Here's an article by Dr. Patrick Johnston titled "Why Christians Should Not Vote for George Bush."http://www.wherethetruthhurts.org/tractsbooksread.php?w=59I normally avoid politics, but I'd very much like to hear what you all think of it. Frankly, it convinced me (I was already leaning in that direction), and it appears very well documented. Dr. Johnston doesn't bend over backwards to pull his punches, but he is fair.Please consider this prayerfully, and please bring up any objections (or agreements) you may have.
Article on President Bush
I normally avoid politics, but I'd very much like to hear what you all think of it. Frankly, it convinced me (I was already leaning in that direction), and it appears very well documented. Dr. Johnston doesn't bend over backwards to pull his punches, but he is fair.One great thing about SermonIndex being a forprofit ministry rather than a non-profit at this point is that we can discuss political issues and I could even endorse one side :-P considering most of the viewership of this site is American (65%-75%) I think this is a great topic to discuss. I have heard alot of biblical teaching on that Christians shouldn't even be involved with politics at all. I have been able to view the Kerry Campaign abit and he is clearly not as much a professed christian as George Bush? I am not even sure if John Kerry is a Christian, though in his speeches he uses alot of biblical phrases for his own means. In the Video recording: The Power of Prayer (video) by Keith Daniel, he says that 'we should not critize George Bush but rather pray for him, hes the only president of a country that is professed born-again!'. Thats just my 2 cents im not american so I don't have very strong political views.
I have heard alot of biblical teaching on that Christians shouldn't even be involved with politics at all.That's another very important topic, particularly when constrasting that view with theonomy/reconstructionism, but let's get to that one later :)I have been able to view the Kerry Campaign abit and he is clearly not as much a professed christian as George Bush?Kerry is officially a Roman Catholic, but pretty much just a nominal one, even some of the bishops and such in that church want to deny Kerry communion because of his pro-choice views.Keith Daniel, he says that 'we should not critize George Bush but rather pray for him, hes the only president of a country that is professed born-again!'I'm glad, to an extent, that Bush at least professes Christianity and seems more serious than Clinton or Kerry, and I agree that we should of course pray for our leaders (and all national leaders), and I agree that we should not "criticize" him in the sense of being wantonly gossipy or denigrating out of some kind of vengefulness or bitterness or the like, but we are commanded to "judge righteous judgment" and to "judge a tree by its fruit," and upon close examination President Bush's fruit isn't looking good.Again, I'd like for people to read the article I linked to (I'd post it here, but it's big, though I may wind up having to post it if I want people to actually read it). Could someone here contact Mr. Daniel and ask him to read the article and respond?A few of the more significant points:George W. Bush is not strictly pro-life."On the campaign trail, President Bush professed to be "pro-life", but with exceptions -- he believes abortion to be justified in cases of rape and incest. The New York Times reported, "It was the same tempered language that George W. Bush typically uses to discuss abortion, which he opposes except in cases of rape, incest or risk to a pregnant woman's life." As Alan Keyes pointed out in the Presidential debates and in various speeches, such pro-life exceptions that allow the innocent to be killed in some circumstances disqualify President Bush from being pro-life at all. If President Bush would justify the killing of one innocent person under his jurisdiction, he is disqualified from being a good person, much less a good leader."(in that, and other quotes from the article, I've omitted the documentation links, which you can find at the bottom of each page in the article linked in the first post)Bush has appointed more openly homosexual persons to places of power than any other president (more than all of them combined, I think)."President Bush has stated that he has no qualms about hiring homosexuals, and he has proven it. He has appointed open homosexuals to high government positions at a rate that makes Bill Clinton look like a homophobe! On April 9, 2001, he appointed a renown homosexual activist Scott Evertz to the Office of National AIDS Policy, which was the first appointment of an open homosexual to this federal position. On June 18, 2002, he transferred Evertz to direct U.S. Policy on Global Fund for AIDS and appointed another homosexual activist to take over as new director of the Office of National AIDS Policy. On September 18, 2001, President Bush appointed a homosexual activist to be Ambassador to Romania at the protest of the Romanian government. Furthermore, President Bush authorized a Clinton policy that allows an "unmarried partner" of a foreign aid worker to be given the same status as a married spouse. So the ambassador’s homosexual lover accompanies him to official government functions, travels with and resides with him on the taxpayers’ tab. On August 22, 2001, President Bush appointed an open homosexual to the U.S. Commission on Fine Arts. He presided over the appointment of another open homosexual to oversee the choice of civilian personnel at the Pentagon. The Bush administration posted a job for a "gay and lesbian program specialist" at the Department of Agriculture. On November 1, 2001, President Bush appointed an open homosexual to the State Department as an arms control advisor, which was the first appointment of an openly gay person to a senior arms control post. President Bush insisted that openly homosexual Congressman Jim Kolbe of Arizona be given a prominent speaking role at the Republican National Convention. On January 25, 2002, President Bush appointed many openly gay Republicans to the President’s Advisory Council on HIV/AIDS. "And a very sobering thought concerning the role of American Christians in all this:"The church has largely neglected its Biblical duty to judge a tree by its fruit, to "judge righteous judgment." George W. Bush’s is a counterfeit conservative. If judicial activists pervert the covenant of marriage to accommodate the sodomites, it will be because of politicians like George Bush who appoint them. The blame for the assault on the traditional family and the preborn can be laid squarely at our feet because of our negligence in preferring pragmatism over principle, political power over persecution, and religious pluralism over Christ. The Supreme Court has forsaken God ultimately because the professing church has forsaken God. Thousands of "the least of these" are murdered every day in America because the majority of professing Christians voted for it or failed to vote against it. The only truly pro-life, pro-family, constitutional candidate for President who was on the ballot in 2000 was the Constitution Party’s candidate, but that vote would have required a faith that works. "And that brings us to the alternative: Bush and Kerry aren't the only ones running for President! Most of the others aren't any better, it seems, but there is one shining light:http://www.constitutionparty.orgPlease do check that link out as well, I was positively elated when I read their platform and agreed with essentially every word (what a shock to someone so opinonated as me), and discovered they're probably going to be the biggest third party involved in the presidential election (unless Nader makes a really good showing).
And that brings us to the alternative: Bush and Kerry aren't the only ones running for President! Most of the others aren't any better, it seems, but there is one shining light:WOW all Christians in America should definetly check this out. I really think we have no viable option except this man and this party as you brother Keith I was throughly impressed with their stances and their determination to run the country as did the forefathers with moral excellence and respect unto God."George Washington feared two threats to America above all others. First, the corrupting influence of political parties with their spirit of faction and selfishness; and second, the weakening of the influence of religious morality on public life. On both counts he was right - the Democrats and Republicans have betrayed us, and squandered the Founders' legacy of liberty and justice. Countless government officials in the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government take their oath to uphold and defend the Constitution with no understanding of the responsibilities that oath entails."---[image][img align=left]https://www.sermonindex.net/images/forum/2004/july/peroutka.jpg
Thank you, Brother Greg, it makes my heart glad to see you react as I did. Thank you also for posting that article, I hadn't read it yet, and it fills me with joy to be reminded of these brave Christian men and women whom God has brought together to oppose the evils of both major parties.Please keep Michael Peroutka and the Constitution Party in your prayers. It will take an act of God for Peroutka to win, but God's been known to act when His people pray.
If I have been american, I will vote for Bush.This is the will of the Lord.
Bogoizbrania wrote:If I have been american, I will vote for Bush.This is the will of the Lord.How did you arrive at the conclusion that it is God's will that Americans vote for Bush?Is it God's will that we vote for a man who believes, and will politically advocate, murdering an unborn baby is ok if the pregnancy was the result of rape or incest?Is it God's will that we vote for a man who has appointed more openly homosexual individuals to government office than any other president in history (possibly all of them combined)?If so, and I don't wish to be mean, but if so we're not talking about the same God.
I dont know what you a talking about homous, you cant ignore them like errors in page thats right desision in his politiks.God use a lot of sinner in diferent ways.
Please keep Michael Peroutka and the Constitution Party in your prayers. It will take an act of God for Peroutka to win, but God's been known to act when His people pray.Brother I am actually quite shocked that this man has not got barely any media coverage on stations such as CNN and others. I have never seen him once or heard of him and that is wrong. After reading and listening to him I am very thrilled that there is an option like this man for Christians to vote for. How could a Christian vote any other way even if they disagree with small points that the Consitution Party holds to. I am actually going to even call them and see If I can broadcast the DVD from SermonIndex. Here is his campaign website: http://www.peroutka2004.com/Here are some videos that you can watch that will show the heart of this man of God:Presidential candidate Michael Anthony Peroutka on C-SPAN's Washington Journal talk showOn July 3rd Michael Anthony Peroutka was a guest on C-SPAN's Washington Journal talk show. Among the topics discused were the separation of church and state and the First Amendment, the source of religious liberty, the Iraq war and policy, the economy, the Bush administration's fiscal policies, abortion, gun-control, and others...Michael Anthony Peroutka's presidential nomination acceptance speechOn June 25 the delegates from Constitution Party affiliates nationwide selected Michael Anthony Peroutka as their presidential canidate. C-SPAN's Road to the White House covered the convention...
I dont know what you a talking about homous, you cant ignore them like errors in page thats right desision in his politiks.God use a lot of sinner in diferent ways.But could you, in good conscience, vote for an openly homosexual person? How about, if you were an elected official, appoint such a person to a position of high authority?And could you, in good conscience, murder an unborn child because the pregnancy was caused by rape or incest or is endangering the life of the mother? Could you, in good conscience, approve of or in any way support such a murder?Could you, in good conscience, vote for a man who would?
Brother I am actually quite shocked that this man has not got barely any media coverage on stations such as CNN and others. I have never seen him once or heard of him and that is wrong.I think he's gotten some coverage from the more liberal news sources, but the republican (not necessarily all the conservative) ones are apparently rather tight-lipped about the Constitution Party, because it poses a great threat to Bush's re-election chances. I readily understand why they're not eager to talk about "Bush's Nader," but you're right, it is wrong.I am actually going to even call them and see If I can broadcast the DVD from SermonIndex.I'm very happy that you're being so supportive, I think a great many Christians would react in a similar fashion if they actually heard about this beacon of light in a very bleak political world.
I thought that the article was interesting. On the issue of appointing homosexuals however, it is not wrong to appoint them to places in government. The scriptures expressly forbid christians from judging those who are in the world.Personally, I believe that George Bush is weak willed and easilly influenced. I think he is a christian, but I think he has comprimised greatly. I dont know whether or not he has left the faith.All to and for HimJohn
I thought that the article was interesting. On the issue of appointing homosexuals however, it is not wrong to appoint them to places in government.I expected that some would think that way, and I understand, but my main objection is that Bush isn't really pro-life.The scriptures expressly forbid christians from judging those who are in the world.We're not to judge them in the same sense as we're commanded to judge sinning professing Christians, no. But are we not to judge them at all? You presumably wouldn't trust a person who claims to be Christian but is a serial murderer. Would you trust a non-Christian serial murderer? If not, you've judged them because of their history of sin (murder, in this case). Judging in that sense is simply taking the available information and making a decision regarding the character and capabilities of the person.Anyway, the issue about Bush's appointing homosexuals is less damning (possibly in a literal sense) than his pro-choice-sometimes stance.Personally, I believe that George Bush is weak willed and easilly influenced. I think he is a christian, but I think he has comprimised greatly. I dont know whether or not he has left the faith.Let us pray for him. I hold no ill will for him, nor anyone, I simply think we Christians should recognize that he is not our political champion and thus should not automatically receive our vote. Indeed, I think it is clear we cannot vote for him at all in good conscience if we understand where God stands and where Bush stands on abortion.
Let us pray for him. I hold no ill will for him, nor anyone, I simply think we Christians should recognize that he is not our political champion and thus should not automatically receive our vote. Indeed, I think it is clear we cannot vote for him at all in good conscience if we understand where God stands and where Bush stands on abortion.Personally my feeling is if just a few christians don't vote for Bush then Kerry is a shoe-in. But it would be nice for a large amount of people to vote for the consitution party and thus demand media coverage brings something to peoples eyes that they would not choose to want to hear or watch. This fellow even called homosexuality "Sodomy!" which really is the name for it. Well this political thing is a crux because many of the founding fathers if not MOST where genuine Christians and the moral climate of america was mostly Christian, so the thought of an immoral man in any regard being in any part of office would be deplorable. This "Consitution Party" seems like a move back towards the past and it would be progress to go that way.
Personally my feeling is if just a few christians don't vote for Bush then Kerry is a shoe-in.It is true that if Peroutka campaigns well, Bush will probably lose. Frankly, I think that (in the long run) would be best for the country: with a democrat in the white house many more conservatives will wake up and fight tooth and nail against the liberal agenda, and even if the liberals make a lot of "progress" in their direction, it will only make more clear to more people how dearly this nation needs leadership like the Constitution Party.And, as "Ten Shekels and a Shirt" points out so clearly, pragmatism must not trump the conscience, and it cannot justify an immoral act.I'm not trying to tell anyone who they must vote for, just trying to bring out some apparently-not-very-well-known information and asking people to prayerfully consider it (in the light of Scripture) and act according to their conscience.
with a democrat in the white house many more conservatives will wake up and fight tooth and nail against the liberal agenda, and even if the liberals make a lot of "progress" in their direction, it will only make more clear to more people how dearly this nation needs leadership like the Constitution Party.I was just saying this to my husband a couple of days ago. I believe that even when Clinton was in office, the christians in this country were more uncompromising because they were a bit more "awake".Just as we discuss on this forum- what is a true christian? Uncompromising in belief, sold out completely to the Lord, follows Jesus example. All of the standards that we talk about on here are for ALL Christians. You either live a surrendered life or you don't. I am doubting that anyone who is really living the true christian life would last long in office- if they even got there (which would be by God's miraculous power alone.) A true christian who must make public statements would be like one of us, or a speaker or pastor we know who knows the truth. Would America stand for a Tozer, a Wilkerson as president- for that matter, a Greg Gordon or anyone one of us who live for God's true gospel, as president? NO. Our beliefs would keep us from probably ever reaching that level and then, the people would never accept that today.Someone is either a christian who thinks and acts and believes with the mind of Christ- or they have one foot in the world and one foot in the kingdom. The bible clearly states that this is not acceptable.I am not into politics at all but i am very aware of who is living for Christ and who is not. At least this guy from the constitution party is totally sold out for his beliefs and is not afraid to let people know that. He is not a hypocrite in this way.Just my thoughts. :-)
I hadn't read the article yet that Keith posted. If Bill Clinton was a President in the image of the nation, George W. Bush is a President in the image of the church, having a form of godliness but denying the power thereof. “From such turn away!”Says much!
Hi All,I find it quite interesting to read about the political climate in your nation. I just have a few thoughts on what I have read. In regards to the Christian guy in politics I will tell you the situation here in our nation. We have a Christian party, in fact we have got two, but I will refer to the bigger one. They had allot of airtime as all parties were given equal opportunity to spew their ideas forth, and the ACDP (African Christian Democratic Party) really felt that they could get 10% of the vote. Now as a Christian that sounded great. A voice in government, standing on Christian principles etc, etc. So after the election in the province I live in, they gave their votes away to the ruling party, which was instrumental in fashioning our constitution, which by reports, is the most liberal on the planet. All I can say is ‘go and figure’? WHAT OF THOSE PEOPLE WHO VOTED FOR THEM BECAUSE THEY WERE ‘CHRISTIAN’? Politics and Christianity, is there a middle line? Me thinks not, but with God all things are possible, even pigs flying.To give you a quick background picture, South Africa as a nation claims to be +-75% Christian which is very similar to the States. So you would think that getting Christians to vote for someone that is seen as Christian would be simple, but as it worked out they only got 4% of the vote. So where did all the ‘Christians’ go with their vote? In our nation expediency is a big motivating factor in determining what and who gets voted for hence spiritual virtues are way down on the list.Politics in this nation is still really split down the black/white line, which really becomes fun in the church, because there are now laws that are down affirmative action lines. This is a system in which the previously disadvantaged majority are preferred over the previously advantaged minority, in all segments of government and corporate activity. It is in place to redress the imbalances of the past, so that our government, businesses, sporting teams all accurately reflect the demographics of the nation. So in a church you have black and white worshipers, who both love the lord, but one is favoured in the workplace and the other isn’t. So the irony is that one member of the same church will experience ‘persecution’, in terms of the jobs that they are able to get, and the other will experience blessing from that same system. Businessmen are being told, unless you have a black partner, forget about doing business. This is especially true in mining and other industries that have exploited people. The minority still owns most of the businesses, so in the workplace, the seeming incompetence of the new regime is always spoken about and because it affects the people that you know, maintaining a godly attitude and perspective is sometimes difficult. What is Gods plan for our nation, why have we been spared a blood bath? Even without knowing the exact answers, hope springs eternal that God has everything in his hands. One of the redeeming factors is that it makes you trust that God has a plan for your life, so no matter what ‘it is well with your soul.’ I am thankful that what is happening in Zimbabwe has not come upon us yet, but I think in Gods grace he is helping us transition from the old to the new. One thing about Zim, it has driven the church to its knees and we are seeing great spiritual growth in the churches that we work with. There is such a hunger for truth and just for God, it would seem that when you have nothing, what choice do you have?As far as Bush is concerned, my perception of him is that he is an American first and foremost. Secondly, I think that he has biblical values that are his personal compass. To be in the position that he is in and be fair and impartial with all the people of the USA is an extremely difficult situation. As much as he is a Christian, he is the president of the whole of the United States, not just the Christian or gay or muslim groups. Does he force his own opinion upon certain segments of the population because they don't believe what he believes? He would look like a dictator, its my way or no way sort of attitude. I will say it again, to be the president of such a varied people group is difficult.Zeke
Someone wrote:And, as "Ten Shekels and a Shirt" points out so clearly, pragmatism must not trump the conscience, and it cannot justify an immoral act.These days are evil, and we see the fruits of pragmatism don't we. We read an article like this and the darkness is brought out into the light. The darkness brings disdain within our hearts. Do you see what it means to be conveyed into His light? Do you sense the Holy Spirit striving with our carnality? We have been talking about the hypocrisy within the church. We have discussed what brings weakness and sickness into the church. God's truth does not change. It is us who must choose the love of the truth over our carnal inclinations to compromise. It is compromise that gives pragmatism it's power. The condition of our government should not surprise us because we already acknowledge the compromise of the truth within our church. Only a revival brought about by God in His church can change the course of this nation. The witness of the power of the Gospel is the only hope for our nation.In ChristJeff
This is a very interesting discussion, and i've been attempting to stay out of it, but i just couldn't after the postings of the brother from Bulgaria, and South Africa ... Bogoizbrania, from Sofia Bulgaria posted:--- God use a lot of sinner in diferent ways. ---And i thought, "out of the mouths of babes, and brothers from a foriegn land posting in broken English" ... But what so powerful, but simple a statement ... To a greater or lesser degree we ALL are sinners, and fall short of the glory of God, but He uses us ALL as He sees fit, to accomplish what He sees fit ... In fact from the time Adam and Eve sinned, God has wrought the birth of His Son to this world via "sinners", and is now in the process of birthing His Kingdom thru the same medium ... we "sinners" ... i'm reminded of this scripture for those of us who see ourselves as trying harder than the other guy, and in particularl those guys who attempt more than just armchair quarterbacking, and really get suited up, and get out there in the actual game, in political and/or spiritual leadership positions ... Tit.3[1] Put them in mind to be subject to principalities and powers, to obey magistrates, to be ready to every good work, [2] To speak evil of no man, to be no brawlers, but gentle, shewing all meekness unto all men. [3] For we ourselves also were sometimes foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving divers lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful, and hating one another. [4] But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared,[5] Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost; [6] Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour ...God Himself is the one who has ordained governments, and by God, someone's got to run them, to be at the helm ... If not you or i, because somehow we may have figured that we're not supposed to be involved in this arena of life, then someone who dares to know that "there is no power but of God" ... Someone brave/crazy/idiotic/etc. enought to aspire to a leadership role that's inevitably gonna get him/her torn apart by a multitude of divergent groups all criticising something about him ... i'm not taking myself out of this scenario for i can be as critical, and as judgemental as the next guy, and neither am i saying that some of the blatant errors (willfully or mistakenly) that our public officials make are not wrong ... But when i find my judgment past prayer, and in the realm of total condemnation, then as with Christ Church, i have to remember this following scriptures ...Rom.13[1] Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. [2] Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. [3] For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: [4] For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. [5] Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. [6] For this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing.[7] Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.1Tim.2[1] I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; [2] For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty. [3] For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; [4] Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.Brother ZekeO posted:--- Politics and Christianity, is there a middle line? Me thinks not, but with God all things are possible, even pigs flying. ---This made me laugh and shout Hallaleujah at the same time ... "With God all things are possible" and the thousand of years of human history with it's war, bickerings, injustices, horrid leaders, mediocre leaders, good leaders, Christian leaders, early Church, Roman Church, Protestant Church, and now apostate Church didn't, hasn't and cannot stop the Plan of God marching thru our time, trampling every obstacle ...Col. 1:[16] For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: [17] And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.[18] And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.i don't know about the rest of you but i'm a Christian in America, and from my perspective both scripture and my conscience dictate that i attempt to participate toward the good, or as good as it can be, by casting my vote as to who will lead the nation God placed me in (and for His own reasons i might add) ... I'm an independent, the dread of both partys, i voted for Perot the first time he ran ... My initial thought was to vote for Pres. Bush because he truly seems the lesser of the two evils, as my country is already in trouble because of abortion, and i dread that "stem cell research" and "gay union/ marriage" be added to our blatant transgressions ... That only says to me that our slope, as a nation, will become even more slippery ... But i have to admit that now i'm looking at this new guy, party, that i didn't even know existed that's been posted (so thanks brother Keith and Greg for the info) ... Now i may be able to "vote" with an even clearer conscience than voting for Mr. Bush, for my vote to Mr. Kerry is totally out of the question ...If there are American saints who read this, and have not voted in the past, then if Mr. Peroutkais a good alternative for your "good Christian vote", then please register and cast it ... He may not get elected, but "politics" is about numbers, and if Mr. Peroutka gets enough numbers, he'll at least gain a platform to be heard ...
Let God pick the rulers. Let us discern between good and evil. Let us give to Caesar what is Caesar's, knowing the son's of the king do not pay, and let us give to God what is God's. What does God require? We must love Him with all our strength, mind, soul, and heart. It seems to me if we do this we won't have time, or the desire for this land. We will look to the heavenly country. We will preach the Gospel with the hope that some may become fellow heirs. Why do we want to go back to Egypt?In ChristJeff
i'm just happy for the scripture below, and the fact that God's plan is not contingent on what we believe to do, or believe not to do ... As with anything i settle in on God's Word as the last word, so will end my thought on this thread with ...Rom.14[1] Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations. [2] For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs.[3] Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him. [5] One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind. [6] He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks. [7] For none of us liveth to himself, and no man dieth to himself. [8] For whether we live, we live unto the Lord; and whether we die, we die unto the Lord: whether we live therefore, or die, we are the Lord's.So what this scripture says to me is if a saint votes, and he votes as regardeth unto the Lord, it's all good ... and if a saint doesn't vote, and he doesn't vote as regardeth unto the Lord, it's all good ... Either way a fellow saint chooses, as long as it's his regarding as unto the Lord, I ain't mad, and certainly won't judge, and certainly will continue on in love for one another.
The condition of our government should not surprise us because we already acknowledge the compromise of the truth within our church. Only a revival brought about by God in His church can change the course of this nation.Brother Jeff I cannot agree with you more ;-) We need this plastered on every pulpit for a month so it can sink in to our spirits. The owness is on us 'the Church' when watching this video: The Power of Prayer (video) by Keith Daniel I cannot but sense the same message being given that the responsibility is for the church to engage in spiritual warfare against the devil and be the church. Let us get to warfare on our knees and win our nations back to God.
I was just looking abit at some books on prayer and saw this quote in the book: Prayer the mightest force in the world by Frank C. Laubach"Most of us can never enter the White House and offer advice to the President. Probably he will never have time to read our letters. But we can give him what is far more important than advice. We can give him a lift into the presence of God, make him hungry for divine wisdom, which is the grandest thing one man ever does for another. We can visit the White House with prayer as many times a day as we think of it, and every such visit makes us a channel between God and the President."
rookie wrote:Let God pick the rulers. Let us discern between good and evil. Let us give to Caesar what is Caesar's, knowing the son's of the king do not pay, and let us give to God what is God's. What does God require? We must love Him with all our strength, mind, soul, and heart. It seems to me if we do this we won't have time, or the desire for this land. We will look to the heavenly country. We will preach the Gospel with the hope that some may become fellow heirs. Why do we want to go back to Egypt?In ChristJeffAmen Jeff,This is really none of my business (being that I'm Australia), but don't forget that God (not the devil) is planning for the antichrist to rule the earth. He set Nebuchanezzar over the nation of Judah. God gets more glory from us serving Him under an unjust ruler, than a godly one.When our Australian elections come, I'll do what I always do, ask Him who he He wants to be in power. He'll give us who we need.
Here in NZ, the country is run by a woman who, while in government, has legalised prostitution and soon it seems there will be an alternative for gays who want to get married called a 'Civil Union'.So let me just say this, if there was a man running for president in my country, who started off each day on his knees in prayer, and studying the Bible, I think I'd be voting for that man. ;-)Should a Christian vote?Yes, we are to make Jesus, Lord of all areas of our life, which I believe includes elections.Who should we vote for?Seeing as it says in Romans 13:1, "Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves." I believe we should vote for the person we believe will run the country according to Biblical principles."The White House is never going to run the country." - Leonard Ravenhill
My previous post by my own determination was to be my final word on this thread, but i am compelled ... in Christ i guess it's better to never say never ...i thought, and prayed a whole lot about this topic last night, and this little story came to me this morning ...There once was a servant whose Master gave him a rather sizable choice loin of pork to cure, and a big bag of sea salt in which to preserve it with ... The servant knew that in order to preserve his Masters provision he would have to take his time and apply that salt very carefully, and to every area of the meat, lest decay should find the smallest unapplied site and set in ... Well the servant at first vigorously set about his task, and began salting the meat daily, but only on one side, the side that mattered most to him, then eventually the servant just ceased to salt the Masters provision at all ... Lo and behold one day the servant noticed a foul odor coming from the meat ... The side he had salted looked pretty good but horror upon horrors when he flipped over the meat the side he had neglected was rancid, and full of foul writhing maggots ... What to do? ... Surely his Master would require an accounting for his neglect, so the servant began to vigorously rubbing salt into the spoiled side of the meat, but no matter how hard, and how much salt he applied, the meat continued to decay, and soon the servant determined it was to late ... In his total disgust the servant began to berate the meat, it was the meats fault that it had gone bad ... And with that rationalization the servant determined that when it came time for his giving an accounting to his Master he would say to Him, "Master I salted all that I thought I should, but somehow decomposition set in anyway" ... But secretly what he wanted to say was, "Master if you wanted the loin preserved correctly, you should have done it yourself" ...The above scenario reminds me of mature Christians in the 60's who sat idly by while the blow flies and maggots of satan worked their foul decay on our American society thru our governmental courts, by legislating God right on out of our public lives first, then out of our private lives by the trickle down method ... The salt of Christianity wasn't for application in politics, government and/or the voting booth ... It wasn't until the 80's that Christianity began smelling a foul odor, and via the likes of Jerry Falwell and the moral majority, began the attemtps of applying "the salt of the earth" to what was already 20 years rank ... So now here it is 40 something odd years later and the Masters servant has just given up, "Master I'm salting all that I think I should, but somehow the decomposition just wont go away, I can do nothing more, it's to late" ... Perhaps you saints who are anti voting are right, for by now it surely seems that even the salt has lost it's savor, but somehow i just can't seem to stop rubbing it in to all areas of this life, even into what appears to be dead meat, because i believe in resurrection, tho it may be three days dead, and stinketh ...Lord revive your servant, your Church, it's salt, and resurrect ALL that is dead ... In Jesus precious name ... Amen
Brother Rahman wrote:Perhaps you saints who are anti voting are right, for by now it surely seems that even the salt has lost it's savor, but somehow i just can't seem to stop rubbing it in to all areas of this life, even into what appears to be dead meat, because i believe in resurrection, tho it may be three days dead, and stinkethI have seen examples of the church being turned into a social welfare service system. I have recently seen people living in third world poverty. I have met brothers and sisters in Christ who live in third world poverty. They are lacking in the things of this world. They are surrounded by the works of Satan. Yet, they reign in Christ. Their joy comes from our Savior. So the way I see it, Christ is everything to them who seek Him. Christ is the only solution to man's problems. Secular society,(the world), cannot understand this. The laws of God condemn the world. They see Christ's ways as foolishness. We Christians may work and work and work to try to make the world adhere to the precepts and ordinances of God, yet unless they know Christ, they remain with Hagar. Pragmatism and compromise will reign in their lives. The only solution I see is to sow and water, and pray that God gives the increase.In ChristJeff
Brother Jeff you posted:--- The only solution I see is to sow and water, and pray that God gives the increase. ---Amen my brother, and let us also pray to God that we "sow and water" much better than we "salt" ... Amen
the topic of God's will is an interesting one indeed. Who knows the mind of God?What is GOd's will? I have heard it explained as follows, there is God's perfect will and His permissive will. Perfect will being what He originally wanted and permissive being what He allows in order to make a point or teach a lesson. Now some would argue george bush's election (or lack thereof depending on your view) is God's perfect will whilst others would say it is His permissive will at work. God does not want to see us suffer or watch us make foolish decisions but if He sees it necessary in order for Him to get through to us, that's what He'll work with. If we have become so fargone as a nation that we would allow someone into office who holds views that contradict the foundations of this nation that then we need to reassess ourselves. When God allowed the Isralites to have a king like their neighbours, he had already told them that He was their king and they had no need of one. He gave them their wish although it was not what He wanted originally so that they could see the futility of such things, being ruled by a man who is a product of his sinful environment only perpetuates the problem. If we as a people were to do what God wants us to do more often, we would become a Godly people and our leaders would be as such. sometimes God's will does not agree with our own, that's why we are to seek God's will always to see us through each day. Perhaps it is God's perfect will for Bush to be in office, maybe it is His permissive will but nonetheless ALL things work for the God of He that loves the Lord. We should take comfort in that.
Anyway, the issue about Bush's appointing homosexuals is less damning (possibly in a literal sense) than his pro-choice-sometimes stancehow is this so? do you mean less damning in the sense of it being a lesser sin or that it less chaos as it were?
It is true that if Peroutka campaigns well, Bush will probably lose.does he have enough money? the tendancy has been that the candidate who has the most and spends the most wins. our system of governance at this time makes it practically impossible for a 3rd party to get involved seriously enough to take the whitehouse.
Wow Ironman ... What a great post! ... Clear, concise and straight to the jugular ...--- Perhaps it is God's perfect will for Bush to be in office, maybe it is His permissive will but nonetheless ALL things work for the God of He that loves the Lord. We should take comfort in that. ---Now that's something we can ALL agree on ...
Just a thought with the Scriptures being the foundation upon which I write. Now we as a nation like to refer to the OT examples given to us in the books of Kings, Chronicles, and Samuel. We try to draw similar parrallels between the nation of Israel then and our nation today. However, are we willing to adhere to God's commands for Israel? Are we willing to apply the same commands to our direction in this country?What I mean is this. God commanded the king and his people to get rid of all the high places within the nation. There were a few kings who obeyed God. The nation received the blessing. Are we willing to do that today? Next, there was only one religion allowed in the nation of Israel then, are we willing to again follow God's command?God selected the king, are we willing to have a theocracy? Today we demonized the thought of a theocrisy in places like Iran, Iraq, or Sudan. What is the truth according to Scripture? In ChristJeff
Bro. Jeff you posted;--- However, are we willing to adhere to God's commands for Israel? Are we willing to apply the same commands to our direction in this country? ---Hmmm ... i'd say NO!--- God commanded the king and his people to get rid of all the high places within the nation. There were a few kings who obeyed God. The nation received the blessing. Are we willing to do that today?Hmmm ... i'd say NO!--- Next, there was only one religion allowed in the nation of Israel then, are we willing to again follow God's command?Hmmm ... i'd say NO!God selected the king, are we willing to have a theocracy? Today we demonized the thought of a theocrisy in places like Iran, Iraq, or Sudan.Hmmm ... i'd say NO!--- What is the truth according to Scripture? ---Hmm ... we've got a blind date with destruction???
I probably should have said "possibly less damning." In either case, I meant that the appointing-homosexuals issue is more easily viewed as a gray area because the constitution says nothing against it (whereas abortion is obviously against the 4th amendment, at least). If one applies Biblical standards, however, there's very little difference (though I think the Bible makes murder a bit more heinous than appointing perverts to positions of power, particularly in 1 John 3:15).Anyway, the issue about Bush's appointing homosexuals is less damning (possibly in a literal sense) than his pro-choice-sometimes stancehow is this so? do you mean less damning in the sense of it being a lesser sin or that it less chaos as it were?
KeithLaMothe wrote:\\ But could you, in good conscience, vote for an openly homosexual person? How about, if you were an elected official, appoint such a person to a position of high authority?And could you, in good conscience, murder an unborn child because the pregnancy was caused by rape or incest or is endangering the life of the mother? Could you, in good conscience, approve of or in any way support such a murder?Could you, in good conscience, vote for a man who would?I think the question is can you in good conscience vote for someone who isnt a christian no matter if they are homosexual, anti-homosexual, murderers, pro-life, if they dont believe i cant in good conscience vote for any of them.
For those of you interested in the Constitution Party or in supporting Michael Peroutka for president, they're using a "meetup" system where people of a like mind can get together to discuss whatever. You tell them where you are (zip code or city) and they tell you where the nearest group will be meeting and when. Seems like a good idea.http://peroutka2004.meetup.com/If nothing else, it would probably be a pretty good fellowship time considering the kind of Christian it takes to let their faith dictate their politics, or else it would be a witnessing oppurtunity (there's at least one conservative atheist supporting Peroutka).
"My high school debate teacher, Sr. Theodore of the Sisters of St. Francis, used to say that the result of effective speech is action."This is part of the letter written by Michael A. Peroutka. Is he Catholic?
He affirms the Westminster Confession of Faith, which makes him a Presbyterian unless I'm mistaken.edit, from http://www.peroutka2004.com/schedule/index.php?action=eventview&event_id=116 :If the Democrats and the Republicans both claim to honor God, and so does Michael Peroutka, what is the difference?One difference is this: We mean it. God is not honored when we slap His name into political speech or stick a cross on something completely unholy. Do you remember the Israelites at Sinai? They called their Golden calf Jehovah, and yet what they did displeased God.We cannot use “religion” to further our political ends. It is not proper to use God to achieve our ends as men. God is the end, we are not. I subscribe to the Westminster Confession of Faith and the Catechisms – the very first statement in the Shorter Catechism is: The chief end of man is to glorify God and enjoy Him forever.(end quote)His vice presidential candidate, Chuck Baldwin, is a Baptist pastor.
and so does Michael Peroutka, what is the difference? One difference is this: We mean it.Are you joining congress? You should be his campaign manager. :-P
That was a quote from one of his pages, as I thought I marked off, I just didn't want to use [ quote ] tags because it makes it longer.
Hey Bro. Keith,thanks for the good info on a new candidate.My concern, though, is that a vote for Peroutka is actually a vote for Kerry.Surely we'd both agree that at least being almost totally against abortion, cloning, stem cell research, and gay marriage is better than Kerry's support for such woeful sin.What are your thoughts? Kendal*I'll pray for and about this candidate too!
by the way, in how many state is Peroutka going to be on the ballot?is Nader going to be on the ballot in all 50 states?
My concern, though, is that a vote for Peroutka is actually a vote for Kerry.This is naturally going to come up, though I don't think it works out mathematically (more like half a vote for Kerry). In either case, the article I pointed to in the first post addresses this, I'll quote from it:Typical conservative rebuttal: This is a common reproof conservatives offer when they discover that I have denounce Bush and I support the Constitution Party candidate for President, Michael Peroutka, the only pro-life, pro-family constitutional Presidential candidate on the ballot in 2004. “A vote for Michael Peroutka is a vote for John Kerry.” If you are shortsighted, pragmatism will dictate that you vote for the least wicked man who will do the least amount of wickedness and destroy the least amount of your freedoms these next four years. I have a good friend who can’t stand President Bush’s pro-abortion or pro-sodomite leanings or his big-government remedy for every social ill, but he voted for Bush in 2000 anyway because the one thing he feared more than Bush was Gore. But if you vote for the lesser of two evils every four years, the lesser of two evils will inevitably become more and more wicked! If you vote for the most conservative of two liberals every four years, the most conservative liberal will become more and more liberal! Your vision must be greater than the next four years. You need to vote with your grandchildren in mind. If you always vote for the most conservative of two liberal candidates, then America will always be justifying the murder of preborn children. Always! In 2020, maybe the lesser of two evils is a pro-abortion sodomite who will charge you only 80% for taxes while the greater of two evils is a pro-abortion communist who charges 95%. Where will we draw the line? There must be some issues on which conservatives will not compromise, and the legal killing of children is one of those issues. I am going to vote to keep my conscience clean first and foremost. That means I’m going to vote for the best man for the job and pray in faith (not in unbelief) for a miracle. If more saints did the same, we WILL see our miracle.[1] I am praying, "God give us godly leaders who will outlaw abortion and govern us in accordance with the laws of nature and nature's God." How can I pray this prayer and not act in accordance? Should I pray in unbelief (as evidenced by my vote on Nov.7)? Or should I pray in faith, and act in accordance to my prayers? Voting for Bush over Gore was not “the lesser of two evils,” as it has often been said. It was more evil! When the liberal President Bill Clinton tried to shove his socialistic, liberal nonsense down the nation’s throat, conservatives in Congress and around the nation fought him every step of the way.[2] How can so many of those conservatives live with themselves as they support and vote with President Bush as he does the very same thing they so vigorously opposed with Bill Clinton? It appears that conservatives have unconditional allegiance for their darling, “Christian” President, regardless of how many babies he kills, how many militant sodomites he appoints, how much of our hard-money he steals and spends on nonsense to which we would not donate voluntarily, how many of our constitutional liberties he rescinds with his anti-terrorism legislation, and how successful he has been in four years at doing what Clinton was unable to do in eight! As Alan Keyes admitted when George W. Bush was chosen to be the Republican nominee, Bush is more dangerous than Clinton! The argument for the lesser of two evils only applies when it truly is lesser; but with the Republican Party’s capitulation to Bush’s liberal agenda, Bush accomplished much more for the left than Clinton ever dreamed! I would be remiss to mention that many Christian Bush-supporters are not ignorant or naive about the President's liberal tendencies. They hate government-sanctioned child-killing and sodomy and they are aware of Bush’s grave shortcomings in these areas, but they believe that promoting godliness in government is a matter of "incrementalism" - a gradual shifting of policies and legislation to the right. The conservative "incrementalists" condemn my approach as an "all-or-nothing" mentality that is doomed to obscurity and failure. I have two comments about the philosophy of incrementalism when it comes to President Bush. First, if Bush is "incrementally" taking us anywhere, it's to the left. The same goes with the Republican party as a whole: they are "incrementally" taking conservativism to the left - we are not taking them to the right. Under G.W. Bush and a Republican dominated Congress and Senate, there are more babies dying at the expense of the taxpayers, there are more sodomite proponents of gay marriage being elevated to positions of government leadership, the central government is getting larger and the Constitutional rights are being undermined even more than under Clinton. Conservatives have been betrayed by Bush's rhetoric, and have not judged him by his fruit. Compromise has its place in politics, but Christians can never compromise “Thus saith the Lord.” When God forbids murder, we cannot overrule him. It is usurpation and idolatry to think that man – even a universal democratic consensus of men – can overrule God and tolerate legal child-killing. On issues of principle, Christians, constrained by conscience, must draw a line in the sand and say, "No! I'm not going to compromise the Word of God!" If we can compromise to support a Presidential or Congressional candidate who supports the killing of innocent preborn children in some instances, then what won't we compromise on? Would we compromise to support a candidate that supported the killing of Jews, or the elderly and infirmed? Would we compromise to support the "incremental" abolition of kidnapping and enslaving blacks? Would we compromise to support a candidate that supported the killing of Christians? I don’t think we would compromise to support a Republican candidate who endorsed the slaughter of Christians, and if not, do we love our neighbor as ourselves if we compromise to support a candidate who endorses the slaughter of our preborn neighbors? I fear for the professing Christians who compromise to vote for a President whom they know justifies abortion and who doesn't want Roe v. Wade to be overturned. Will they look down at their hands on Judgment Day to see them stained with innocent blood? Will they hear, "Inasmuch as ye did it not to the least of these, ye did it not to me"? (Matthew 25:45)Surely we'd both agree that at least being almost totally against abortion, cloning, stem cell research, and gay marriage is better than Kerry's support for such woeful sin.Bush's stance on abortion is not acceptable, I cannot in good conscience support any candidate who thinks it is ever ok to murder an innocent human being. The sixth commandment is absolute. Voting for Bush would be a sin for me (voting for Kerry would be worse, but one does not choose the less grievous of two sins, one refuses to sin).What are your thoughts?I think that Bush might actually do more damage than Kerry could, because his positions are not exactly conservative and the mass of the people who normally oppose the liberal agenda would be more likely to "sleep" under Bush because most of them think they would have a good, reliable conservative in charge and wouldn't have to fight him every step of the way. If Kerry wins, more would fight for a truly conservative/Christian agenda.Also, if Kerry wins, and this nation does go further down the tubes as a result (and I have little doubt that it would, apart from an act of God), it will be clear to more that there are serious problems with the nation and that truly conservative politics (like those in the CP platform) are the best political way to address them.Of course, politics are not and can never be our salvation. Only Jesus can save us, now or ever. The church has a lot of repentance to do, particularly over how our shamefully poor job at being fathers is filling the ranks of the militant homosexuals (who cannot reproduce on their own). No amount of political action, money, and harassing our congressmen will change the fact that a lukewarm church is being rightly judged for its failure to obey, and part of that judgment (as indicated in Romans 1) is a proliferation of homosexuality. As Credenda/Agenda put it, we're far too ready to say "Here is evil, let us condemn it," and far too reluctant to say "Here is evil, let us confess it."*I'll pray for and about this candidate too!I'm glad to hear that. Let us keep President Bush, Senator Kerry, and other national leaders (of our nation and others) in our prayers as well, as we are commanded to.
In how many states in Peroutka going to be on the ballot?
Sorry, forgot to answer that: in the 2000 election the CP (running Howard Phillips) was on the ballot in 41 states, with 7 more taking write-ins (I think that's what they did). This time around it looks like considerably less than that, but the article they have up on it isn't finished. I suppose it could be the new campaign finance reforms making it even harder for the other parties.The Lord's will be done.
Check out www.bushrevealed.comThe information on this site is true and documented."You shall know the truth and the truth ......"
I think Greg Koukl has some valuable things to say on this subject, please prayerfully consider the following clips from an article he wrote about third-party voting in the previous election ;"Since there is no middle ground on abortion–"choice" always means a dead child–then it's critically important we make decisions at the polls that go beyond token moral gestures (something that looks right, but has no impact). We must make choices that have the greatest chance of actually saving children.The question we're faced with is this: If we were forced to choose between looking virtuous but having no further effect, or appearing ignoble but accomplishing some good, which path should we take? When we must choose one or the other, are we obliged by God to make a moral statement or to have a moral impact?"Here's an example of what I mean. Judie Brown has vigorously opposed legislation targeted narrowly at partial-birth abortion. She's against the prohibition not because she is pro-abortion, but because she is pro-life. As President of the American Life League, Brown asserts that such "incrementalist" solutions "set aside millions of children scheduled for death," the 99% of abortions that don't use that procedure.As Brown sees it, this is an issue of conscience. A mere ban on partial-birth abortion doesn't go far enough. She can't get behind any legislation that allows a single child to be killed. Anything short of the full pro-life position is an unacceptable compromise. In this case, however, "voting one's conscience" actually causes much more harm than good. Instead of saving 1% of future victims of abortion, Judie Brown's approach saves none.""In other words, it's better to choose someone who is committed to eliminating some of the evil, than contributing to the victory of one who is not committed to eliminating any of the evil but, on the contrary, will promote it. This is not a compromise. This is good moral thinking.""Let me state it plainly: If you are pro-life and intend on casting a "conscience vote" for a third party candidate, you might as well be voting for Al Gore. It will have the same ultimate impact on the safety of the unborn.If you sleep more comfortably at night because you've voted your principles, then I believe your conscience is misinformed. You've chosen to make a moral statement instead of choosing to have a moral impact. As one pundit put it, it's better to have a second class fireman than a first class arsonist. There is no victory nor honor in voting for the first-class fireman who had no chance of winning when, in the end, your "conscience vote" actually counted for the arsonist."You can read the entire article at the following link;What's Wrong with the "Conscience Vote"In Christ,Ron
by earnestlycontend on 2004/8/7 21:26:19"by the way, in how many state is Peroutka going to be on the ballot?"ANSWER40 if things work out, but probably 39, 38 would be the least it appears now.
Hear the Constitution Party's agenda first hand from;Jim Clymer, National Chairman, Constitution Party ...NAT'L CONSTITUTION PARTY (C-SPAN INTERVIEW)Real Player Req'drtsp://video.c-span.org/project/c04/c04_wj053104_clymer.rmFYI for PA. : Mr. Clymer is running for the Senate against Arlen Specter(R) and Joe Hoeffle(D).A statement Mr. Clymer made that i really like;Quote;"DUTY IS OURS ... RESULTS ARE IN THE HANDS OF GOD" ... Sounds a lot like ...1Cor.3: [6] I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase.
Okay, well, there's A LOT that's been said on here and as I started reading the first couple posts, oh boy, this stuff just goes right over my head! I did go to the link to that first article, but where it says Bush appointed a homosexual so and so, or that he believes in abortion in the case of rape or... I forgot what the other reason was - well, there were these numbers that I guess were supposed to be links to where this information was coming from, but my computer said I needed authorization. So I couldn't look up the proof on what that guy was writing.I don't listen to talk radio, watch hours of CSPAN during my free time (don't have cable anyway), or get all into this campaign... competitiveness. However, I do exercise my right (rather, privelege) to vote. If we have opportunities as Christians to have a say in the direction of our government and country, why not get involved? As far as I know, George W. Bush is against abortion and homosexuality. Those are 2 pretty big moral issues that could be our country's survival or downfall. I don't deny that President Bush isn't a perfect person, or that he even fails to make all the right political or moral decisions. As far as I know though, he takes a stronger stand morally than John Kerry does. But may God grant us the wisdom.
