The Highway
Posted By: John_C Vote preference as a sin - Thu Oct 28, 2004 9:28 PM
By voting for Bush for President, I'm I sinning. There are some who advocate that I'm being unequally yoked by my vote, thus I'm sinning. I don't give them much creedance, but should I?
Posted By: Peter Re: Vote preference as a sin - Fri Oct 29, 2004 3:47 AM
Quote
John_C said:
By voting for Bush for President, I'm I sinning. There are some who advocate that I'm being unequally yoked by my vote, thus I'm sinning. I don't give them much creedance, but should I?

Do you mind explaining how voting for Bush (or Kerry, or whomever) is a sin? What rational is being used to determine this?
Posted By: Pilgrim Re: Vote preference as a sin - Fri Oct 29, 2004 3:48 AM
PREPOSTEROUS...... and if nothing else, a horrid misuse of Scripture. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/rolleyes2.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />
Posted By: MarieP Re: Vote preference as a sin - Fri Oct 29, 2004 4:34 AM
As we say around here when we're totally stumped by someone or something, "Do WHAT?!"
Posted By: TheClingingVine That "yoked" business is definitely a reach. - Fri Oct 29, 2004 1:29 PM
To explain the view of the one who has posited this (obviously not I!), it's that when we vote we are giving our assent to the proposed agenda of the candidate, signifying our willingness to have that person act on our behalf in Congress (or wherever), therefore the actions taken by said candidate (assuming he wins...how one is "yoked" to a losing candidate I can't imagine) are, in effect, our actions. Thus the yoking together of candidate and voter.

John, have I 'splained it reasonably well, d'you think?
Posted By: TheClingingVine However, seeing as how you brought this up.... - Fri Oct 29, 2004 1:40 PM
Let me ask this forum about voting for Bush or Kerry:

Ought it not make a difference to us that both Bush, based upon past experience, and Kerry, because he's RC and liberal, see nothing wrong with avowed Christians participating in, and thereby tacitly promoting, false religions?

As Doug Wilson noted in his blog: "Bush has observed Ramadan in the White House, conducted a polytheistic worship service in the National Cathedral, offered reverence in a Shinto shrine in Japan..." (To be fair, I'm not sure it's quite fair to say that Bush conducted that service in the National Cathedral, though he certainly was a participant, if memory serves.)

There's no doubt in my mind, and I mean none whatever, but that the LORD detests seeing those who claim His name giving respect to religions which deny Him. He is offended by this. Deeply offended.

Do either of those gentlemen intend any harm? Surely not. But one is RC and the other is Methodist, so both hold to the popular "We're ALL God's children" mentality so prevalent today. It's doubtless this conviction, that God loves everyone equally, which dulls their conscience to the offense they give the LORD when they honor God-denying religions with their attendance and attention.

But we know better.

Because I know better, I simply cannot bring myself to vote for either man; the one based upon his actions over the past four years, the other based on common sense.

Trouble is, America is deeply respectful of and addicted to religious syncretism, therefore it probably is just as well that one of the two win. Seeing as how America is Officially Syncretic (is that the word?), and the LORD detest syncretism, refusing to share His glory with another, how can this be reconciled with our faith?
Posted By: Wes Re: Vote preference as a sin - Fri Oct 29, 2004 3:43 PM
John,

I don't think your sinning by voting for someone who is less than perfect.

IMHO we put too much emphasis on which candidate is more righteous. Neither candidate can stand up and declare they are righteous and unfortunately their records indicate they both can be very pragmatic. I realize that Bush has made more references to God and to prayer than Kerry but he's also identified himself with pluralism which is contrary to a biblical world view.

When we vote for the President of the United States we're voting for a candidate whom we believe has the best ability to lead this country, uphold the constitution, and promote policies that provide for the welfare of the citizens. Keep in mind we're not trying to find a religious zealot. However, having said that, I still believe we need to decide between which candidate will take the higher moral ground on issues that need to be addressed. Clearly Bush has taken that path more decisively than Kerry.

Remember we're only voting on a man to lead a country/kingdom of this world. He has to be a qualified leader first and foremost and make decisions which promote liberty and justice for all. Remembering that both Bush and Kerry are mere men I pray frequently for them and for all men in positions of authority as we are encouraged to do by Paul in his letter to Timothy. (see I Tim. 2:1,2)

I look at it this way. I'd rather have a qualified athiest doctor perform surgery on me than an unqualified Christian. So whether the President is a Christian or not is not the real issue, the real question that needs to be answered is whether he's qualified to be a good leader, make wise decisions, and uphold the laws of the land. We've had some great leaders in the past. May the Lord guide us in our voting and bless us with good leaders who respect that all authority comes from Him.


Wes
Posted By: gotribe Re: Vote preference as a sin - Fri Oct 29, 2004 3:49 PM
Since this conversation was essentially imported from another discussion board, I would like to quote from what I deem is an excellent response. I have received permission from Dave, aka Zerrubabel to cross post his thoughts on this subject. They express my thoughts much better than I can. . .

Quote
Bush is a flawed Christian man who is trying to straddle the line between being a good Christian and be the President of all Americans. He is not a minister of the Gospel and that is not what he was elected to be. Is he wrong? Of course. Will this mistaken approach harm the country in the next four years? No.

The choice is between Bush and another man who claims to be a Christian. The other man's policies are clearly anti-Christ and downright dangerous for us and our children. If we were electing s national Pastor I would agree with Wilson. We are not. We are electing, primarily, a Commander-In-Chief during war-time. His wishy washy theology is not nearly as bad as the supposed Christians actions and public beliefs. Bush is a struggling Christian. Kerry believes good is evil and evil is good and his record reflects it.

With our children’s future at stake, Supreme Court Justices retiring and a host of other issues, it is clear that Wilson is missing the trees for the forest. I will vote for my children’s future so that they can live to defend the faith not for a dangerous short sighted high-mindedness that is deadly for our country.

We are electing a Commander-In-Chief not a Pope. We have two real choices. One that reasonable Christians who live in the real world can and should vote for. The other is a choice for a weaker country, a weak national defense, governance by the UN, abortion on demand, etc.

The next four years are critical for our children and grandchildren. This Christian version of the Ivory tower mentality is deadly. Those who don't support the better man are, in this case, supporting the other guy by default. It is that simple. The choices are: Do the right thing do the wrong thing or don't do anything. And that is what a throw away vote is - doing nothing. Worse it is helping the worse man.


Here in MA I am supporting a local Republican candidate for State senate because he is pro-life and committed to fighting gay marriage. Oh but he is a devout Catholic! So I should not vote for him since he has some screwed up ideas. Is it better to let the liberal, pro-death, pro-sodomite "marriage" guy win again? SHould I write my wife's name in since her theology is correct,e evn though she has no chance of winning? Is that the right thing to do.

As I see it it is like a soldier in an army ready to go fight the Nazis saying "I will not oppose the Nazis because the general leading us into battle did not speak out against the enemy in a manner that I believe is appropriate and he also said he thinks Jews are not so bad. And since he is a Christian he should know better. No, I think it better to allow my comrades to increase their risk of death by not firing on the enemy who is firing at us. This is my principled stance. So what if the Nazis win and end up killing my family and friends down the road. At least I stood my ground."

We are to fight the battles we are given the best way we can. we fight tomorrow's battles tomorrow. Right now we need to fight to ensure tomorrow. Not throw it away.
Posted By: MarieP Re: Vote preference as a sin - Fri Oct 29, 2004 4:55 PM
Wow!

<img src="/forum/images/graemlins/applause.gif" alt="" />
Posted By: Pilgrim Re: That "yoked" business is definitely a reach. - Fri Oct 29, 2004 5:05 PM
TheClingingVine,

My thinking goes along with that of Wes, which I have expressed elsewhere a number of times on this Board and elsewhere. The leader of a country is one who is best qualified for the task. Currently there simply are no "true" Christians who have those qualifications. Thus, it is obligatory for me to vote for the candidate who is most qualified for the task. There is no perfect candidate and never will be; even if there was a "true" Christian man running for office. We are ALL riddled with sin and make erroneous judgments, even when they are done with the best of intentions. A cursory reading of the Old Testament in regard to God's appointed leaders of Israel will clearly make the point. God alone is all wise and without sin. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

In His Grace,
Posted By: Pilgrim Re: However, seeing as how you brought this up.... - Fri Oct 29, 2004 5:16 PM
Quote
TheClingingVine said:
As Doug Wilson noted in his blog: "Bush has observed Ramadan in the White House, conducted a polytheistic worship service in the National Cathedral, offered reverence in a Shinto shrine in Japan..." (To be fair, I'm not sure it's quite fair to say that Bush conducted that service in the National Cathedral, though he certainly was a participant, if memory serves.)
First of all, I have to consider the source of the man who has evidently been voicing some criticism(s) concerning Bush and/or Kerry and how a Christian should vote. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/rolleyes2.gif" alt="" /> Aside from his heretical views concerning the doctrine of justification, methinks what he is espousing is a typically Postmillennial/Reconstructionist worldview; i.e., a "Christianizing" of this earth, something which I obviously find spurious.

The United States is NOT a theocracy; never has been and never will be. Would it be great to have a qualified Christian as President? Perhaps. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/scratchchin.gif" alt="" /> However, it would be doubtful if anything the man held to be true could be enacted into new legislation and actually applied. Methinks the Civil War of the 1800's would pale in comparison to the rebellion that would ensue should someone with Wilson's beliefs and agenda were to get into office. [Linked Image]

In His Grace,
...confusion over my viewpoint, for you are not the first to think I'm saying to vote for the most 'Christian' candidate, so to speak.

No, no, no!

What frets me is that the LORD is displeased and dishonored when one of His own participates in pagan worship events...surely we agree on that?

Yet the American president these days tends to have to do just that to demonstrate his tolerance of and repect for all religions, and that is something no Christian should be doing.

Look, Jeff, you ever see me setting off to attend a Shinto service, please grab me and stuff me in the trunk of your car or something until it's over, okay? I would hope I'd never be so lost to what pleases my Savior as to do such a thing, but hey, one never knows.

I could mentally fritz out for a bit.

Just as I'd want you, or any other Christian friend, to stop ME, insofar as it's within their ability, from dishonoring the LORD, I'm not going to aid and abet those men, both of whom claim Christ as their Savior, from doing so by voting to put them in a position where they'd be called upon to do so, especially as I know they would.

Given the present depth of religious syncretism in America today, I'd prefer the president to either NOT be a professed Christian, or be a Christian who will flat out refuse to attend any such God-dishonoring event.

First, because it is detestable in the sight of the LORD.

Second, because it's not good for their souls.

Third, because the president represents ME at those functions, whether I like it or not.

See what I mean?

You needn't agree with me, mind...most people don't, after all...but surely you can see where I'm coming from?
Quote
Third, because the president represents ME at those functions, whether I like it or not.
My president only "represents" me in the things he "properly" represents me in. As far as my personal beliefs, he nor any other leader, fully represents me--not even my own denominational leaders. If you ever find a president that fully represents "everyone" of your particular views then one thing has happened--you have become president.
Posted By: janean Re: Vote preference as a sin - Fri Oct 29, 2004 7:02 PM
My thoughts exactly Wes! Well said.
Posted By: Ruth Re: It must be my writing recently which is causing... - Fri Oct 29, 2004 7:34 PM
I have to agree with Wes and Joe on this issue! I believe our duty is to vote for the most qualified man for the job. One who will lead the country to the best of his ability, with the best outcome to the welfare of the it's citizens in mind. We are not voting for a religious leader and cannot judge him as such! If any of us were held up to public exposure in all our actions, such as the president is, would we stand up to such scrutinizing as perfect Christians?

It would be impossible, realistically, to get any legislation enacted, without some compromise. Comparing Bush's record so far against what we know of John Kerry's voting legislation record, gives a good idea of who is better qualified to lead America in a better direction. To vote a "throw away" vote is worse than not voting at all in my opinion, as we must account for all our actions!

Just my 2 cents!

In His Hands,

Ruth
..."perfect Christians"! And it has nothing whatever to do with anybody being a religious leader.

We seem to be compartmentalizing Christianity for politicians, which is rather an odd thing to do, ISTM. I get the impression that while attending a polytheistic or multifaith event in a private capacity is wrong, it's okay so long as it's part of a politician's public duties.

So we have Kerry, for instance, insisting that while he privately considers abortion to be wrong, his public stance on it is the opposite.

Isn't that essentially the same rationale that underlies the idea while a Christian ought not attend worship services honoring false gods, if he does so as a public figure it's somehow acceptable? One set of rules applies in one area, while another set of rules applies in another?

ISTM wrong is wrong. If Christians are to stay away from occasions where false gods are honored in their private life, they ought to keep away from them in public life as well.
Quote
It would be impossible, realistically, to get any legislation enacted, without some compromise. Comparing Bush's record so far against what we know of John Kerry's voting legislation record, gives a good idea of who is better qualified to lead America in a better direction. To vote a "throw away" vote is worse than not voting at all in my opinion, as we must account for all our actions!

Eh. I'm not so convinced. I don't think Pres. Bush is the best qualified for the job, as he has enacted and supported many policies which I consider detrimental to our national welfare. I can't vote for him in good conscience. Kerry, on the other hand, is even worse.
Posted By: TheClingingVine Isn't it amazing how pessimistic we all are? - Fri Oct 29, 2004 10:24 PM
(BTW, Kyle, this is not directed at you...I'm just too darn lazy to take the trouble to put this elsewhere.)

Why are we so convinced that the LORD cannot work through Kerry? Scripture plainly shows that our LORD has a definite taste for drama (as nature demonstrates with each and every lightning storm and rainbow!), and occasionally it pleases Him to set His stage so it looks as if surely His will can't be done now.

Then ka-BOOM!...He shows how nothing and no one can say Him nay.

Wouldn't it be something were Kerry to be elected, then come to true, saving faith in Christ, become set on fire for Him, publicly repent of his past positions and votes, courteously but firmly refuse to set one toe into any multireligious gathering, and generally be a powerful witness to a baffled, probably horrified world?

Gives me chills to think about it.

The details are in the LORD's hands, not Bush's or Kerry's or Nader's or Peroutka's or any human hands.

Resting on the total sovereignty of the LORD means I can watch the election returns with placid interest. "What will our almighty LORD do next?" I wonder. "What surprises does He have in store for us?"

Mind, they might be unpleasant surprises, and if that's His will for us, so be it.

But maybe it'll be something wonderful.

It could happen. ;->
Posted By: Anonymous Re: It must be my writing recently which is causing... - Fri Oct 29, 2004 10:53 PM
And who would your perfect candidate be?


God bless,

william
Posted By: MHeath Re: Isn't it amazing how pessimistic we all are? - Fri Oct 29, 2004 11:13 PM
Clinging Vine.. Well.. while I highly doubt that Kerry would radically repent.. I guess it's possible. Still.. I'm not holding out any hope for it lol.

One good thing I see in all this, is that we do get to vote. We do get to discuss politics without fear of persecution. I got to help with taking the marriage petitions door to door this summer, and it was so much fun talking to flaming liberals! I got to hear their side, and discuss the situation. There were no real debates.. but the one thing I always said was that this was what is good about america. The petition was only to put the issue on the ballot so that we as Michiganders could vote on the issue ourselves. Even the liberals could agree with that!

That's what I think is good about this whole discussion too. We get to decide for ourselves.. of course knowing we will be held accountable before God for doing our duty or not.

I personally don't think Bush is a Christian by the way. I think that just as a catholic who converts cannot call themselves a catholic, because a true christian, once they know they should not commit idolatry, could not continue praying to Mary and the saints. It's the same with Bush. If he were really a Christian, he would not publicly or privately worship, or condone the worship of satanic idols. I'm not a conspiracy theorist though. I don't care one way or the other. God has the election in His hands. I will vote for Bush though, because I care very much about babies and old people. John Kerry doesn't. George Bush claims he does...

Michele
Posted By: Ruth Re: Not sin but Responsibility! - Fri Oct 29, 2004 11:42 PM
Hi MHeath,

I do agree with you, we do have the right to vote and I think that duty and responsibility go hand and hand with that. I believe we will never see a true Christian in that office until the new heaven and earth, because, as I said above, they would be unable to do anything, due to the compromise needed to pass ANY piece of legislation, which they would not be able to do if they stand true to their beliefs.

I don't see anything wrong with Pres. Bush attending ceremonies etc. as the country's representative, he does not have to approve of them. Did not Paul eat meat from idol sacrifices? Realistically, we are to be apart from the world, but not to neglect our civic duties and our interactions with the world!

Again, just my thoughts.

In His Hands,

Ruth
Posted By: TheClingingVine There is no such critter. - Sat Oct 30, 2004 12:07 AM
Doesn't exist, I fear.

As Scripture says, "Do not put your trust in princes," etc.

So I don't. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/uptosomething.gif" alt="" />
Posted By: MHeath Re: Not sin but Responsibility! - Sat Oct 30, 2004 12:31 AM
Ruth,

That is a valid point you made. I had not considered that. I am thinking about him being at the shinto shrine though. That bothers me a lot. Still.. I agree with you. There will be no perfect Christians in leadership until Jesus Christ! and I honestly can't wait.

Michele
...if it caused anyone to stumble. Any behavior which increases the modern day, ecumenical conviction that "all roads lead to God" should be avoided, surely. Yet what message does an avowed Christian send when he is shown in respectful attendance at services honoring false gods?

Which takes precedent, temporal affairs, no matter how lofty, or God's honor? If a Christian believes participating in a multifaith or polytheistic event is offensive to the LORD, he ought to not attend, and let the temporal chips fall where they may.

Mainly though, there should not be one set of rules of Christian behavior in this situation, yet another set of rules of Christian behavior in that situation. I strongly disapprove of a disconnect between the public and private behavior of Christians, whether in the workplace or politics or the entertainment field.

As Paul wrote: ...the sacrifices of pagans are offered to demons, not to God, and I do not want you to be participants with demons. You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons too; you cannot have a part in both the Lord's table and the table of demons. (1 Cor. 10:20-21)
Posted By: Pilgrim Re: [wailing] But I'm not SAYING they have to be... - Sat Oct 30, 2004 2:58 AM
Anne,

I do hear what you are saying and I do believe that a professing Christian should not be found guilty of dissimulation. However, methinks you would have to prove that George Bush was actually partaking in the worship of false deities; i.e., he actually offered up worship to Buddha, Allah, etc. Where I differ with you is that I believe that as the leader of a country; not the Christian Church, the President is duty-bound to attend such functions as a representative of the United States, offering unity with those of different faiths who stand against terrorism. His presence at such events does not necessarily mean he is condoning the theologies of the various religions. However, I agree with MHeath in that I do not believe that George W. Bush is genuinely converted, and thus IF he actually offered up worship to false deities, it shouldn't be a surprise! <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

All this fervor over Bush's attendance of such multi-religious events reminds me of a man who was a member, I think?, of the Church of Scotland who was excommunicated because he attended the funeral of a friend who was Roman Catholic. He went out of respect for his friend, while not agreeing with the man's beliefs in any way and to offer his condolences to the grieving family. I cannot believe that the Lord Christ would have done anything otherwise. Yet, this man was found "guilty by association"! I can't tell you how many wedding receptions I have attended with great reluctance, knowing the things that were going to take place there, e.g., heavy drinking, debaucherous music, profane speech, etc... yet I still went (made an appearance is more accurate) so as to wish the newly-wed couple good tidings.

Again, what the state of George Bush's heart was in these gatherings was I cannot judge. But whatever one chooses to do by way of judgment in his regard, then it must also be equally applied across the board to everyone who attended those ceremonies and professes to be a Christian, e.g., Billy Graham?

Lastly.... although it is indisputably true that God is sovereign and has already determined the outcome of the election, what is also indisputably true is that each Christian individual is personally responsible for the decision they make in this regard. Although God foreordained that Cyrus would destroy Israel, I doubt God would have been pleased if an Israelite who supported Cyrus! <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> We don't want to diminish God's sovereignty nor man's responsibility. They are co-existing truths, the latter of which rests upon us to do that which is right. Thus, let each man vote according to his/her conscience and not judge one another. The man who God wants to be the next President of the United States, whether it be for blessing or judgment, will infallibly be elected by those who vote.

In His Grace,
There isn't a perfect candidate, but there are better candidates.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: It must be my writing recently which is causing... - Sat Oct 30, 2004 3:38 AM
Maybe. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />


God bless,

william
Posted By: Tom Re: Isn't it amazing how pessimistic we all are? - Sat Oct 30, 2004 6:57 AM
I have reason to believe that Bush isn't a Christian either. Either that or he doesn't know the Bible.
Here is an example of what I am talking about.

GOOD MORNING AMERICA
New York, New York
October 26, 2004

PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW CHARLES GIBSON, ABC NEWS

CG: Do we all worship the same God, Christian and Muslim?

GWB: I think we do.

CG: Do Christians and non-Christians and Muslims go to heaven in your mind?

GWB: Yes, they do. We have different routes of getting there.

If someone has information that proves, this interview has been doctored in any way, please speak up.

Tom
Posted By: J_Edwards Re: Isn't it amazing how pessimistic we all are? - Sat Oct 30, 2004 1:20 PM
Do you consider Billy Graham a Christian? Yes, or no?
According to the ABC site:
Quote
In an exclusive interview with ABC News' Charles Gibson, Bush said he believes that both Christians and Muslims worship the same God.

"I think we do. We have different routes of getting to the Almighty," Bush said.
Don't suppose it really matters, however, as Muslims are, by definition, non-Christian.

Still, so far's I can tell, the interviewee was asking about Christians and Muslims, not Christians, Muslims, and everybody else.

Anyone have a link to the transcript of that interview? I can't find it.
Posted By: Tom Re: Isn't it amazing how pessimistic we all are? - Sat Oct 30, 2004 11:01 PM
Personally, I don't know if Billy Graham is a Christian. But if he is, it is despite what he teaches.

Tom
Posted By: Anonymous Re: Isn't it amazing how pessimistic we all are? - Sun Oct 31, 2004 1:16 PM
Before we say that someone who belongs to a Christian church (except the Antichrist) is not a Christian, there should be a scriptural excommunication. On Sept. 14, 2001, at a cathedral dedicated to the worship of the Holy Trinity, an Islamic Imam offered prayers to Allah. Rev. Graham, then gave an address in which he failed to point out that Allah is not God but an idol who hears, helps, and saves no one.

Did Rev. Graham's church: Call him to repentance? Revoke his call to publicly preach the gospel? Excommunicate him for syncretism? If none of the above, all Christians should mark and avoid Rev. Graham and his church.
...was Saul of Tarsus, before he set out for Damascus? ;->
Posted By: Anonymous Re: Isn't it amazing how pessimistic we all are? - Sun Oct 31, 2004 5:06 PM
Quote
speratus said: On Sept. 14, 2001, at a cathedral dedicated to the worship of the Holy Trinity, an Islamic Imam offered prayers to Allah.

In addition to the prayers in the name of the Christian God and the Muslim God, President Bush offered prayers in the name of the American civic God:

Quote
On this national day of prayer and remembrance, we ask almighty God to watch over our nation, and grant us patience and resolve in all that is to come. We pray that He will comfort and console those who now walk in sorrow. We thank Him for each life we now must mourn, and the promise of a life to come.

America has turned its back on the First Commandment.
Posted By: J_Edwards Get Real and Get Out and Vote! - Sun Oct 31, 2004 5:43 PM
Quote
Tom said:
Personally, I don't know if Billy Graham is a Christian. But if he is, it is despite what he teaches.

Tom
Agreed. Graham of course is more schooled in theological matters than Bush, thus, "personally" you do not know if Bush is a Christian either? Thus, statements such as, "I have reason to believe that Bush isn't a Christian either...." are not "fully supported." But, THIS is NOT even what elections are truly about!

When Paul gave COMMAND by the Holy Spirit to pray for their leaders (for kings, and for all that are in authority) it was with the knowledge that they (the leaders) were NOT Christians (1 Tim 2:1-4). Truly God puts leaders into positions--though He does use the secondary means of elections, et al. to accomplish this. When one votes it is not a matter of voting a "perfect Christian" into office.... you are voting for a person who you believe will best (but, not perfectly) represent your views. Thereafter you are to pray for him, that [you] may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty. For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth."

While this nation has never been Christian, we as Christians and Americans have an obligation to vote for "the best man," but Christ isn't running for office. So it is not the matter of "the right candidate," but "the most right candidate." Thus, simply look at the issues and select he who best supports your views. For instance, look at: (1) the partial birth abortion ban, (2) defense of the marriage act, (3) prohibiting distributing morning after pill to "children" in schools, (4) parental notification for a minor child's abortion, (5) prohibiting taxpayer funding of abortions, (6) and who will appoint pro life judges. Now, someone might get the idea here that one candidate is for murdering children and the other is not. Which is more biblical? <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/bif.gif" alt="" /> Americans, you as jury members of this nation sit in the juror's box this Tuesday; will you elect a murderer, or desert your duty and remain complacent saying "what will be will be," or stand up and have some backbone on at least one issue?

Is keeping just one baby alive a genuine concern for Christians or have we become mere modern-day Ammonites--offering child sacrifices to the political system of the day? Is it worth your vote or are you so theologically entrenched in your "perfect theology" of your "perfect candidate" that it is not possible for you to really live a Christian life? Everyone, Get Real and Get Out and Vote! (not you Tom, I know you are Canadian).
Posted By: MHeath Re: Isn't it amazing how pessimistic we all are? - Sun Oct 31, 2004 8:18 PM
Speratus,

Call me a dork, but what was the matter with that prayer?
Posted By: TheClingingVine Were I to guess . . . - Sun Oct 31, 2004 9:19 PM
...I'd say it's because it's a nice, vague, all-purpose, one-size-fits-all prayer addressed to a nice, vague, all-purpose, one-size-fits-all deity. It'd be difficult to find anyone who would object to it (barring a flat-out atheist or Satanist).

That's just a guess, however.

I could be very, very wrong.
Posted By: DaveVan3 Re: Isn't it amazing how pessimistic we all are? - Sun Oct 31, 2004 11:50 PM
Quote
speratus said: On Sept. 14, 2001, at a cathedral dedicated to the worship of the Holy Trinity, an Islamic Imam offered prayers to Allah.

This is not just a cathedral...this was at the Washington National Cathedral. For a bit of the history of this cathedral....go here—Washington National Cathedral

Quote
Speratus said:In addition to the prayers in the name of the Christian God and the Muslim God, President Bush offered prayers in the name of the American civic God:

President Bush did not offer any prayers. His were “remarks”....see full text here: Bush’s remarks 09/14/2001

Just a little clarification.

Dave
Posted By: Tom Re: Get Real and Get Out and Vote! - Mon Nov 01, 2004 1:42 AM
Joe

If you had read any of my previous messages, you would have noticed that I said if I was American I would be voting for Bush.
By the way when I said "I have reason to believe". I didn't mean I know for sure.

Tom
Quote
DaveVan3 said:

This is not just a cathedral...this was at the Washington National Cathedral. For a bit of the history of this cathedral....go here—Washington National Cathedral

What a marvellous synagogue of Satan it is. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/mryuck.gif" alt="" />
Posted By: Pilgrim Re: Get Real and Get Out and Vote! - Mon Nov 01, 2004 5:21 AM
This little conversation between you and J_Edwards is definitely [Linked Image]

Please let it end here! [Linked Image]

[Linked Image]
Posted By: Anonymous Re: Isn't it amazing how pessimistic we all are? - Mon Nov 01, 2004 9:10 AM
Quote
MHeath said:
Speratus,

Call me a dork, but what was the matter with that prayer?

2 Cor. 6:14 tells Christians not to be yoked together with unbelievers. But, President Bush, a professed Christian, and those who prayed and spoke in the name of the Christian God (e.g., Billy Graham) were yoked together at National Cathedral with the unbelievers who prayed in the name of Allah.

Exodus 20:3 says “You shall have no other gods before my face.” But President Bush in his address did not distinguish between the prayers to the Trinity and the prayers to Allah that had proceeded him in worship but instead spoke of unity of faith.

Quote
Today, we feel what Franklin Roosevelt called the warm courage of national unity. This is a unity of every faith, and every background.

President commends prayer in the name of an American civic god who is not the Holy Trinity, a god that encompasses the god of the Muslims. Those who vote for President Bush should do so with the full knowledge that he is urging America to sin.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: Isn't it amazing how pessimistic we all are? - Mon Nov 01, 2004 12:19 PM
Quote
Those who vote for President Bush should do so with the full knowledge that he is urging America to sin.

Welcome to humanity. I'll ask you, who is your perfect candidate? What, specifically, has Bush requested of you to sin?

Quote
Today, we feel what Franklin Roosevelt called the warm courage of national unity. This is a unity of every faith, and every background.

A civil unity is not the same as unified universalism. The stand against terrorism is something that crosses over differences in religion to bring all people together against it.


God bless,

william
Posted By: Anonymous Re: Isn't it amazing how pessimistic we all are? - Mon Nov 01, 2004 6:21 PM
averagefellar,

I would prefer a candidate who does not mix Christian and pagan worship. I would prefer a candidate who, after Muslim prayer, does not tell the assemblied congregation (and the American people in general) that they pray to "almighty God".

Those who do pray to an almighty God who includes Allah can expect no love, faith, or blessing from Christ. They abide in eternal wrath and damnation.
Posted By: Anonymous Re: Isn't it amazing how pessimistic we all are? - Mon Nov 01, 2004 6:23 PM
Now name that candidate.


God bless,

william
Posted By: Anonymous Re: Isn't it amazing how pessimistic we all are? - Tue Nov 02, 2004 2:05 PM
To my knowledge only one candidate for president has disrespected Christ by mingling Christian and pagan worship and by telling the American people they pray to a god that includes Allah. Are there others?
Posted By: fredman Re: Isn't it amazing how pessimistic we all are? - Tue Nov 02, 2004 2:42 PM
Pretty much all of them belive that. I don't consider that a mark of disqualification for a secular governmental office.
Fred
Posted By: Anonymous Re: Isn't it amazing how pessimistic we all are? - Tue Nov 02, 2004 6:58 PM
That's not what I asked. I asked you for the name of our perfect candidate, please.


God bless,

william
© The Highway