his son hung a stray dog and cut it’s throat and stoned it! I think I must have repressed it!

My friends all want to be reincarnated as my dog - that is how good I am to my furry kid (and all animals). That son of Huckabee is probably either psychotic or a full blown sociopath.