;)
tagged: Baptist Life, Barack Obama, Current Events, Evangelical Vote, Geoff Baggett, John McCain, McCain, Obama, Presidential ElectionObama and the Evangelical Vote
Posted by Geoff Baggett in News & Culture
Goodness, what a difference a year makes. A decade of loaning money to people who had absolutely no hope of actually being able to pay those loans has finally caught up with the United States economy. Big surprise. Not really …
Last July the Dow Jones Industrial Average topped the 14,000 mark. This afternoon (Tuesday) it closed at 9,447 … down an unbelievable 33% in just fourteen months. Today’s loss (and yesterday’s loss, for that mater) occurred in spite of the $850,000,000,000 (I wanted everyone to see the actual number of zeroes) bail out plan signed into law on Friday by President Bush. It seems that printing more money may not have been the best idea.
Millions of ordinary folk are watching their retirement nest eggs melt away. I’m one of them. I’ve watched my 403b dwindle by about 25%, despite the investments I have made over the past year (which take it up to about the 40% range). I finally had enough bleeding, and moved my funds into a “safe” category today. So, I guess you can chalk up part of today’s sell-off to me. Sorry.
And now federal government is lending money directly to financial institutions as of this morning. We have just taken the most drastic steps toward socialism ever in the history of the United States. And the financial woes are not limited to the US. Markets and banks worldwide are in meltdown mode. It’s as if someone flipped a cosmic economic switch, just in time for election day.
And unless there is some unforeseen meltdown … and that’s what I believe it would take, a complete and utter meltdown, or some unbelievable, irrefutable piece of news … in his campaign between now and November 4, Barack Obama is about to receive the keys to the White House. I honestly believe that you can officially stick a fork in John McCain. He is done. This recent, immediate, catastrophic worldwide financial meltdown has sealed the deal. I don’t think it will even be close.
I guess the thing that has surprised me the most is the support that Obama has received within the evangelical community. Just try typing the phrase, “Obama Evangelicals,” into your Google search line and watch your screen light up. And grab a capuccino … it will take you a while to read them all. Indeed, there are some who predict that the white evangelical vote will actually carry this election for Obama.
I’m no expert, but I believe that it may be the white, evangelical, college student vote … first time Christian voters … that will carry this election for Obama. I know too many of them. Almost all of the Christian college students I know are voting for Obama. Interestingly, most cannot really tell me why, based upon policy or political conviction. The buzz-words I keep hearing are, “change,” “young,” “fresh,” and “African-American.”
All economic and policy differences aside … I’ve examined Obama’s views and his voting record. I’ve tried to entertain the notion of casting a vote for Obama. But I simply cannot fathom doing so. His stand on abortion, especially his votes and comments regarding the Illinois law to protect babies born alive during abortion procedures, is the deal breaker for me. And it’s not that I am a great fan of McCain. I’m not. I desperately desire an “other” category. There is no candidate in this election who truly represents my views and my faith. It is quite an election-day quandary.
So, I’m wondering about your thoughts. What are people saying/thinking in your churches? Do you know Southern Baptists who are actively campaigning for Obama? Have you had discussions? Are there any “deal breakers” for you in this election? What will an Obama presidency look like … from a faith perspective?
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
;)
Brother Geoff,
In this election, your deal breaker is my deal breaker. I do believe in all candor, that every Christian will have to answer for their AWOL (Absence Without Leave) on the front-lines of life. One wonders how much sooner slavery would have ceased if we had back-boned Christians during those days, including our founding fathers. How nice of General Washington to release his slaves upon his death. “Oh, you must understand the context of the culture of that day.” That’s baloney.
And there’s no context of the culture to understand here either. Future Believers are going to look at you and me and rightly question our moral resolve, our commitment, and our back-bone. Could a scene in Heaven take place where we find ourselves visiting with one who met such an early demise? And if so, can they not rightly ask us: “Where were you?”
Outside of Steve Camp, the blogs I frequent are oh so absent in regards to posting anything about the most basic of human rights…life. I guess like voting, driving, etc, that is now considered a privilege.
So I commend Impact for going where others have chosen not to. “Now John your tone seems a bit harsh, I mean we put pink and blue crosses outside our church every January…oh wait, we don’t even do that.”
Frankly, neither candidate is going to do anything to save lives but one candidate may appoint someone who eventually will.
And finally, I’m not sorry for the rant and there’s no smiley face to put at the end on this one. There’s nothing to smile about.
I am opposed to abortion as it is practiced in our country, no if’s, and, or buts. However: I have said this on other blogs, and I will say it here: abortion, like middle names, is a non-issue in the 2008 election. Why? Because like it or not, it is the law of the land. The “pro-choice” folks (as they euphenisticly call themselves) won this one. And having a Republican President 2008-2012 will no change that that having a Republican President 2000-2008 (and Congress 2000-2006) did. The reason is that (1) it would require a majority, not only of Supreme Court justives, but a host of like-minded judges in the Federal system at the district and appealate levels as well. And (2) a judge who goes into his/her confirmation hearing in a Democrat-controlled (plus moderate Republican) Congress and admits that he/she wishes to change Roe v. Wade, especially on theological rather than legal grounds, will not be confirmed, period, end of paragraph.
That means, that as this country now stands, the only way that would happen is through judgeship candidates who either lie or refuse to answer questions (which likely, though not definitely, will cost them confirmation), AND require them to form a vast, right-wing conspiracy to get the job done. Bottom line: Roe v. Wade will not be overturned as long as we who are conservative evangelicals trust in “horses and chariots.” When it can be overturned is when we convert enough to make life a grassroots movement in America or at least until we have done something to take care of all those unwanted babies.
In other words: I say vote on the issues that matter, and don’t let “deal-breakers” be things that won’t make a difference. If you want to vote for McCain because you think he would handle the economy, the war, terrorists, diplomacy, the environment, etc., better, from a Christian perspective, and be a more effective leader, that’s fine. But don’t vote for him because you like the notion that he may cause Roe v. Wade to be reversed, because it ain’t gonna happen that way.
John,
It’s not that I have much hope that either of them would accomplish much to reform or reverse Roe v Wade. It’s the fact that Obama has a fundamentally different worldview from me, and the fact that he does not even see the value of the life of a baby in its mother’s womb says, to me, that he lacks a fundamental moral compass.
I would add that I share little in common with Obama’s economic ideas, either. But the basic lack of value for human life identifies him as a “no go” for me.
I agree with Mr. Fariss completely. Furthermore, I suspect that for many republican politicians, a pro-life stance is nothing more than lip service to secure the christian vote. Something to think about: the Bible clearly commands us to stand up for the poor and helpless – the unborn certainly qualify. But, then again, so do the already-born. I feel that conservative politics often promises to rescue the unborn (something which is undeliverable – see John Fariss above) while steadfastly insisting it is not the state’s business to look after the poor. A capitalist system is sometimes an excuse to regard the poor as lazy and deserving of their fate.
So, here I am, a Bible-believing Christian. I oppose abortion, I believe the state should take care of the poor (within reason), I oppose unjust and unnecessary war, I believe homosexuality is a sin, I believe we should be good stewards of our environment. You tell me, which Biblical command is more important? How should I vote? If I believe a person to be an unfit leader, should I vote for them because we agree on a few issues? I agree and disagree with both candidates.
While I respect the opinions of Geoff and Mr. Daly above, I am weary of the idea that this election is a “no brainer” for a Christian. I take my opinions about abortion – that it is wrong and a great evil – very seriously. But I am not sure the candidate who agrees with me is (a) able to do anything about it or (b) the best leader of our country in all other respects.
Thoughtfully and prayerfully considering the coming vote,
Tim Cook
Tim,
Where did I refer to this election as a “no brainer?” I think I clearly elucidated my struggle with my choice for this election.
Wow! You take on capitalism. So, do you think it is the state’s responsibility to take care of the poor? Who/what is the state? Define poor …
If you guys haven’t done so, you should read the late Larry Burkett’s 1991 book, The Coming Economic Earthquake.
SBC Impact,
Are yall moderating comments? I have tried to make a comment three times, and it doesnt come thru?
Also, the stop spam thing yall use is very hard to read at times. It has a line running thru the words that messes up the spelling. Very hard to read.
David
Well, that one went thru. What in the world is going on?
David
Tim Cook,
How can you say,”I believe the state should take care of the poor (within reason).” That’s socialism, which is a kissing cousin to communism. Do you want the Govt. that involved with everyday living? And, what should the Govt. be doing to take care of the poor? And, who’s money should we spend to take care of the poor? Yours?
Tim, I’m just having a hard time understanding statements like what you’ve made. Can you please help me understand why you believe that the govt. should be taking care of anybody? Shouldnt they be taking care of themselves? You do. I do. Why shouldnt they? I mean, really, Tim…why should the govt. be involved in the welfare dept.????
Also, I will not vote for Obama due to the abortion issue, and due to the raising taxes issue, and due to his connection with the homosexual agenda, and some other issues about the govt. sticking their noses into places where they dont belong. So, I will reluctantly vote for McCain as well. Palin makes the ticket more attractive for me, but my vote will be a reluctant, hope to keep liberalism out of the White House vote. I just cant vote for Obama…a man who is so opposed to a Christian worldview.
David
finally!!!!
To me, recognizing that you do not share Obama’s economic ideas are something concrete, because something will happen economically during the administration of the next President–whether a Hoover-like depression/recession or a Roosevelt-like recovery. That is an issue that should be a deal-breaker on one’s decision, depending on which candidate you believe is more likely to pull a Roosevelt rather than a Hoover. But–and again this is for me–deciding which of two candidates agrees agrees with my position on an issue that neither of them can do anything about is not the deal breaker.
Something I’d like to see a discussion on is healthcare. That is, or IMHO should be, a Christian issue. There are way too many people in this country, yes even citizens, who currently have no health insurance or inadequate insurance. Part of that even speaks to the abortion issue: millions of these aborted babies would be born into poverty and drugs, and would have no healthcare except what we the taxpayers overpay for. And I don’t know which of the candidate’s plans would be better, if either. How about a blog outlining each candidate’s proposals, and how we see (or don’t see) each as a Christian issue?
David,
No, we’re not moderating. Everything looks fine from our end. That new computer of yours must be running a bit slow.
Brother John & Brother Tim,
If Believers did/do all that is in their power to do in ending this atrocity then it indeed would matter not where one might cast their vote.
Hey Volfan,
Is it a Biblical value NOT to take care of the poor? If I value giving aid and assistance to “the least of these” and I “vote my values,” what’s the issue?
I am encouraged by notable pro-lifers like Douglas Kmiec, a very conservative legal scholar and thoughtful opponent of same-sex marriage, who have come out in support of Obama. Here’s what Kmiec (who was denied communion for his endorsement of Obama) recently wrote:
“We are all called to build a culture of life – but there’s more to it than just hoping that the next Supreme Court justice somehow deals with Roe v. Wade. A bad economy is threatening to human life. Women facing the moral tragedy of abortion – are facing it, now, today – and they need a supportive community and tangible help, not condemnation.
As Ronald Reagan’s legal counsel and as a dean and professor at Catholic University and Notre Dame, I have worked to put the law on the side of life. But after 35 years, a new approach is needed. Barack Obama’s strengthening of support for prenatal care, health care, maternity leave, and adoption will make the difference. Studies confirm it.
We are but a few weeks away from a new beginning in America. I am inspired by what Senator Obama calls “the promise of America — the idea that we are responsible for ourselves, but that we also rise or fall as one nation in the fundamental belief that I am my brother’s keeper; I am my sister’s keeper. That’s the promise we need to keep.” That is the change we need right now. And it is within our grasp.”
Also, I know of two Southern Baptist pastors who in their private time are actively campaigning for Obama. Both are located in different parts of Georgia.
Thanks, Tim. I had finished my next entry, but was interrupted before I could submit it, else I would have mentioned your comments in it.
BTW David: Obama may not be “your kind” of Christian, but he is a Christian, so please be careful of saying that he is opposed to a Christian worldview.
John,
So, a man who accepts liberation theology, and abortion, and homosexuality is a Christian? I would have to wonder about his salvation.
Geoff, I like my new computer.
David
PS. I think I can read this anti spam word…let me seeeee…..cornyne scored, or something like that.
I saw in “The Body,” a great film starring Antonio Banderas, in which a character says, “God has no place in politics.” I find that statement to be untrue. Indeed, God does have a place in politics. The problem lies with us, not Him. Issues are complex, and to try to assess this election and these two candidates in a few short posts and replies is not an adequate treatise on the topic.
Each of us weighs the candidates, issues, and parties against our values and what we believe the Bible says is right and good and true. The difficulty lies, though, in determining how to make that judgment.
Take the issue of life. If you value life, you have to take more into account than abortion. What about the people losing their lives in Iraq and Afghanistan (not just Americans)? Even the economy plays into this. Economic (and even foreign policy) decisions can drastically effect world hunger rates. It is possible that a president against abortion could approve an economic plan that would cause worldwide poverty levels to rise resulting in the deaths of millions who are unable to get the food, shelter, and medical treatment they need. What if more people would die under a president who is against abortion than under one who is for it?
The issue of life is not as clear cut, in the grand scheme of things, as we would like it. Abortion is a very important issue, but for some religious conservatives, it is the only issue. McCain could promise to use nuclear weapons against Iran and North Korea and superinflate the dollar to collapse our economy, and those people would support him all the way so long as he was against abortion and the other candidate was not.
According to my economics professor, my vote doesn’t matter unless it creates or breaks a tie, and Geoff is probably right that Obama is going to win anyway. Still, I know who I’m voting for this election, and unlike some of my evangelical college compatriots, I’m voting for McCain.
Shocking? It may be because 1) I am a young college student, and 2) I’ve been apparently making an argument for Obama. Honestly, at one point I would have voted for him, but I believe McCain does stand in line with more of what I think than Obama. Will the world end if Obama becomes president? No (at least, it’s ending is not hanging on him winning the election or not). Vice versa McCain? No. We as Christians in America are not going to live in peace and tranquility forever. Sooner or later we will stop fighting for our rights to have nativity sets in our yards and cashiers to tell us “Merry Christmas.” Sooner or later we will begin to serve Christ in the place and time where He’s put us. I find it interesting that Jesus spent more time focused on people and following and living the will of God than politicking. Maybe we should live that way too.
Brother Andrew,
You said:
Sooner or later we will stop fighting for our rights to have nativity sets in our yards and cashiers to tell us “Merry Christmas.” Sooner or later we will begin to serve Christ in the place and time where He’s put us. I find it interesting that Jesus spent more time focused on people and following and living the will of God than politicking. Maybe we should live that way too.
I say:
AMEN!
Why are evangelicals lukewarm on McCain? I’ll likely vote for him, but I don’t understand the antipathy towards him, and the inexplicable euphoria over Palin. Has anyone watched her performance lately? Can anyone who supports her because she’s a “good Christian” look me in the eye (virtually speaking) and tell me she’s being 100% truthful about her own record, and the record of her opponents?
Is McCain soft on abortion, or same sex marriage? Or do evangelicals dislike him because Dobson and Rush told them so?
Republicans have ruled this country for 20 of the last 28 years. Abortion is still the law. They have paid us lip service and danced evangelicals on the end of a string for decades, and we continue to dance.
Tell me David, does the phrase, “Judge not, that ye be not judged” sound even slightly familiar to you?
I’ll give you a hint: the “rest of the story” is, “For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother’s eye.” It’s from the Gospel According to Matthew, chapter 7, verses 1 -5. And the speaker. . . let’s see, I think his name was Joshua. . . or Yeshua. . . or Jesus, something like that.
John,
Jesus said,”Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.”
John 7:24
Jesus told us to make our judgements righteous, good, solid judgements.
Also, Matthew 7 and other passages….we shall know who is saved and who is not by the fruits that they bear. We should be fruit inspectors.
John, there’s nothing wrong with righteous judgements and fruit inspecting. I dont condemn Obama…I’m not God. I’m not sending Obama to hell…I’m not God. But, there aint nothing wrong with me saying that I doubt that someone, who believes in the murder of innocent babies, and who believes that we get to heaven by doing good works, and affirms homosexuality as ok, when God’s Word clearly calls it sin, is saved. I really doubt that the man really understands salvation. Now, only God and Obama know for sure….but, it sure doesnt look promising to me.
Bill, we’re voting for McCain because we dont want a liberal in the White House…. especially with a democrat controlled congress. What a recipe for a disaster. And, Bill, we’re saying that we like Palin’s conservative views. Yes, she’s probably made mistakes in her life, and yes, she’s probably not as qualified as some to be President; but we like her values and worldview.
And, I really dont think that people are for McCain and Palin because Dotson and Rush told them to be for them. Are you calling conservative people mindless idiots who just follow the advice of a certain, intelligent few????
And, Bill, in case you havent noticed, the dems have controlled congress, or have at least had enough in power to block things. Also, the Supreme Court has not been changed enough, yet, either. This is another reason that it’s important to not elect a liberal into the White House…..he’ll appoint some more Judges who dont value human life, and who support big govt. in things like gun control and the PETA crowd’s thinking.
David
Government has grown massively under Bush. Last night McCain suggested the government buy up all the bad mortgages, so that people who shouldn’t have gotten these bad mortgages are able to keep their homes with lower payments. McCain supports the 800b bailout. McCain is not for smaller government. Bush is not for smaller government.
David: When I talk with many Christians they sound just like a Fox News commentator. Obviously not all are mindless idiots, but many, many evangelicals get their worldview from Rush Limbaugh and James Dobson.
My initial question was why evangelicals DIDN’T like McCain.
I stand by my assertion that Republican politicians have almost no interest in stopping abortion. Their interest lies in appearing to be against it so we’ll vote for them. A good strategy. It works every time.
Is it government’s position to help the poor?
No – that is the church. The presence of poor shows the poor way that the church has dealt with them. The government has very limited resources (as we all should know by now).
War is hell, but it is what it is – war. Our soldiers are not unaware of this – they signed on the doted line, they were not conscripted. The United States as a global power attempts to mitigate innocent life as much as possible, more so than any other power, even at the possible loss of life of our own soldiers. The World War II mass bombings of such places as Dresden, Hiroshima, and others was indeed sad – but each did their part to end the war so others would not die in a greater war. If the United States as a power is unwilling to place its treasure and lives on the line to defend the civilians of her own nation, then it will be our citizens who will be ducking truck bombs and smart bombs and we then will not deserve to live freely. If Obama had his way, then our troops would be home now – and Iraq would be probably be entering the next dark age. Put that in your rubric whenever you contemplate your vote and “innocents” perishing.
Which leads us to abortion. The mere fact that “nothing can be done” or “will be done” is irrelevant – and it cringes me to hear believers spout off such nonsense. What these candidates offer is a world view. Which has the world view of “life.” I am sorry – the deaths of 4,000 American troops and thousands of Iraqi’s and others compares like a Sunday School picnic in comparison to the 40,000,000 + dead human beings that have been slaughtered on the sacrificial altar of expediency – most killed for the most selfish of reasons. Will the killing increase or decrease with the next President? If Obama takes office, what will be the result of his executive orders? McCain’s executive orders? Will God judge you in how you deal with this issue and with whom you vote? It seems to me that Judas betrayed Jesus for 30 pieces of silver. For which economic package will you sell some if not many of the next generation of potential human beings by voting for the most radical pro-choice candidate in recent memory? Will God give you a “mulligan” in such a stance?
The prophet Amos spoke to the people of Israel during the reign of Jeroboam II, a time of prosperity during the reign of an evil king – a time when “they sold the righteous for silver, and the poor for a pair of shoes.” The blood of the innocent call to God from the ground. Judgment is coming – and will start in the house of God.
Rob
David,
With all due respect, there is a difference in opposing or disagreeing with a person’s position and making a judgment on that person. When you say, “So, a man who accepts liberation theology, and abortion, and homosexuality is a Christian? I would have to wonder about his salvation,” you are making a judgement on the person. Granted, in your subsequent post you claim, “I dont condemn Obama…I’m not God. I’m not sending Obama to hell…I’m not God.” And had you left it there, it might simply be a case of using words in a sloppy way. But then, for all inmtents and purposes, you reverse yourself with, “But, there aint nothing wrong with me saying that I doubt that someone, who believes in the murder of innocent babies, and who believes that we get to heaven by doing good works, and affirms homosexuality as ok, when God’s Word clearly calls it sin, is saved.”
What I am trying to communicate is that we can disagree without being disagreeable. And one of the first steps there is to focus on what action you disagree with, rather than a blanket statement focusing on the person, doubting a person’s salvation, in effect attempting to judge him.
And David, part of my comment about Palin is that she is misrepresenting her record and Obama’s record. So yes, I’m questioning her values, at least in that regard. Now, I don’t think she’s being any worse than any other politician to come down the pike, but her activities don’t entirely square with a Christian worldview.
Which part Bill is Palin misrepresenting Obama’s record? His association with Bill Ayers? (no relation)
Rob
Rob: Check sites like factcheck.org. Lots of falsehoods being thrown around by all sides.
Rob,
Since you mention your non-cousin. . . .
(Sorry, I couldn’t resist that. FYI, the American kid who was caught, I believe it was in Afghanistan, with the Taliban (I think it was) renamed himself “Fariss” so feel free to take a cheap shot at me. After all, it is an Arabaic word/name. Whether or not my ancestors came from there, I don’t know. I do know we have been in America since at least 1768, and great-great-great-grandaddy William Fariss fought in the Revolution, and on our side, by the way.)
Anyway, Palin said that Obama “palled around” with Bill Ayers, a domestic terrorist. When Ayers was with and forming the Weathermen, Obama was maybe 8 years old. Now he is a history professor at a college in Chicago, and lives in the same area as does Obama. Their association seems to have been limited to Ayers having a coffee or something of the sort when Obama was first running for–I forget, either the Illinois house or Congress. No one has been able to say they had any more association with each other than I do with a 7th Day Adventist who live a couple of blocks down the street from me, or my Catholic next-door neighbor. Obama’s wife is on the same hospital board (I think it is) that Ayers is. I’ve been on boards, on a much smaller scale, and I didn’t have a clue who some of my fellow board members were or what their past was. None of this exactly qualifies as “paling around.”
Bill,
Non-response on your part. Put it out, or stand down.
John,
It is a fairly documented issue about the Weathermen, and how Ayers (my non-cousin
)
was clearly, clearly guilty of terrorism – bombing the Pentagon, New York police precinct offices, and Superior Court judges and their families – go look at this article by another University Professor, one John M. Murtagh when the Weathermen bombed his house when he was nine years old (http://www.city-journal.org/2008/eon0430jm.html). Here is the money quote:
If this was the only instance of one wayward “acquaintance” John then okay. But would you call Obama’s 20 year friendship with Jeremiah Wright an anomaly whose recent activities only now has caught Obama’s attention?
Rob
This is one white, evangelical, conservative SBC pastor in the deep south who will be voting for Obama in November. I am convinced that many others like me will be voting for him too, but don’t dare admit to it in public for fear of seeing their inbox fill up with innane forwards!
Today, John M. Murtagh made the following statement on Barack Obama’s relationship with William Ayers:
“When I was 9 years-old the Weather Underground, the terrorist group founded by Barack Obama’s friend William Ayers, firebombed my house. Barack Obama has dismissed concerns about his relationship with Ayers by noting that he was only a child when Ayers was planting bombs at the Pentagon and the U.S. Capitol. But Ayers has never apologized for his crimes, he has reveled in them, expressing regret only for the fact that he didn’t do more.
“While Barack Obama once downplayed his relationship with Ayers, today his campaign took that deceit one step further. Barack Obama now denies he was even aware of his friend’s violent past when, in 1995, Ayers hosted a party launching Obama’s political career. Given Ayers’ celebrity status among the left, it’s difficult to believe. The question remains: what did Obama know, and when did he know it? When did Obama learn the truth about his friend? Barack Obama helped Ayers promote his book in 1997, served on charitable boards with him through 2002, and regularly exchanged emails and phone calls with him through 2005. At what point did Barack Obama discover that his friend was an unrepentant terrorist? And if he is so repulsed by the acts of terror committed by William Ayers, why did the relationship continue? Any honest accounting by Barack Obama will necessarily cast further doubt on his judgment and his fitness to serve as commander in chief.
“Barack Obama may have been a child when William Ayers was plotting attacks against U.S. targets — but I was one of those targets. Barack Obama’s friend tried to kill my family.”
And you can hear the crickets chirping.
Doug – being “white” is irrelevant as it is also irrelevant that Obama is “black.” The issues of life and death are in the balance. My friend, receiving inane forwards will be the least of all of our worries if there are many more people who will do what you say you will do. Keep this response handy and look at it again next year if Obama wins. His associations alone should disqualify him, as well as his being in the employ of NARAL. That is not exactly the action or belief of an evangelical minister of the gospel.
Rob
Rob,
Good grief. What John said about “paling around with terrorists.” Her statements about her non-support for the bridge to nowhere is misleading at best. Palin’s claim that Obama voted to raise taxes on families making 42K a year is false. Palin’s claim that Iraq troops had gone down below pre-surge levels is false.
My point isn’t that she’s a slimier politician than others, just that she’s a politician. They mislead for a living, especially during election time.
Is it your contention that she has not been misleading? Do you believe everything she says? If not, then my point is made. I don’t care if Christians vote for her and McCain. My only point is my wonder about evangelical’s giddiness over her candidacy because she’s a “good Christian.” (something evidently evangelicals think McCain is not.)
I hope I’ve “put up” enough, but I suspect you won’t think so.
Rob,
I’ll check the site out, and keep an open mind. But even so, does some degree of political association equal “paling around”? Nothing I’ve seen so far makes it so in my book, and that was the allagation from Sarah Palin. I know Ayers was a radical who today would called a domestic terrorist, and no doubt a very bad man, at least way back when. And I’ll have to second what Bill said in #32.
A lot of people claim friendship with politicians, and politicians (and actors) claim friendship with many people. But their definition of “friendship” and mine tends to differ, and I suspect yours does too. But isn’t it Mr. Murtagh who says they are friends, not either Obama or Ayers? I understand his hurt and anger, but doesn’t it seem likely (or at least possible) that his pain is coloring his perception?
OPh, re: Wright–I don’t get too upset by that. I understand hyperbole at least similar to what he said is relatively common in the African-American church, and is understandable consiering their experience. And as a person with some Native American ancestors and others who fought under Stonewall J. and Marsh Robert in the Late Unpleasantness, I can understand anger toward the USA. My grandfather all but disowned one of his nieces because he thought the fellow was from Kansas City, Kansas.
John,
I’m not putting myself up as better than Obama, nor am I God to condemn him to hell; but, there is absolutely nothing wrong with me, nor with any other Christian, saying that they doubt whether someone is saved, or not. If someone tells me that they’re saved, a Christian, yet they drink and run around with whores and come home and beat their wife; then, I’ll say that that person probably does not really know the Lord. If someone tells me that they’re saved, yet they havent been to Church in 20 years just because they “got out of the habit;” then I’ll doubt their salvation, too.
When someone tells me that they’re a Christian, and yet, they believe in liberation theology…a works based religion…then, I will doubt their salvation. And, I believe that I’m right to do so.
John, I guess you have trouble with John the Apostle and Jude and James the Apostle? They all said that you can tell a tree by the fruit that it bears. They said to test the teachers and make sure if they are false or true. They said that a faith without works is dead…is not true faith.
I guess I’ll just stick with the Bible.
David
Rob,
The attempt to MORAN Obama with Ayers just ain’t sticking. If it does stick, I’ll gladly come back and eat my words. Right now, the Obama pals around with terrorists thesis is coming across as an act of political desperation. I’m still waiting for John McCain to man-up and do some of his own dirty work instead of leaving the smear-job to Sarah Palin.
You asked in #23: Is it the government’s position to help the poor? Your answer was a loud NO. I respect your right to hold that opinion. But, at the end of the day, it’s just an opinion. Many fine Christians believe as you do. But, I’d venture to say that as many (likely more, don’t have time for statistic digging) fine Christians believe that it is both the role of the government and the church to help the poor.
Volfan,
Did you just compare yourself to John, Jude and James? LOL.
Aaron,
As with all things, you think in “political” terms. The issue is not if it is “sticking” or not. The issue is “is it true.” If it is true Aaron then you should return and eat a little humble pie regardless if it “sticks”. When did Obama know that Ayers was a terrorist? How could he not know considering the circles he was associated with? including Jeremiah Wright? Come on guys, I did not fall off the turnip truck yesterday. Of course Aaron you love to skirt the real issue – that Obama believes that choice means that a woman can have a partial birth abortion – something that even the AMA is a bit squeamish about. Aaron, honest to goodness, give me a call whenever that first child of yours comes. Let’s see what you think about “choice” and those who support it then.
Tell me what the trillion dollar socialist redistribution-of-wealth “war on poverty” program has brought us besides a mountain load of debt? The result Aaron has been the building up of the dependency class and almost the total destruction of poor families – specifically African-American families. You rail against the slave masters of the southern states as well as the segregationist and Jim Crowe, yet are fairly well mannered and compliant about these dear people and their continued enslavement to the government dole and their political masters who seek to maintain the status quo. I guess you really do not have much to say about modern day slavery then do you? How my heart aches for them to get beyond their enslavement into freedom with Christ and improved self-esteem beyond what some tell them as truth.
It was the continuation of this philosophy that has lead to the current economic crisis – that is “the poor need housing so let’s force lenders to give it them irrespective of their ability to pay” that has brought us to the point of economic collapse. As with everything there when there is a Cause then there is an Effect. What is the Effect of government largess towards the poor? Marxist theories look great on paper – yet in practical terms lets be honest – they have never worked because they are based on a false premise(s) – the infallibility of man and the non-existence of God. Think about it.
John,
Read again the statement by John Murtagh made today (#31). Also go checkout some of the documentation about Ayers and Obama and their relationships together on various boards after September 11, 2001 – after Ayers made his comments to the NYT (http://www.southernappeal.org/index.php/archives/4687). Also know that one of the Obama campaign spokesman admitted to Time Magazine that Obama knew about Ayers and his background before he began working with him
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yxlZ8xhkEZ8). The question is this: does Obama believe is is appropriate to have professional relationships with unrepentant terrorists who planted bombs that threatened people’s lives and fortunes? And what kind of judgment is this coming from a candidate seeking the highest office in the land? You can “palley” around all you want – and you can let this slide if you wish, and you can call people ignorant and stupid who would even ask the question. You claim allegiance to Christ – so what would Jesus say?
Bill same to you. I asked you a specific question in #26. You did not answer it except in a really ignorant way without dealing with the substance of the matter, with exception to Pallin’s sins. So – put up, or stand down.
By the way – people who plant bombs seeking to destroy people or things are terrorists yesterday, today, and tomorrow. If you don’t get that, then who else will you apologize for?
Rob
Rob, You brought up Ayers, not me. I gave you examples of how Palin is misrepresenting Obama’s record and her own. Which part, specifically, is ignorant?
I don’t know what “with exception to Pallin’s (sic) sins” means, but that no doubt is due to my ignorance.
Is it your assertion that Palin is being completely truthful in her public campaigning? If not, my point is made. If not, perhaps you could “put up.”
The last sentence should say:
If so (you think Palin is completely truthful) perhaps you could “put up” and prove me wrong.
While I have misgivings on either side with regard to the coming election, I must say that the Bible COMMANDS us to JUDGE those who call themselves Christians.
I think many of you have bought into either 1) a cursory reading of scripture, or 2) the world’s only verse they like to quote: “Judge not, lest ye be judged.”
We MUST judge McCain, Palin, Biden, AND Obama, because they ALL claim to follow Jesus.
We must hold them to account for their actions and their words with regard to their resemblance to Jesus.
Why has McCain not submitted to believer’s baptism? He attends North Phoenix Baptist Church, yet will not be baptized. Why? Is his 100% pro-life stance rooted in something other than a strong faith in Christ? Should that matter when we vote?
Is Barack Obama’s connection with liberation theology (i.e. Marxism with Bible clothes on), the homosexual rights movement, and the abortion rights movement enough to make Christians question the legitimacy of his faith in Christ and his supposed trust in the Word of God? Should this matter when we vote?
Is Biden’s “anti-catholic Catholicism” up for judgement from believers who view Catholicism as an aberrant form of Christianity?
Is Palin’s faith legit? Do we view her as a real sister in Christ, or do we think she is faking it like the others might be?
Which ones of these four do we honestly think is born again? And again I ask, does it matter when we vote?
***************
For me, I trust only Sarah Palin’s testimony as legitimate after examing what she has said about Jesus in the past and present.
I think Obama has been surrounded by false preachers of a false gospel and the Bible says that they should be accursed. For Obama’s sake, I hope his Bible study has outstripped his black liberation theology study. I pray that he see the light of Jesus Christ. If the people on this post do not understand what liberation theology is, they should do themselves a favor and look it up before they vote.
As far as Biden and McCain, they seem to be in the same camp: nominal Christians. McCain is an Episcopalian who attends a Baptist church, and Biden is a Catholic who doesn’t obey his church’s teaching. Neither has really charted a Jesus-centered course in their politics or their lives. While I would give McCain the slight nod for favoring pro-life politics, but I am quite unsure of where he gets his notions about life.
My wife and I pray for the four of them regularly and I lead my church to pray for the four of them during a focused time every Sunday morning.
This is MY JUDGMENT. I am required by God to make judgment of those who claim Jesus Christ. This seems to me to be the first step in making a decision for whom to vote.
Then it seems that we should ask whose policies measure up to the Bible standards well.
It seems to me that we have two choices: Socialism-lite and Socialism-on-steroids.
Apparently many folks have forgotten their history when it comes to socialism. DO they not recognize the corruption and abuse that has come with nearly every country that has charted a course in this direction?
Obama explained his policies to a young girl at an election rally recently: If your neighbor had no pizza, and you had two pieces, then what would you do?
Of course the pat answer is: Give my neighbor my extra slice! But before we get carried away, do we think we should empower the government to go steal everybody’s extra slices and then distribute them to those that the government thinks are most needy?
Generosity is different that forced re-distribution of wealth. So to those who think that the “government” should help the poor, then how does the government get the resource to help the poor? By taxing somebody, of course. Who do they tax? Anybody richer than you? Obama has deftly reintroduced class warfare into our politics. He learned a great lesson from the Bolsheviks and the (FD)Roosevelts.
Shane
Also, I have a difficult time dealing with the pro-war (in general) postition on BOTH sides.
To those Obama supporters: Did you hear him at the debate?
He supports WAR everywhere BUT Iraq. Iraq is unpopular, of course, so we can see that. But to kowtow to hawkish voters who happen to be sick of the Iraq war, Obama positioned himself as pro-war EVERYWHERE else.
Iran, Darfur, a hypothetical repeat of Rwanda, Pakistan, more troops in Afghanistan.
He is just against the war in Iraq, but not anywhere else.
The anti-war crowd must be frustrated with this, but I guess they just dance with the one who brung ‘em.
McCain is against the war everywhere where he knows better, though. For example– Beirut and Somalia. He can spot potential failure and has opened up about it from time to time. Now he happened to be right on these issues about the potential failure of these miliary initiatives, but is this what we want as Christians? An astute warrior?
I have misgivings about either one of these policies from a Christian perspective. What happened to promoting peace?
How do we as Christians influence our govermnment to promote peace around the world, instead of war? Knowing it’s not all the US’s fault, for certain, but I am convinced we CAN be a proponent for peace and not war as believers and as a country.
I have been reading Jeremiah the past couple of weeks and am floored at the talk of God using Babylon as his sword to bring judgment on Judah, Moab, and even Egypt. Then God turns around and tells Babylon, that when He is finished using them, He will make their own destruction certain.
I wonder if God might have used America like this in some ways? He has used the US to break Nazism, much of Communism (which interestingly enough many Central Asians thank God for in breaking the back of Islam in the former Soviet republics!), and now the US is possibly being used against militant Islam.
But are we (as in America, not the church) the heroes here or just a tool in the hand of God while we await our coming judgment?
Can we (as in the Church, not America) then fight for peace in the midst of this and promote the Prince of Peace as the only rescuer in this world?
Help me out on this brothers and sisters.
Together in the Task,
Shane
I dont want the govt. to steal my slice to give it to someone who doesnt have one. Now, if I voluntarily give it…that’s another matter.
BDW, not comparing myself to John, James, and Jude…although they were just men like you and me….but instead, just trying to follow their example.
David
As in all instances Rob, you can’t have a conversation (with me) without finding a way to hurl an insult in my direction. Classy, guy – really.
I’m sorry if my one, pithy comment (which included no insults) got you so riled up. Actually, I implied that you were a “fine Christian.” I find it extremely odd that you consistently talk down to me as if you know me especially when you make comments about “whenever my first child comes.” What do you even know about my personal life and family? Nothing. And I know absolutely nothing about you.
Assuming there is a next time, I’ll remember not to engage you in dialogue. I’m feeling some deja-vu. Anyways, I apologize for taking a moment to respond to your comment. It wasn’t worth it.
Volfan,
I think that your point there is the main difference btwn private citizens or churches supporting the poor vs government support of the poor.
You and I aren’t the first to make this point, but it seems that we need to keep making it over and over again.
Helping the poor voluntarliy is not the same thing as a government taxing people against their will to help the poor in the way the government sees fit.
Power is a corrupting influence. It amazes me how fast some are to give more power to the federal government.
God warned the Israelites against having a king like everyone else: He told them that the king would tax them heavily and take their sons off to war.
When we want to have a heavy-handed governemtn that “saves” us from our problems, then we are in the same boat as Israel was when they were asking for a king.
Probably preaching to the choir on that one, though.
Take care,
Shane
I want a
pro-life (beginning to end),
pro-family (parental rights and traditional marriage),
pro-peace (not just against the Iraq war),
limited-government,
corruption-fighting (oversight is not the same as regulation, mind you),
oppression-fighting (protecting orphans and widows),
alien-loving (just like the Bible commands),
law-enforcing (just like the Bible commands),
Christ-honoring,
Bible-believing
candidate for President.
Anyone?
Anyone?
.
.
.
.
.
.
Where’s Ron Paul when you need him?
Shane: When, in our memory, have we had a president as you describe?
Brother Bill,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1p00ASxejlE
Shane: Isn’t it your experience that American christians are pretty much pro-war? I mean, most evangelicals I know are also hard core Republicans.
FTME: That was terrific. Entertaining and painfully true. Thanks.
Aaron,
I am crying buckets. Truly I am. I am feeling deja-vu too. You see, it truly is okay by you to send pithy comments to others whenever you wish – yet when one sends a few back your way you pack up your bags and go home. You can play the martyr if you wish, but don’t feel that anyone needs to feel sorry for you. I don’t. And in fact I suspect that the martyr game is merely a dilatory tactic on your part. What you should know is that I have been dealing with those who hold your philosophy for longer than you have been alive. Cheap rhetorical tricks and fallcious arguments of non-relevance are the blunders of a non-critical response and the tool of desperation. I truly have thought better of you. You have let me down.
I also note (via deja-vu) that you really do not wish to engage in dialogue. Not really. You want to spout of your rhetoric without really engaging a soul. When someone confronts you with some uncomfortable counter-points of data(i.e. abortion, marxist redistribution-of-wealth, the unbiblical continuation of the dependency class that does not help but destroy and enslaves the poor particularly a large portion of African-American families) you then make it about me rather than the issues. That Aaron is called an Argumentum ad hominem (abusive). Really useful for politicians and partisans who often skirt the real issues – but not really helpful for a bulletin board dedicated to “truth.” Here is hoping for some real intellect and the use of “reason” rather than a partisan hatchet job.
Rob
Bill,
I dont know many, if any, Christians that are pro-war. Nobody that I know loves to go to war. Nobody I know is just dying to get into a fight where people are injured, maimed, and die. But, most of us out here believe that war is necessary at times, and when it’s necessary, then we’re behind our troops and support our country.
Bill, the next time you go to the store and you’re not having to speak German and do the heil Hitler salute….thank God that we have some people who are willing to fight tyrants and evil dictators and crazy Kings.
David
This “discussion” has gotten too polarized. Virtually everyone is attacking and sniping and hitting low blows, instead of discussing the issues. If I cannot (1) engage in brothers and sisters about this issues or (2) be an anxiety-reducing presence in the discussion, I will bow out, but without surrendering my convictions. The first is no longer happening in this one, and the second was a long shot at best, and is all shot to _____ now. Consequently, I will take a chill pill, and hope that the rest of you do too. May we all remember the grace with which Jesus approached those whose lives needed change, and remember that he regularly met with “sinners and publicans” as well as Pharisees.
David: Please don’t pull that crap on me. You don’t know me from Adam. I’m not a pacifist and I don’t play one on TV. This is why it is impossible to dialog with you. You have all the answers and all the right slogans to put people like me in their place. Your first paragraph was sufficient, but you had to get in the dig.
John,
Good point. Sorry I’ve not been around to host the discussion.
Everyone … play nice. Let’s disagree, even enthusiastically, but do so with honor and decorum.
Funny … my “captcha” security words are “Wildly” and “war.”
Then Bill – answer David’s first paragraph. Don’t use his second as an excuse not to.
Your statement that started that particular vein was the following: “Shane: Isn’t it your experience that American christians are pretty much pro-war? I mean, most evangelicals I know are also hard core Republicans.” David answered it. Your statement would call into question most every evangelical calling them bloodthirsty warmongers. Prove it beyond your absolutist rhetoric and what I percieve is an aversion to “traditional” viewpoints.
Also Bill – I sense in most things that you are straining a knat while swallowing a camel. The points “on integrity” of what people say in political campaigns could be uttered by partisans from “their point of view” – “Did someone do this” “Did someone say that” while may be interesting, it does nothing for the real issues of truth. For example – Does Obama support partial birth abortion? If so, how does a believer who holds the values of life dear deal with a person whose view of an unborn person as merely a choice to be rid of? Deal with those issues of values if you will.
Shane,
Excellent points in #44-45. Thank you.
John,
Good points, yet clearly I would say that you have not addressed some of the exchange on dialogue of the matters of truth. I am clearly waiting for your points on them.
Rob
Rob,
I don’t wish to “dialogue” with those who find new and creative ways to insult me.
I regularly have great conversations with those who share your politics and theology on several Baptist blogs especially SBC Today. I’ve engaged in several great conversations along the way here at SBC Impact – conversations that you were not a part of. The other guys don’t make a habit of snide insults. It’s hard to “engage in dialogue” when immediately, right off the bat, the person you are trying to have a conversation with uses words that are condescending, insulting and downright disrespectful.
I do not, however, wish to further derail this thread. In light of Geoff’s directive to “play nice,” it’s best that I bring this to a halt. I will definitely remember to steer clear of your comments in the future here and elsewhere. I think I’ve said that before but I honestly forgot. I hope you will be decent and do the same. If you feel the need, my e-mail is aaron_weaver@baylor.edu.
Rob: I see that you are a contributor here, which I guess gives you the authority to direct the conversation. So be it.
1. My question was for Shane, not David. That doesn’t preclude him from answering it, but nor does it obligate me to answer him.
2. David’s first paragraph wasn’t a question, so it alone doesn’t necessarily warrant a response. His perception is different than mine. Since I had already stated my perception I don’t see the need to restate it.
3. His second paragraph was a dig, pure and simple. Perhaps I should have ignored it.
4. You have consistently ignore my question about whether you think Palin is campaigning truthfully, always steering the conversation back to Obama. I don’t know why you are under the impression that I am an Obama supporter when I stated that I was a McCain supporter. My point has consistently been that they are all playing fast and loose with the truth.
Bill,
I’m not sure we’ve ever had a candidate like I want. At least not one in the general elections. Ron Paul came close, but he is not as alien friendly as the Bible commands.
I feel bad for what Palin is being asked to do. I sense that she is a sister in Christ and I don’t feel confident about anyone of the other three’s faith in Christ. I believe that she will come to regret some of the Sarah-cuda tactics she is becoming known for.
Obama has plenty of things to criticize, but campaigning evenhandedly probably won’t get America’s attention. Too bad. Maybe we don’t deserve a good president, when we won’t listen to anything that is not sensational. Not that McCain fits the bill perfectly either.
Maybe we need a taste of Socialism to teach us what we really need in the Federal government. However, we are just as likely to get hooked on all the subsidies from the government. Who knows? I am glad we don’t belong to any kingdom of this world.
Together in the Task,
Shane
Will someone help me understand “just war” theology in light of Jesus’ commands in the Sermon on the Mount?
I have my ideas and I lean toward pacifism. (That’s when I’m not waving my flag and hoping that the US Navy will send a tomahawk down Osama Bin Laden’s throat.) I honestly struggle between the two extremes.
Thanks,
Shane
Shane,
In your attempt to understand war being just, and why a Christian could see the necessity of war; dont forget that it was God who told the Israelites to wipe the Canaanites off of the face of the Earth in the OT. In fact, many wars were fought because God, Himself, directed the children of Abraham to fight…even destroy…certain people groups.
In the NT, you need to also see that Jesus will come back to wage war with the armies of the world led by AntiChrist. And, Jesus will wipe out the armies of this world. In fact, it says in Revelation that the blood will run as high as a horses bridle in the valley of Megiddo.
So, war is something that God initiates at times, when it’s just, and thus war can be justified and necessary at times. Certainly not desired. But, necessary nonetheless.
David
Bill,
While a contributor, I can do things “wrong” and if need be will be called down upon for it. If I have directed this thread in a wrong way, my apologies to Geoff and to you. Now let me attempt to answer your questions:
1. Okay – I will ask the question in light of your answer to Shane. See my further comments in #55. Specifically you asked Shane about his “experience” that most American Christians are “pro-war” and that most of them are “hard core Republicans.” I must infer that is your experience and understanding. What do you mean by “pro-war?” and “hard core?” Can one support the troops and their mission without being “pro-war?” Can Christians believe strongly about biblical issues and not be “hard core?” Those are fairly loaded words – explain them a bit.
2. David’s statement was a listing of data: A great majority of most evangelical are not “pro-war” but understand that sometimes war is necessary but not to revel about – and if found by our leaders necessary then to support the mission and the troops carrying out that mission. If you clearly stated your view, then I missed it. I guess I can infer what you view is from your comments to Shane, but by golly you got to prove it beyond your opinion. Do you have proof that American Christians are “pro-war” (see my desire of your explanation in item #1)and what in the blazes is wrong about being ‘hard core’?
3. It was a dig. You could have ignored it. Truthfully I would not be able to. You have me there
4. I believe that all politicians (besides those who have too much to hide) are trying to be truthful from their point of view. My point is despite what you consider fudging about their opponents positions, what exactly are they sharing about their own world view – and have they consistently applied their world view by their votes? What scares me is not what Palin is saying about Obama. What scares me is what Obama has done and said for all to see.
Aaron,
I sent you an email.
Rob
Rob: Fair enough.
My experience with evangelical Christians fall along primarily SBC and various flavors of Charismaticism. Among those I am acquainted with, there is a strong and pervasive anti-muslim, pro-war-with-any-muslim sentiment. Specifically, there is, almost to the person, an immediate indignation if one questions the Iraq war for example. Most still believe there are WMDs in Iraq. Most believe Iraq had something to do with 911. Essentially, they believe anything out of the current administration’s mouth. Mention torture, and you’ll get not horror, but justification. That is what I mean by pro-war and hard-core. Although the voices are different, you would swear you were listening to a Rush Limbaugh transcript being read. There seems to be a fundamental inability to think critically about alot of issues. Ask them what they think about a certain issue, and they’ll tell you what Sean Hannity and Bill O’Reilly were just saying about it. My experience is my own, which is why I asked Shane if his experience is the same.
I appreciate your benefit of the doubt for politicians. I do not believe the truth is their friend at all. Like Shane, I am sorry for Sarah Palin, because she doesn’t seem to be a good attack dog and rumor monger. It doesn’t seem to fit her.
One question of mine that has gotten lost in the noise, is why evangelicals don’t like McCain.
Bill,
McCain aint conservative enough for a lot of us.
David
Brother BDW,
I do like to dialogue with you. We have agreed on things in the past and probably will in the future. I will always try hard not to demean you personally and play fair. Your contributions are typically well researched and thought out,…so I enjoy the dialogue.
It is unfortunate that this election in America leaves us with little economic solutions or any responsible direction in government. Neither, Obama or McCain, brings long term fundamental improvements to government. Both are working from essentially the same economic philosophies (one better understood than the other) and misunderstand the benefits of competition and biblical stewardship. So therefore, none will be applied in either of their tenures at the helm. This is truly a frustrating time in American freedom, accentuating the need for the gospel and the peace that accompanies its power to make changes in the heart…and a call to train our children with the truth.
Although it seems that Obama and McCain have little understanding of how to build a “culture of life”, Obama’s fundamental understanding of “rights” should be appalling to any American that truly understands the philosophy employed by the writers of the constitution. Obama, if privileged to work in that original legislative body, would have been overwhelmingly silenced by the American ideal of freedom espoused by the framers, who were not enticed by the incentive of taxation as defining their result as many of today’s elected officials.
Obama’s promise for America seems to be tied only to getting money to induce this so-called future change. He is an astounding speaker and communicator, but has little American ideals. When he says “I am my brothers keeper” he is advancing the governments ability to oversee that advancement, not the brother independent of the government. He uses religious rhetoric to play havoc on the hearts of the emotionally led. It does work.
We would all do well to familiarize ourselves with history and the ten planks of a not too distant past social icon…..
Specifically, Obama’s current self-proclaimed agenda (easy enough to read on his website) supports or is advancing seven, or portions of such, out of the ten tenants of an economy expoused by Marx. Marx was not a simple, confused, or “Koresh” type individual. He was well educated, well respected and a very good communicator, that was interested in educating the children of his day. He succeeded.
We simply need to understand history to help us select the lesser of two fundamentally flawed evils this go around.
Go easy on me Vol….
Blessings,
Chris
Thanks for the comments about Christians and war.
Let’s remember about what volfan said: that Jesus will come and wipe out the armies of this world (of course he’s right–that’s what the Revelation says) and also let’s look at Psalm 110: Every authority will be put under the footstool of Jesus.
That includes the US military. It will be defeated by Jesus. The authority of the US and all the other governments will be replaced by the authority of Christ. “The kingdoms of this world have become the kingdom of our Lord!”
Let us remember that we do not belong to the kingdoms of this world–not even America. If we are bought by the blood, then we don’t bleed red, white, and blue. We are only to be in conditional submission to this government as temporarily established by God.
I may have just positioned myself as a traitor or a heretic to some, but I seek to submit myself to the Word of God rather than the popular concepts of civic religion or patriotic-Christianity.
I’m not in concrete on my pacifist-leaning position, but I am solid on the belief that I do not belong to (while I must conditionally submit to) the USA.
I’d love more comments on just war theology. I’ve read a bit on it, but the opinions are so diverse that I’d love some real people’s thoughts on what the Bible teaches in this arena.
Together in the Task,
Shane
Oh yeah. . .
Add “good steward of resources” to my wish list for a presidential candidate on comment #45.
Anyone interested in crashing the libertarian party with piles of Christians?
Then we can change the one plank of their platform difficult to swallow–abortion “rights.” There is a small contingent of pro-life libertarians who are very Reagan-esque in their politics.
Could we effectively join them?
Here’s a new case for politics:
Democrats, at their best, believe in and promote “generous” government.
Republicans, at their best, believe in and promote “lean” government.
Libertarians, at their best, believe in and promote “limited” government.
Can’t we balance the three philosophies like this:
Local government: “Generous,” Democratic-style governance, if the locale approves.
State government: “Lean,” Republican-style governance as the state chooses.
Federal government: “Limited,” Libertarian-style governance, giving as much authority to citizens and the several states as possible.
???
Or am I just crazy-thinking?
ps-My reCAPTCHA words are “morbid stand” hahaha
Brother Shane,
Pacifism is unbiblical. We are commanded to help those who are oppressed, not to be passive. However, nonviolence and self-sacrificial love is not unbiblical. It is possible to take nonviolent action in an effort to seek justice. As people of God we should be peacemakers and ministers of reconciliation.
May His peace be yours in every aspect of your life,
From the Middle East
FTME,
I’m processing. . .
This seems to be the right mix of biblical mandates for a Christian to engage the troubled world in the political and societal realms.
No to pacifism, but yes to nonviolence.
We do not wash our hands of oppressed people but insert ourselves, even at our own risk for their well being. Ministers of reconciliation, not agents of war. Wow–it sounds like Jesus, doesn’t it?
Thanks. I think I am more radical than I was just 5 minutes ago.
Together in the Task,
Shane
PS-Having friends serving in Muslim dominated regions has forced me to reconsider my dogged Republican-style, America-first foreign policy that I onced espoused.
Obama sat under Jeremiah Wright’s teaching for 20 years. Ever listen to one of his sermons?
G-d–m America is just for starters as one of his sermon topics. There is even worse. (The born alive bill he opposed as point man 2x is another huge concern. He supports infantacide. Whose next? unproductive old people?)
How can anyone believe that is Christianity?
And what experience does this man really have compared to McCain?
I know he will be elected. God help us. This man is messianic.
And we wonder how the anti christ is going to do it. (Hope, change, etc…and the people fall for it)