Posted on 12/29/2011 3:10:05 PM PST by Colofornian
U.S. Republican presidential candidate and former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney speaks during a town hall meeting at the Missouri Valley Steel in Sioux City, Iowa December 16, 2011.
Pastor Steven Andrew, president of USA Christian Ministries, is calling out Franklin Graham and telling him to repent after Graham said that it is acceptable for a Christian to vote for a Mormon.
“Graham is misleading Christians to vote against Scripture for Mormon Mitt Romney,” Andrew said in a statement...
In a recent interview with the Christian Broadcasting Network, Graham said that Mitt Romney's Mormon faith “doesn't bother me at all,” and said voters should elect a president based on the candidates' qualifications for the job, first and foremost.
In the interview, Graham called the 2012 election “the most critical election of my lifetime” and said, “You can have the nicest guy and he can be a Christian and just wonderful but have absolutely no clue as to how to run a country, you don’t want that.”
He also said that Christians need to pray for leaders in the U.S., and that we need people “who will put God's standards above everything else and who will take us back to the God of our fathers.”
But Andrew says Mormonism, the common name for the beliefs of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, is a cult, and as such a Mormon cannot lead the nation in a godly way.
"Mormonism is secretive, recognizes none others and adds to the Bible. We can't have a president missing a true relationship with God. Do we want God to bless America?" Andrew asked. Andrew is also calling on church leaders like Pat Robertson and Joel Osteen to repent for similar statements.
"We don't want Franklin to stop standing for righteousness...We respect Franklin..."
(Excerpt) Read more at christliche-radiosender.blogspot.com ...
Say what? Obviously God hears the prayers of all people. But we know from reading the Bible that God seemingly responds more favorably to those He is in an actual relationship with...versus examples like Pharisaical religious legalists whom Jesus said were of their father, the devil (John 8).
Many, including Mormon leaders, claim that if we start considering the faith of a candidate, that it might "weaken the foundation" of our country.
You mean religionists might actually prefer having a POTUS in the White House who actually knows the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob? Why, how shocking!
Do we mean that if the Living God was called upon during a Jack Bauer-like crisis by a POTUS who actually is in a vital relationship with Him...that is problematic? What?
To hear some tell it, such a candidate would NEVER be preferred over voting for an atheist candidate on faith grounds!
Which in turn, would supposedly "weaken the religious foundation" of our country?
How does that make any sense?
Were we to discuss candidates representing a broad range of alternative religions, I would guestimate that 60-80% of them do not necessarily go out of their way to slam Christianity or badly slander the spiritual reputation of Christian adherents for chunks of 170-180 years at a time. That can't be said about true-believing LDS candidates (in distinction from Jack Mormon candidates).
Simply put, the true-believing Mormon candidate who approaches us historic Christians is saying:
"You are an apostate; I am a restorationist built upon the complete ashes of your faith. Your creeds--all of them--are an 'abomination' before God. Your professing believers are 'corrupt.' Can I count on your vote then?" [See below for chapter & verse]
Conclusion: When a candidate mislabels 75-90% of his voting base's primary faith tenets and claims & reduces them to mere "apostate" status--Note that LDS "Scripture" specifically labels the entire Christian church as "apostate" and Note that 75% of people claim to be "Christians" in the more mainline/Protestant/Catholic sense--& frankly, this % is higher in the Republican party...
...Then...
...he not only shows open disdain for his voting base, but betrays his ability to inspire confidence in his ability to accurately define a major world religion.
If he cannot even accurately define a major world religion, what confidence does he inspire re: his ability to handle national security issues, terrorist issues, & negotiation issues pertaining to another world religion like Islam?
Specific citation to above: Pearl of Great Price, Joseph Smith - History, verses 18-19: I asked the personages who stood above me in the light, which of all the sects was right — and which I should join. I was answered that I must join NONE of them, for they were ALL wrong, and the personage who addressed me said that ALL their creeds were an abomination in His sight: that those professors were ALL corrupt... " LDS cannot just take or leave for this is authoritative "Scripture"; this verse originated as the supposed description of the very foundation of the Lds church--the First Vision of Joseph Smith. They claim that this is their "god's" judgment of Christians and their church bodies; they have since translated this into over 100 languages and circulated this nonsense world-wide with millions of copies.
We are electing a president, not a spiritual adviser.
The problem with Romney is that he is not a conservative. The fact that he is Mormon makes no difference to me at all.
what’s your purpose with this nonsense?
Are you mormon?
‘He also said that Christians need to pray for leaders in the U.S., and that we need people “who will put God’s standards above everything else and who will take us back to the God of our fathers.” ‘
If the leader we’re supposed to be praying for doesn’t believe in the God of the Christian Bible, this leader won’t take us back to the God of our fathers because he doesn’t know anything about Him.
(Backdrop to this principle): In 2009, a Mormon news release cited Lds "apostle" Dallin Oaks highlighting "religious freedom": The religion of a candidate should not be an issue in a political campaign
My 'Principled' Response: NUMEROUS REASONS EXIST AS TO WHY THE RELIGIOUS BELIEFS OF A CANDIDATE ARE RELEVANT. Before outlining them, let's see if Mr. Oaks applies this same standard to his own people:
Q #1 for Mr. Oaks:
Mitt Romney delivered a "Faith in America" speech in Dec 07 that discussed his Mormon faith & some of its perculiarities in early December. Q: If this was so important to not address his religion as a political campaign issue, as Mr. Oaks claims, why couldn't Romney leave "religion out of" his political talks?
Q #2 for Mr. Oaks:
If "the religion of a candidate should not be an issue in a political campaign," then somebody forgot to tell Utah and Nevada (& other Western State) Mormon voters! Why then did Utah and Nevada Mormons vote 94% for Romney?
Did Mr. Oaks address his Mormon faithful, telling these voters to stop making a candidate's religion an issue in a political campaign by voting according to such identity politics?
Don't misunderstand me. I'm not calling these Utah/Western states' residents "bigoted" or "intolerant" of non-Mormon candidates. It's a free Republic so Utah/Mormon citizens should support who they want to support. My question is not so much geared at Utah residents as it is statements like these from leaders who fail to consider the inconsistent application of their claims. I mean, Mr. Oaks implied those who think and act counter to his claims are "anti-religous freedom" simply because some voters take other-worldly commitments into voter consideration. Well, if that's the case, then how do Utah voters, and Western-state Mormon voters escape Mr. Oaks' implied labels?
I would vote for Jeff Head for president.
I would not vote for Romney.
The Mormonism is, by itself, of zero relevance.
Principle #4 - WE MUST WEIGH A CANDIDATE'S LEVEL OF VULNERABILITY TO DECEPTION - FOR THAT TRANSCENDS RELIGIOUS CONSIDERATIONS (And a candidate's level to deception in the most important area of his life, his faith, is an excellent indicator of potential other gullibilities)
We all have blinders to truth. Nobody has a monopoly on it. (But I would say the Bible has the best snapshot of God & humanity and the interaction between the two). Deception exists in the world, and when compared to trustworthy sources of truth (the Bible), deception exists as a continuum. If we agreed that a candidate belongs to the most deceptive cult in the world, then certainly that candidate's vulnerability to deception in the most important area of his life--his faith--serves as an indicator that he/she might be more easily deceived in public policy issues. "Vulnerability to deception" belongs on a character checklist! Even one 2007 poll indicated that 54% of Americans would not vote for an atheist.
Principle #5: OTHER-WORLDLY COMMITMENTS (FAITH, WHETHER IT'S TRUE FAITH OR MISDIRECTED FAITH) IS A CHARACTER ISSUE!
There's no way around this realization! To try to extract such other-worldly commitments from character is simply not possible. Time & time again folks try to hermetically seal "faith" & "religion" away from the public square as if folks checked their faith at the door or as if folks were neatly cut-up pie pieces. (Just try telling any voter that he should never weigh "character" into his/her voting-decision considerations).
It is NOT heaven down here. If you vote for the best man at the time of the election, and he happens to go to a different church than you — still he is a church-going man, still he is a man who seeks to better himself.
Is this not better than a raving Socialist Marxist Narcissist? It is only binary, however imperfect that may be.
We worked tooth and nail for Prop 8 here in California. The Mormons gave so much help, made and distributed posters, had phone banks. We worked booths at Farmers’ Markets side by side, got spat upon and slandered side by side. I was very impressed. Theology, I do NOT agree with their theology. Honorable folks, yes indeed.
This guy is an ‘always winter, never Christmas’ sort of guy. I stand with Franklin Graham.
Back to basics, I guess. People came to US to seek religious freedom and escape bigots like this pastor. Being a liberal is bad, but mormonism should not be an issue (i recognise that for some it is - they are unamerican bigots).
It is amazing that we still see open religious hatred tolerated here
It appears the purpose of this stupid thread is to post mormon spam.
See especially posts #2 & #10.
A president needs spiritual discernment to be guided by the One True God. Somebody who looks to some low totem-poll "god" is not trusting in the Ultimate God.
Also, you can't separate other-worldly commitments from character. For example, if a true-believing Mormon thinks he will be a god, there's a certain over-extension of pride going on underneath...that he could actually qualify for godhood.
Spiritual arrogance is a character issue. And character issues can be considered in voting. Especially for POTUS.
So, in other words, you're intolerant of the religious views of this pastor. How then do you escape the label "bigot" coming back upon yourself? Doesn't intolerance = bigotry?
Where do you get these licenses to be religiously intolerant? Who gives them out?
I am a descendent of Mormons.
I also stand with Franklin Graham....
Where is the hatred?
Exposing mormonISM is not hate.
Please feel free to state what hate you have seen.
And by your very statement here are you not yourself a bigot against Christians?
You didn't finish the sentence: ...by becoming a god.
You know...let's say it was the Democratic primary season from the previous election.
Imagine if Hillary Clinton had come out and declared: "I am a 'god in embryo' and I will one day join God as a peer...a fellow god."
EVERY FREEPER would have had a field day with such a declaration!
So were any Democratic candidate to make such a declaration, they would become an immediate FR laughingstock.
But leave it to some FREEPERS that just because a candidate has an (R) by them and actually embraces a few conservative principles, such a firm Mormon belief gets 100% bypassed.
Btw...the "god in embryo" statement is a common Lds "prophet" phrase used to describe Mormons. The Mormon "prophet" Kimball probably used it more than the others.
Sorry. But I don't vote for 'would-be gods.' And I'm frankly shocked like this pastor is that Evangelical leaders wouldn't be bothered by that either.
Since when do people presenting themselves as idols in worship competition with the One True God get such a free pass?
None of this has to be a problem. Let the flop earred Marxist Muslim win and nothing will matter after that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.