Will We Gain the White House and Lose Our Souls?

by Dave Miller on October 19, 2012 · 117 comments

Let me start off by making two statements, just to clarify.

  1. I want to see a new occupant in the White House in 2013, in the worst way. I think Barack Obama’s policies are dangerous and destructive to the future of America.
  2. I don’t have a huge problem voting for a Mormon to be the next president. Romney was not my first choice (Tim Pawlenty), my second choice (Herman Cain) or my third choice (Rick Santorum – for whom I caucused). His false religion was a part of my desire to find another candidate. But when he became the nominee, I made peace with that.

So, I am a conservative Christian ready to vote for a Mormon to be the next president of the United States.

But I am deeply disturbed by some things that are going on among conservative Christians. In our desire to “save America” and to advance our political agenda, are we in danger of giving up something more valuable than the White House.

Jesus asked,

“What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world and loses his own soul?”

I would ask conservative Christians in America,

“What does it profit us if we gain the White House and lose the soul of our faith?”

Politics is about compromise, but there are certain compromises we cannot make without sacrificing the essentials truths of our face. A disappointing and disturbing example of this took place at the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association recently. A few days ago, Billy Graham and his son met with Mitt Romney. Pictures of this meeting appear when you go to their site. Also appearing there is a thinly veiled endorsement of Romney. Graham exhorts voters to focus on biblical values, especially the sanctity of life and preservation of traditional marriage. Romney’s platform supports both of these things, while Obama is against them. Obama is also perceived as less friendly to Israel than Romney would be.

Here is what Graham said:

“As I approach my 94th birthday, I realize this election may be my last,” Graham says in the ad. “I believe it is vitally important that we cast our ballots for candidates who base their decisions on biblical principles and support the nation of Israel. I urge you to vote for those who protect the sanctity of life and support the biblical definition of marriage between a man and a woman.”

It is certainly Billy Graham’s right to make such an endorsement, even if it is something of a departure from his lifelong trend to focus on the gospel and proclaim it to those in power on both sides of the aisle. He shared Christ with Democrats and Republicans and did not endorse either side. For a man whose entire life has been about the gospel, that seemed like a wise choice. But I actually agree with him on the importance of this election, the key issues on which Christians need to focus and the need for us to stand and be counted.

But then came the problem.

The Graham website had a definition of cults and listed Mormonism as one of those cults. But at some point recently, they removed the mention of Mormonism as a cult – at just about the same time that Graham gave his tacit Romney endorsement.

What can we believe but that Billy Graham, the greatest proclaimer of the gospel in the last century, has compromised biblical truth – no, GOSPEL truth – for political reasons. To help elect Mitt Romney, they softened their stance against the false religion he professes.

A representative of the BGEA tried to put a positive spin on this. Ken Barun, chief of staff for the BGEA wrote this statement.

“Our primary focus at the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association has always been promoting the Gospel of Jesus Christ. We removed the information from the website because we do not wish to participate in a theological debate about something that has become politicized during this campaign.”

I am sorry, but I do not buy it. This waddles like a duck and quacks like a duck. Don’t tell me it is an eagle. To claim that removing the statement identifying Mormonism as a cult was done to prevent politicizing the issue defies logic and insults our intelligence. Mormonism is a false cult that damns souls to hell for eternity. I pray that Mitt Romney will see the truth before his life ends. But for Billy Graham to walk back his clear statement that this religion is false is sad and indefensible.

Bart Barber’s response to this is pretty much spot on. He said, to close his hard-hitting post:

“I’ve got my priorities straight. The Billy Graham Evangelistic Association doesn’t. I’m worried about some of the other institutions of Evangelicalism around me.

I’m worried about some of you.

Prove me wrong. Prove the BGEA wrong. Prove Mitt Romney wrong. Come out HARD against this terrible mistake, and do it BEFORE the election.”

Well, Bart, count me among those who want to call out the BGEA and “come out HARD” against what they have done.

I do not plan to punish Mitt Romney (nor America) for Billy Graham’s folly. But I do not intend to soften my conviction that his faith is founded in falsehoods. He may be a great president, but unless he repents of his sins and trusts Jesus Christ by grace through faith alone, he will be condemned. His Mormon faith, no matter how sincerely held, will never save him.

American evangelicals, let us not seek to gain the White House by losing the soul of our faith in the process.

 

1 John Wallace October 19, 2012 at 8:00 am

Thank you! Dave, for raising this issue. I am absolutely shocked and dismayed by the actions of the BGEA. The removal of the references to Mormonism as a cult from their website smacks of the most outrageous politicizing.

2 Steve Martin October 19, 2012 at 8:06 am

Not to worry.

If Mitt gets in, the left wing media will do ALL it can to discredit him and bash him (ala G. Bush), and that will include constant hit pieces on Mormonism, exposing this false religion (we know that to be true and we care about it – even if the media really doesn’t).

It will be a double win for us. We’ll have someone who can run the country better, and Mormonism will be exposed (big time) for what it really is.

3 Mike Leake October 19, 2012 at 9:49 am

I think you’re making an assumption that the MSM will make a distinction between Mormonism and Christianity. We’ll be thrown under the bus with his Mormonism. Not that it really matters because our citizenship lies elsewhere…but I wouldn’t be looking to the MSM to do the cause of Christ any favors.

4 Steve Martin October 19, 2012 at 4:45 pm

Not looking for them (MSM) to aid Christianity, but they will bend over backwards to make Mormonism and any followers look like fools (just because they will hate the Republican President)…which they are.

5 Tim A Blankenship October 19, 2012 at 8:51 am

WOW!!! A great message that needed said. I too will be voting for Romney, but his religion is vain, and void of truth, and the gospel of Jesus Christ.

6 Dee October 19, 2012 at 8:53 am

I have never told my mom’s cousin he is in a cult…he was raised Southern Baptist…he knows. He married a Mormon lady and jumped in with both feet 30 plus years ago. But what was lacking in his Baptist indoctrination that let him slip away? Our whole family is SBC in that town…there were several SBC churches to choose from. Was there something not genuine…not as loving that he would search for something that has that facade? You won’t find another kinder gentler more dedicated family man than he in my family. I’m not going to attack him with language of cults and heresy…he got tons of that!. A gentle truth here and there and love and gentleness which I think they crave.

7 Dee October 19, 2012 at 9:02 am

So my suggestion for a Christian website is not to name cults but to present truth and define what characteristics make a cult a cult…where it is ok to disagree on debatable matters and what truths are crucial to salvation. You can’t name every cult…so this is more practical any way. People throw the cult word around so much they think it means any small group that disagrees with my pastor.

8 Bob Cleveland October 19, 2012 at 9:12 am

The real shame of the BGEA removal of the page is that they simply didn’t have to do that. If I held that Mormonism was a cult .. that’s a different discussion .. and if I felt the cult member were the best candidate for president, I’d just say so.

Maybe we’re also in the age of PC (politically correct) and RC (religiously correct .. which isn’t).

How sad.

9 David Rogers October 19, 2012 at 9:47 am

Though, given Billy and Franklin Graham’s wonderful record of faithful proclamation of the gospel down through the years, the BGEA decision is particularly disappointing, I think we need to have clear this is not just about the Grahams or BGEA. And, as I see it, it is not just about Mormonism, either. As Dave correctly and astutely points out, the soul of Evangelicalism is at stake. The BGEA decision is only one example of a general attitude of political and moral pragmatism that has little by little worked its way into the minds and hearts of evangelical Christians and leaders, and is now being confused by many as our “main agenda.” The following short video clip of a CNN interview earlier this year with Jerry Falwell, Jr. is just one more egregious example. It is time to wake up!

http://youtu.be/6fvA1_mMIQg

10 John Wallace October 19, 2012 at 9:58 am

Preach it, David!

11 Frank L. October 19, 2012 at 12:50 pm

David. Thanks for the heads up. I find it hard to associate that video and the name Falwell

We are certainly in a new (last) day.

12 David Rogers October 19, 2012 at 9:54 am

And, as much as it grieves my heart to say it, if your inclination is to give Billy Graham a pass on this, for whatever reason, you really need to watch the video clip that Adam G. from N. C. posted yesterday here:

http://sbcvoices.com/a-view-of-rome/#comment-131026

His comment right before that one gives some valuable context for the discussion on this post regarding the BGEA decision as well. He was able somehow to trace down the text of the content that was removed from the BGEA website.

13 Dave Miller October 19, 2012 at 11:20 am

Yeah, I almost included that in my post, but I’ve sort of thought it was one of those cases of a man who gets older and perhaps says some things he wouldn’t have in his younger days.

Billy Graham, whatever one thought of him, was a champion of salvation by grace through faith throughout his life, and committed to the exclusivity of Christ. I considered that statement an anomaly.

14 John Fariss October 19, 2012 at 10:05 am

The problem with some conservative Christians is that they are more conservative than they are Christian.

Absolutely the same thing can be said of liberal Christians, but that is not the group that the Grahams, Dave, or even I are classified with.

There is a tendency to confuse and blur the lines between our faith and our cultural convictions. When that happens, we who are focused on faith see everything as a faith decision or a faith commitment, and then justifying our actions becomes too easy.

John

15 Dave Miller October 19, 2012 at 11:22 am

At the risk of offending some, liberal Christians do not have the same kind of theological commitments and convictions that conservatives do, so the kind of compromise we are discussing here would not be the same deal.

16 cb scott October 19, 2012 at 12:57 pm

What Dave said, but with more understanding.

17 Dave Miller October 19, 2012 at 1:08 pm

Arminian.

18 John Fariss October 19, 2012 at 5:55 pm

Dave,

Huh? Color me “dense” today.

If you are referring to me, I (1) fail to understand, and (2) I deny that I am a “theological liberal.” Of course, that presupposes that if one does not agree with every point of “theological conservatism,” it does not necessarily make one theologically liberal.

John

I would certainly agree that too many liberal Christians are more liberal than they are Christian, but that is not the thrust of either my comment, or (I think) the article.

19 Dave Miller November 5, 2012 at 6:40 pm

I’ve had enough conversations with you to know that in your heart, you aren’t really a liberal, John, you just don’t have a comfort with the word inerrancy.

At least that is my view of you.

20 william October 19, 2012 at 10:36 am

You are 32 years late with the question. We lost our souls when we went foaming-at-the-mouth for Reagan. After a generation and a half, one would think we would have decided that we elect civil magistrates, not ministers and that it is no more harm to the cause of Christ to have an LDS in our country’s top civil office than when we had two Southern Baptists as president and VP.

One would think that after all this hand wringing over the matter, we must think God completely powerless in the face of a Mormon who happens to be POTUS.

Let each judge BGEA for their actions but we are years into use of the term “cult” in a secular, perjorative sense. In order to have a reasonable and fruitful discussion of orthodoxy and unorthodoxy probably necessitates that we employ some other terminology.

21 volfan007 October 19, 2012 at 10:37 am

I have seen people go too far about Romney….even saying that he’s God’s man. I’ve seen some Christians act like Romney is a godly man. In their zeal to beat Obama, they’ve definitely gone too far. This has been true down thru the years….Falwell….now the BGEA.

I will be voting for Romney….not because he’s a Christian…not because he’s God’s man…..because he’s not a Christian, and he’s not a godly man, and he’s not God’s man; he’s a Mormon….but, I will be voting for Romney to vote against Obama. I really dont think our country can take 4 more years of Obama,without experiencing some very damaging consequences. So, on election day, I’ll hold my nose and vote for Romney.

David

22 Frank L. October 19, 2012 at 8:49 pm

“””not because he’s a Christian…not because he’s God’s man…..because he’s not a Christian, and he’s not a godly man””””

I’d go with most of this except according to Dan. 2:21; Prov. 21:1, every king, president or potentate is “God’s man” even if he is not a “godly man.”

Romney is definitely a spiritually-minded man. He is definitely a family-minded man. He is definitely a religion-friendly man. He is a moral man (according to worldly standards). He appears to be a very bright man. He is a conservative (economically and socially) man.

But, then on the other hand: Obama is a man.

23 volfan007 October 19, 2012 at 10:34 pm

Frank,

A Mormon is not a Christian…thus, they cannot be a godly man…nor, can they truly be God’s man.

But, I will vote for him as a vote against liberal, socialistic, pro murder(abortion) Obama.

David

24 Frank L. October 20, 2012 at 2:58 am

I missed where I said Mormons were Christian.

I differ with you. I think God controls Romney as much as He chooses.

25 volfan007 October 20, 2012 at 10:52 am

Frank,

You said that Romney is God’s man, and a spiritually minded man. I guess if you meant he’s a Mormon, whom God wants to be President; then….well…..

David

26 Adam G. in NC October 20, 2012 at 3:25 pm

Does that mean that Obama is “God’s man” at the moment?

27 Frank L. October 20, 2012 at 3:35 pm

“””Does that mean that Obama is “God’s man” at the moment?””””

Absolutely

28 Adam G. in NC October 20, 2012 at 3:39 pm

OK. Just checkin

29 volfan007 October 20, 2012 at 4:18 pm

Yall honestly think that Obama is God’s Man? If you do, then you’ve got a whole different idea of what it means to be God’s man than I do.

Let’s see….Obama is for abortion…the murder of unborn babies. He thinks that homosexuality is okay, and seems to be committed to the gay agenda.

David

30 Dave Miller October 20, 2012 at 4:47 pm

I think, as is common, we are talking apples and oranges.

Is Obama a “man of God?” From what I have read of his beliefs and affirmations, he does not fall within what I would consider orthodox Christianity. His faith is no more “Christian” than Romney’s Mormonism.

Is Obama the man that God raised up by his sovereignty to be a leader in America at this point? I would say yes.

God “raises up one and brings down another.” He raised up Nebuchadnezzar for his purposes. Some leaders are raised up to bless a nation, some to judge a nation.

So, in once sense you could argue that Obama is God’s man, and in another he most certainly is not. We need to define our terms and concepts.

31 volfan007 October 20, 2012 at 8:10 pm

Sometimes, a nation doesnt get the man God wanted to lead… but instead, He allows them to have the man they wanted. For example: God didnt even want them to have a King; and Saul.

So, maybe Obama is the USA getting what we deserve, and what the people wanted….but, it was not God’s man.

David

32 Cheryl October 19, 2012 at 10:50 am

In all honesty, I don’t see the difference in electing Romney for president and electing any of the other lost men we have elected over the past 236 years of American voting. I would challenge anyone who thinks they have a Christian opinion in this matter to first at least read the synopsis of Wayne Grudem’s book, Politics-According to the Bible, and then answer. Here is the link to the books synopsis on his website:
http://www.waynegrudem.com/politics-according-to-the-bible/

In Christian Love, Cheryl Braswell

33 Bart Barber October 19, 2012 at 11:15 am

Cheryl,

The central question on the floor is not whether a Christian can vote for or support a non-Christian for political office. The question is whether a Christian ought to change what he says about other faiths just to get an election to turn out the way he wants.

34 Dave Miller October 19, 2012 at 11:23 am

What Bart said.

35 cb scott October 19, 2012 at 12:53 pm

What Bart said, but with much more intellectual depth to understand what Bart said that what Dave Miller has to understand what Bart said.

36 Dave Miller October 19, 2012 at 12:56 pm

Liberal.

37 cb scott October 19, 2012 at 1:01 pm

I am voting for the Mormon over the Neo-Pagan.

Mormons do embrace a concept of a moral absolute.

Neo-Pagans embrace a concept of a moral vapor.

38 volfan007 October 19, 2012 at 2:26 pm

What CB just said, but without so much understanding and insight, and without as much feeling.

:)

David

39 Christiane October 19, 2012 at 12:57 pm

“The question is whether a Christian ought to change what he says about other faiths just to get an election to turn out the way he wants.”

integrity . . . an old-fashioned American value

I can see by Bart’s comment that people still understand that changing what you say to manipulate voters is NOT a sign of integrity, nor is it conducive to Christian witness . . .

lack of integrity likely will harm Christian witness

40 cb scott October 19, 2012 at 3:56 pm

And I am sure you will agree that the final consequences of embracing LDS theology are the same as embracing RCC theology, right L’s?

Are you now ready to repent of your sin and embrace the biblical gospel?

41 Debbie Kaufman November 5, 2012 at 1:45 pm

Are you now ready to repent of your sin and embrace the biblical gospel?

Yeah, cause harassing, chasing a person with this question always works, or at the least gets hurrahs from the audience. At the least it keeps them from having a voice when it’s not wanted.

42 Joe Blackmon November 5, 2012 at 2:07 pm

Well, Debbie, since L’s lack of a reason to repent and believe the gospel that Jesus and Paul preached is your fault due to you having affirmed her as a Christian this is exactly the kind of response I’d expect from you.

How dare you mock CB when he has consistently and lovingly called her to repentence while you give her false assurances instead of the gospel.

43 Debbie Kaufman November 5, 2012 at 2:24 pm

It’s not mocking, it is pointing out reality. Harassing and bullying someone hasn’t brought many to a Baptist rally let alone to salvation. I would agree that it has been consistent, but that’s all I can agree with.

As for the grooming of Romney, sure he needed it or it wouldn’t be done. I think it’s part of how he comes across as acceptable to Southern Baptists. He’s been groomed and taught by the best.

44 Frank L. October 19, 2012 at 8:50 pm

Grudem endorsed Romney in 2007.

45 Adam G. in NC October 19, 2012 at 12:27 pm

Blessings to you Dave for posting this. I love this blog and the bloggers who participate. The truth matters here.

46 Jess Alford October 19, 2012 at 12:44 pm

I think we can blame the BGEA and Franklin, but no blame should be placed on Billy Graham. “He is 94 years old”. I’m many years younger that that and my mind is not what it used to be. We should not tarnish Brother Graham’s good name even if the BGEA is named after him.

Romney will not get my vote, Neither will the President. I would like to share a truth with you, even though you may not be able to handle it.
The President supports a woman’s right to choose. On the other hand he is doing more to stop abortions than any Republican. I again refer you to a study done in Saint Louis. You can Google, Free Birth Control, Fewer Abortions, Star Tribune.com.

The Affordable Health Care Act will pay for free birth control, among many other things. Sadly I think abortion is included in this Act. Abortion will be drastically reduced according to the study. If Romney appeals what he calls Obama Care, the number of abortions will go up. To me it seems that the President wins on this issue.

The reason the President will not get my vote is the gay issue.

I did not ever think there would come a time in this country when Christians would vote for a man who was a member of a cult,and was a leader in that cult for 15 years. Jesus does not have a brother named Lucifer. Romney does not know what side of the fence to stand on.

These are just a few of the reasons Romney will not get my vote.

God bless you all.

47 Greg Harvey October 19, 2012 at 1:29 pm

I think we use the word “cult” as if it has meaning. In our society it really doesn’t. In our faith the term heresy is more applicable, but over the generations of infighting within the universal church, we’ve even used that term rather generously (which is to say, rather UNgenerously.)

Perhaps the right way to address this is for the SBC to issue a clarification statement highlighting these two distinctions:

=====================================

1. We often share a common political cause with certain groups that emphasize certain positions on morality that we have in common with them. The Catholic position against abortion and the LDS positions against abortion and against alcohol are consistent with how many Southern Baptists feel about those two very controversial subjects. Because of this, we are not afraid to share the political stage in our secular politics with religious groups who promote similar moral views, stands, and–dare we say it–values.

2. But from an eternal view, the faith that has been handed down to us is clear. We believe God is Three Persons in One: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. We believe that the Son was incarnated as a man on the earth that was fully man and fully God. He died on the cross and was raised from the dead. That sacrificial death was made available to every person as the source of salvation and according to the Bible–especially the book of Hebrews–it is a superior sacrifice and according to the words of Jesus NO person comes to the Father except through Jesus Christ.

Our understanding of the Gospel tells us that good people essentially demonstrate an understanding of the Law separate from being informed about the Law and all people are responsible for the Law due to that understanding. No person receives salvation through good works. All people receive it through faith in Jesus Christ. According to the Book of Hebrews, even the saints the the hall of faith looked forward to the coming of Jesus Christ when they faithfully participated in the symbolic rites and rituals of the theocracy.

The thing that distinguishes Christianity is that we understand that all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. And that the wages of sin are death for every single human being. We also recognize that salvation isn’t magical: no person that comes to salvation immediately behaves perfectly and without sin on this earth. Sometimes this can cause confusion because it might SOUND like we are condemning others but excusing ourselves from our own sins.

We believers take seriously the claims of hypocrisy that are sometimes, accurately leveled against some of us and we constantly are reminded through this to come go to each other when we’ve offended someone and repent and seek forgiveness. This obligation is a spiritual obligation that is so important that Jesus commended us in the Sermon on the Mount that if we were coming to make an offering and remember a disagreement with another, then we ought to leave the offering at the altar and immediately go and seek restoration of fellowship with the other person.

Baptists and Southern Baptists have long been key supporters of freedom of religion in these United States. We recognize the value of the ability to worship freely as you so choose as an individual. We celebrate that the Constitution disallows a test of religion for service in public office. And we remain committed to these principles.

We carefully note, though, that it is the Father that discerns the heart of each person in order to determine whether their acceptance of the wedding invitation will permit entrance into the Wedding Banquet. Notably, in the parable one who wanted to join the wedding feast came without putting on wedding clothes. The Bible addresses the problem–with Jesus himself providing the words–this way:

Matthew 22:10b-14 “10b So those servants went out on the roads and gathered everyone they found, both evil and good. The wedding banquet was filled with guests. 11 But when the king came in to view the guests, he saw a man there who was not dressed for a wedding. 12 So he said to him, ‘Friend, how did you get in here without wedding clothes?’ The man was speechless.

13 “Then the king told the attendants, ‘Tie him up hand and foot,[c] and throw him into the outer darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’

14 “For many are invited, but few are chosen.””

48 Jess Alford October 19, 2012 at 2:13 pm

Greg Harvey

I had forgotten no religious test clause was in the constitution so I went to the constitution and read it. WOW!

Would you reword what you said so a simple soul like me can understand it. what is the point? I think you said that it really doesn’t matter if someone is in a cult.

49 Jess Alford October 19, 2012 at 2:18 pm

Greg Harvey

Are you saying, that a President represent all Americans not just Christians?

50 Frank L. October 19, 2012 at 2:21 pm

Dave,

Good article. Very well stated.

We need to be careful looking to the White House for theology. George W. Bush, whom I believe sincerely loves the Lord, said some things that would have gotten him expelled from a real seminary, like SWBTS.

The President, whoever he might be, is not my pope. Even the most devout Christian president, is still just a man. I expect them to have “feet of clay” even if they have a heart of gold.

By the way . . . for disclosure I do not think Romney has a heart of “gold.” I believe his heart is stone, as in stone-cold against the Holy Spirit of God.

I plan to vote for him as president and redouble my efforts to teach my people how “wrong” his theology is. I’m looking forward to having a better leader in the White House and a better foil against which to preach the truth as opposed to error.

I’m voting for a “win-win.”

51 cb scott October 19, 2012 at 2:28 pm

Governor Romney being a Mormon is not really our primary problem as a declining nation.

World History according to cb may help here.

Around A.D. 409, Alaric and his Visigoths jumped over the walls of Rome and killed, raped, pillaged, and burned for three days before they could fully occupy Rome and make the place their home.

In A.D. 2008, Barack and his Visigoths walked into the front door of the White House and turned around and told his Chief Visigoths: Reid, Pelosi, and Frank, “Unload the moving trucks guys, we’re home.”

Therefore, if you folks want to get the Visigoths out of the White House, vote for the Mormon. For history has taught us that it is easier to deal with a Mormon that a Neo-Pagan.

52 Adam G. in NC October 19, 2012 at 2:44 pm

cb, you’re right, Romney being a Mormon is not really our primary problem as a declining nation.
But that’s not what this article and conversation is really about. Its about Christians who tone-down their doctrine (or just deny doctrine) in order get certain political results.

Yes, I believe we all agree with Romney being the lesser of two weevils by far…but what is worse is the level in which some folks in prominent evangelical positions have hidden or denied the damnable heresy that is Mormonism.

53 Frank L. October 19, 2012 at 2:57 pm

“””Reid, Pelosi, and Frank,””””

I’d like to point out that I am NOT that Frank.

54 Lee October 19, 2012 at 2:53 pm

When you’re in the voting booth casting your ballot, or pulling the lever, or punching the card or whatever, it is just you in there. You can vote for whomever you want. It’s not so much the voting for Mitt Romney that I see as a problem for Christians, it is the campaigning for and endorsement of him that becomes the problem. And this action by the Graham Evangelistic Association is a good example of what shouldn’t be happening. The Mormons will invest millions of dollars, if Romney wins, in declaring that this is the hand of God on their faith, a fulfillment of their Prophets’ words over the years, and proof that they are mainstream Christians, which will deceive millions of people. But I think there is an even bigger problem related to Mormon prophecy, and the role they see themselves eventually being ordained by God to play in the return of Christ. Their prophets have predicted that the Mormon Church will take control of the US government and use it to pave the way for Jesus to get from Independence, Missouri, where they say he will return, to Jerusalem. That puts Romney’s words about “shaping US foreign policy in the Middle East, instead of just reacting to events,” in a different light.

Honestly, there’s nothing wrong with voting third party, and contrary to popular opinion, doing so won’t hand the election over to the other guy, whatever side you are on. By the way, relying on a Mormon who doesn’t believe the Bible is free of error, or is the written Word of God to uphold its principles is an oxymoron. Republicans have yet to get Roe v. Wade repealed, largely because of the justices they’ve appointed, like John Roberts, who says it is the “settled law of the land,” and in most states, they ignore their party platform in their support for gay marriage. Evil is still evil, it doesn’t come in lesser or greater degrees. But above all that, truth is still truth.

55 cb scott October 19, 2012 at 3:00 pm

Adam G. in NC,

Let me give you a formal introduction to cb.

He has never toned down anything in his life and he would definitely not tone down anything said to or about a anyone living in a ACC NATION and specifically a TAR HEEL such as yourself.

cb knows exactly what the conversation is about, but when he enters the thread, no one knows what the conversation may become. But you can be assured, he will never tone down a statement on the heresy of the LDS.

You can also be assured he would vote for an Amazon River Cannibal before he would vote for the Neo-Pagan who holds the highest office in the land at the present.

Now that you are properly introduced to cb, I am sure he welcomes you to SBC VOICES even if you are a Lesser FOOTBALL NATION TAR HEEL.

56 Adam G. in NC October 19, 2012 at 3:30 pm

cb, thanks for the intro.

“cb knows exactly what the conversation is about, but when he enters the thread, no one knows what the conversation may become. But you can be assured, he will never tone down a statement on the heresy of the LDS. ”

1) Oh how I do now know
2) Excellent

57 BDW October 19, 2012 at 3:10 pm

Does anyone know the last time that Billy Graham has spoken publicly or granted an interview to a reporter?

I think it’s been quite a while.

And there are a whole lot of people—including folks who worked closely with Billy Graham himself for decades—who think that some shenanigans are going on. If true, that’s a real crummy thing for a kid to do to his elderly father….

58 Dave Miller October 19, 2012 at 3:36 pm

I am intrigued by your subtle allegations of intrigue, BDW.

59 BDW October 19, 2012 at 3:59 pm

Here’s my take:

Billy has always been willing to meet with anyone and everyone. He’s met with countless Democrats and Republicans over the years, world leaders, etc.

But in recent decades, he’s intentionally steered clear of the political arena, avoiding anything that is interpreted as political advocacy. His books have offered detailed explanations and historical context for Graham’s rather consistent posture since his Nixon days.

He’s now 94. Incidentally, my great-aunt died yesterday in Lynchburg. She was 94, college educated too, but at 94, she’d lost a good bit of her decision-making and comprehension abilities. The majority of 94 year-olds aren’t exactly up to making the type of decisions that Billy Graham has made in recent months.

He waded in to the Amendment One debate. Then, he got involved in the Chick-fil-A stuff. Then he removes Mormonism=cult from his website. And then yesterday, he takes out a full-page ad in the Wall Street Journal letting everyone know on the heels of his meeting with Mitt Romney, how they should vote.

Now there’s nothing wrong with anyone doing that, including Billy Graham. But, in previous years, Billy Graham has not travelled down that path of wading into political debates and culture war battles.

On top of that, we’ve barely seen Billy Graham over the last few years. We get an occasional still picture as we did with his Romney meeting. But again, when is the last time Graham has spoken publicly or granted an interview?

If he can meet with Romney for 30-minutes, why not give a 10-minute interview to an AP reporter or even Christianity Today. You know there have been hundreds and hundreds of requests for such interviews.

It’s a little fishy.

60 Howell Scott October 19, 2012 at 4:36 pm

BDW,

First off, sorry to hear about your great-aunt. I think your assessment of Billy Graham’s past political involvement vs. his more recent political involvement is spot on. Like you, I don’t necessarily have a problem with Rev. Graham weighing in on moral issues (i.e. the NC marriage amendment or the recent Chick-fil-A controversy) which also touch on the political. However, the move by the BGEA to remove Mormonism from their list of cults appears to be politically motivated to help a political candidate, Mitt Romney, win the Presidency. By the way, this little kerfuffle was apparently started after a Gay Rights group pointed out that Mormonism was still listed as a cult on the BGEA website. The change was made and then things got really interesting.

If Rev. Graham wants to de facto endorse Mitt Romney, that is his right. If the BGEA wants to scrub references to Mormonism being a cult, they are free to do so. However, their decisions will have consequences. One of those consequences is that some will question the wisdom of these decisions. If, as you point out, Rev. Graham can sit down for a 30 minute chat with Gov. Romney, surely he could answer a few questions posed by CT or even Baptist Press. But, then again, perhaps those questions would be better directed to Franklin Graham, who seems to be leading his father’s ministry so deep into the political arena that politics (and politicians) are influencing the ministry instead of the ministry influencing (salt and light) politics, politicians and the culture at-large. The first is always wrong. The second is always right. Thanks and God bless,

Howell

61 Mark October 19, 2012 at 3:50 pm

BDW,

I’ve seen this charge about Graham on a few liberal websites concerning same-sex marriage. I’m not convinced just yet.

62 BDW October 19, 2012 at 4:05 pm

The charges have come from folks who worked with him for decades and his official biographer. People that know him well.

Here’s a fact: The BGEA’s mobilization against Amendment One was unprecedented. Never before had BGEA waded into a political advocacy battle like that.

It’s not like same-sex marriage popped up as a national issue yesterday.

So, Billy gets involved in advocacy at age 94 but didn’t bother to get involved back in 2004 when the same-sex marriage stuff was at its peak nationally with all the marriage amendments on ballots around the country? Did he have an opinion about Proposition 8?

I’m not saying that Billy Graham supports same-sex marriage. Hardly. I’m saying though that over the years he’s taken a certain approach to politics, based on lessons he learned from the past. And this approach has been up until now markedly different from that of Falwell or Dobson or Robertson. That’s why he’s respected and loved on both sides of the aisle. He put evangelism ahead of culture wars.

63 Christiane October 19, 2012 at 4:29 pm

Hi AARON,
Billy Graham did not hesitate to go anywhere to preach. Here is a quote from an article in Christianity Today published in 2005 after the death of his friend, John Paul II:

” When Karol Wojtyla stepped out on the Vatican balcony on October 16, 1978, as the new Pope John Paul II, waving to the crowds in St. Peter’s Square on the first day of his auspicious papacy, the person preaching for him in his home pulpit back in Krakow, Poland, was none other than Billy Graham. ”

the story goes that Cardinal Wojtyla invited Billy Graham to come to Krakow to preach, and strangely, when Billy Graham arrived in Poland, the Cardinal was called to Rome for ‘conclave’ because the former pope had died. As Billy was preaching, the Cardinal was selected as Pope John Paul II.

64 Adam G. in NC October 20, 2012 at 3:28 pm

This doesnt make me feel any better about all of this.

65 Debbie Kaufman November 5, 2012 at 1:52 pm

BDW: I agree with all you have said. And there is the fact that six years ago it was revealed that Franklin Graham, Richard Land and a few other Southern Baptist leaders were grooming Romney to be acceptable to Southern Baptists. That stopped or at least was more hidden when it was publicly revealed.

66 Joe Blackmon November 5, 2012 at 2:17 pm

They didn’t need to make Romney acceptable. There is no Christian running for President this time so him being a Mormon is no problem. Further, there is nothing in scripture that teaches a Christian can ONLY vote for a Christian.

67 Debbie Kaufman November 5, 2012 at 2:27 pm

Joe: See my last reply to you. Sure he needed grooming…..

68 Joe Blackmon November 5, 2012 at 2:34 pm

Prove from scripture that a Christan is commanded to only vote for a Christian.

(crickets chirping)

Yeah, I knew you couldn’t. Now, don’t you have a kitchen to go clean up or some laundry to fold.

69 Debbie Kaufman November 5, 2012 at 3:09 pm

Joe: I answered all somewhere in this comment section. Maybe the internal sound of crickets chirping that are not really chirping makes it difficult to find these responses. :)

70 Frank L. November 5, 2012 at 4:54 pm

“”””And there is the fact that six years ago it was revealed that Franklin Graham, Richard Land and a few other Southern Baptist leaders were grooming Romney to be acceptable to Southern Baptists.”””””

I think when someone accuses someone else purporting to have facts, one should give the proper footnotes.

My guess it, such a fact is not in fact a fact and the accusation is a “false accusation” that is self-condemnatory against the one making it out of a moderate bias.

It’s sad that such a statement can be made on a public forum without any accountability. It is slander and malice.

71 Nate October 19, 2012 at 3:48 pm

Let me get this straight, Dave. Are you saying Billy Graham and the Billy Graham Association is denying that faith in Christ is the only means of salvation simply by removing Mormonism from a list of cults? That’s what it appears you said when you stated, “What can we believe but that Billy Graham, the greatest proclaimer of the gospel in the last century, has compromised biblical truth – no, GOSPEL truth – for political reasons.”

I did not see anything from the Graham association close to that. Removing Mormonism from its list of cults may be a political gaffe, but it is not compromising biblical truth. Now, if someone asks Franklin Graham or Billy if Mormons are Christians and believe they same about Christ as they do, and then they say, “yes,” well, okay, I’m right there with you.

My goodness, we can’t even begin to list the pastors that support Obama and I haven’t seen a list of their names blogged that they have compromised biblical truth, and I can certainly argue that they are far more guilty of compromising biblical truth to profess their support for Obama, who claims to be a Christian, and who is the most notorious baby-killer ever to sit in the Oval Office.

72 cb scott October 19, 2012 at 4:05 pm

“…who claims to be a Christian, and who is the most notorious baby-killer ever to sit in the Oval Office.”

OK. I gotta go with Nate on this one.

73 Frank L. November 5, 2012 at 2:49 pm

Nate, you seem quite willing to raise Billy Graham to “cult” status and ignore the many (not just few) theological “gaffes” he has made over the years.

I would say that Billy Graham’s impact on evangelizing the world is more as an “icon of evangelism, than evangelist.”

A “gaffe” as you call it of this magnitude at this time involving this religion is much more serious than you seem to think.

74 Jess Alford October 19, 2012 at 4:17 pm

Nate,
cb,

How is the president a more notorious baby killer than Bill Clinton.

75 cb scott October 19, 2012 at 4:22 pm

Jess Alford,

Have you forgotten his campaign platform and his speeches for the 2008 election?

76 Jess Alford October 19, 2012 at 4:25 pm

Nate,
cb,

I respectfully disagree because of free birth control, fewer abortions.

77 Dave Miller October 19, 2012 at 4:30 pm

I’m not sure that relationship is as solid as you make it. Premarital sex and abortion are both sinful – contrary to God’ plan.

Not sure we want to promote premarital sex to hinder abortion.

78 cb scott October 19, 2012 at 4:43 pm

Dave,

Solid response and a Ten Ring at One Thousands Yards to boot!

79 Nate October 19, 2012 at 4:28 pm

Jess,

His votes in Illinois on partial-birth abortion (that the baby should be left to die, even if it survived the abortion). Obamacare requiring even Evangelical organizations to provide abortifacients, and other birth control, regardless of their values. His 2 Supreme Court Appointments, other Federal Judges.

Certainly Bill Clinton was no supporter of life, but Obama has taken it to another level. Not sure what Bill Clinton has to do with my comparison of Dave’s post concerning Romney and my juxatposing Obama’s supporters as a counterpoint.

80 cb scott October 19, 2012 at 4:41 pm

Well said, Nate.

Jess,

Bill Clinton seems to be a man, like other men, who lost his moral compass when he came into such great power as being the President of the United States.

The present Commander and Chief seems to be a man who had no moral compass to lose when he came into such great power as being the President of the United States.

81 Jess Alford October 19, 2012 at 7:29 pm

cb

Well said.

82 Lee October 19, 2012 at 11:34 pm

There’s been no dent in baby-killing since Roe v. Wade was made the law of the land. It continues to be the law of the land because Christians refuse to hold politicians they support accountable for not doing anything about it. George W. Bush had the prime opportunity to turn the Supreme Court toward a pro-life majority, and instead appointed swing-vote Roberts, who slammed the door closed on overturning Roe. But what you hear from conservative Christians who are politically active is silence.

Sometimes, it requires hard choices, and accepting tough outcomes in order to look far enough ahead to see where change has a better opportunity. Bush should have been held accountable to his pro-life promise before he got a second term. But the Christian political right doesn’t know how to play this game. Aside from the fact that the only political record Romney has is a liberal one, it is an unreasonable expectation to think that a man who is a member of the Mormon priesthood, and has sworn a blood oath to a religion that denies every part of the gospel of Jesus Christ is going to uphold Christian values while serving in office as President of the US. More than likely, he will use the power of his office to self-fulfill some elements of Mormon prophecy so that his church can continue to put forth the message that it is the true church, and that the rest of Christianity is, as their prophets have claimed, coming around to acknowledge their superiority.

Truth is still truth. Caving in for the sake of political expediency is dangerous, especially if it compromises the gospel, as Paul said in Galatians 1:8-9.

83 Dave Miller October 20, 2012 at 2:18 am

Interesting thing. I just went to BillyGraham.org to see if they had addressed this and the site is “closed for maintenance.” They claim it will be back up soon.

I don’t know if this is scheduled maintenance and normal procedure, or if thy are making changes because of the wide furor that has erupted over the BGEA’s decision to compromise the gospel for political gain.

84 Jess Alford October 20, 2012 at 6:13 pm

Tell me if I’m wrong, aren’t we just pawns in God’s master plan? Isn’t God the one who sets up kindoms, and takes down Kindoms?

We do our best to serve the Lord in whatever we do, but beyond that, lets face it, everything else is out of our hands. Look what Hitler done to God’s chosen people. Why did God let his children die? There are so many things we just don’t understand. God certainly understands. This is why we should thank God for the things we don’t understand, and thank him for the things that don’t go our way. God understands and what don’t go our way God has a better plan.

I’t a shame that we have to hold our nose to vote for someone. I’m a registered Republican and was proud of it back when brother Ronald was President. I’m so mad at the Republican party that I get sick at my stomach. The House and the Senate Republicans make me sick too. When they were offered their own plan to pass they refused. In hopes that the President will be voted out, while our church members suffered. The church members are the one’s that pay our salary,s. I don’t think Romney can help the country one bit. All he has got going for him is a few moral values. He may change his mind on them.

If I have to hold my nose to vote for someone. Common sense tells me he is the wrong man. I’m sure not going to vote for the President, all I need to see is two women or two men all hugged up. Abortion needs to be done away with Yesterday.

I plan to skip the presidents race and just vote for whoever else is in running. Obama will be the next President, unless he blows it in this next debate. Which I doubt. We need to pray for ourselves and this country more than we ever have. I can’t help but believe that half to three fourths of our church members are liberal. That is in God’s hands too.

Wow! I feel much better now.

85 Greg Alford October 20, 2012 at 8:22 pm

As far as religion goes, Obama is indeed a “Neo-Pagan”… He is a man with no moral compass! He will use any religion that will advance his ambitions…

As far as politics goes, in-spite of being at the head of the Democratic ticket, Obama is not a Democrat… He is a life long Marxist, and a would-be Dictator!

As a Christian Pastor and citizen of this nation… I will be voting against this man… Campaigning against this man… And asking every member of my church to do the same!

86 Christiane October 20, 2012 at 8:30 pm

gosh, I hope that G. Alford and J. Alford are not close relatives!

87 Jess Alford October 20, 2012 at 8:59 pm

That’s the way with the Alfords

88 Lee October 20, 2012 at 9:22 pm

Whoever said that you have to hold your nose to vote in this election, well, you don’t. Writing in a candidate’s name is an American tradition, and if you don’t want to do that, there are several third party candidates that offer the option of not having to hold your nose.

The problem for a lot of Christians in an election, any election, is that they’ve committed far too much to a partisan political perspective and that’s causing major problems for them with this particular candidate. Essentially, conservative, Evangelical Christians have allowed themselves and their politics to be shaped by those outside the movement, and have given away far too much for having received, essentially nothing in return. And part of that is because the candidates offered by the GOP have not been Evangelical Christians. The Republicans have systematically allocated money and influence to keep the Evangelicals who get close from actually gaining the nomination. But as long as we keep voting for them, and giving support without expecting anything in return, it will stay this way. I’m glad to see that some Christians are going to stand for truth, and not support a Mormon candidate for President.

89 Greg Alford October 20, 2012 at 11:04 pm

If anyone is still wondering just how someone like Obama could get elected to the office of President… (remember his bitter clingers comment about all us Christians clinging to our God and Guns?) Well, Just read what Lee wrote and you will see how such a man gets elected! And if you really want to see this man re-elected a second time just do as he says.

And really folks… We are voting for a leader of a secular government, and not our next pastor or the next president of the SBC.

90 Dwight McKissic October 20, 2012 at 11:33 pm

Greg,

I find it interesting that Democrats use the line “We are voting for a leader of secular government, and not our next pastor or the next president of the SBC,” to rally support for President Obama in spitem of his views on gat-marriage and abortion. Republicans use that line to rally support for Mitt Romney in spite of his Mormon beliefs. Interesting?

Dwight

91 Frank L. October 21, 2012 at 6:05 am

Dwight,

Could it be that both are saying the same thing because it is “true.”

After all, 2 plus 2 equals 4 regardless of whether you are a Democrat or Republican.

92 Greg Alford October 21, 2012 at 11:43 am

Dwight,

I wish we lived in a Nation that was run by a Christian Government… But we do not… And as Christians it is past time we stop fooling ourselves and pretending that we do.

Neither man running for President is, in my opinion, a Christian. Therefore, I will vote for the one I believe will provide the leadership our nation needs at this critical time.

93 Lee October 21, 2012 at 10:50 pm

It is ridiculous to think that voting for a third party candidate, or a write-in, is a benefit to one major party candidate over the other, especially in the electoral college system that we have to elect a president. That’s just poppycock, Greg. There’s no way that not voting for someone is voting for them. If you can’t vote your conscience, why bother? Both choices are, by your very definition, evil. Since when is there a difference in the degree of that?

Romney is a Mormon, and a member of one of their priesthood rankings, which means he’s sworn a blood oath of loyalty to the church and its founding prophet, Joseph Smith, as well as to its living prophet. I can certainly see him using the power and money of the United States government to “self-fulfill” Mormon prophecy because they believe it is their destiny. I don’t want to contribute to that, nor to the Mormon church being able to claim divine favor if he is elected, which is exactly what they will do. I don’t want to be responsible for advancing the message of a gospel that Paul calls “accursed” in Galatians 1:8-9.

There are lots of reasons not to vote for Obama.

So I will vote my conscience, stand for truth, and either find a third party candidate who represents me, or write in Mike Huckabee’s name on my ballot.

94 Joe Blackmon October 22, 2012 at 8:06 am

It is most certainly reasonable to assert that a vote for a 3rd party candidate helps Obama. Duh.

No 3rd party candidate will ever win the White House. The only people thinking about voting 3rd party are folks who have said they won’t vote for Obama. Therefore, every vote for a 3rd party candidate is a vote that should have gone for Romney.

95 Tom Parker October 21, 2012 at 1:57 pm

So now we have Southern Baptist pastors who are going to vote for man they “know” is not a christian. I do not get it. Could it all be that because he is a REPUBLICAN his “religion” gets a pass.

In other words does SBC=REPUBLICAN?

It would be funny if it was not so serious watching the linguistic gymnastics of some SBC pastors who I think would raise holy Cain if their members acted this way about other religious issues.

Does no one see the inconsistency?

96 Adam G. in NC October 21, 2012 at 3:25 pm

I think you need to seek the counsel of Dr. Richard D. Land of the ERLC about this. Apparently someone’s not mixing your Kool-Aid strong enough.

97 Bart Barber October 21, 2012 at 4:08 pm

Historically speaking, conservative Southern Baptists are the members of the denomination who have demonstrated greater political independence. For the first 130+ years of our convention’s existence, the SBC walked in lock-step with the Democrat Party. After Roe v Wade, conservative Southern Baptists were independent enough to depart that party relationship and work with the GOP.

Of course, not everyone went along. Some Southern Baptists were unwilling to contemplate changing political parties.

98 Joe Blackmon October 21, 2012 at 4:14 pm

Voting for Obama, as you did, is voting for a non-Christian.

99 cb scott October 21, 2012 at 7:22 pm

Tom Parker,

Liberal is as liberal does, right? You are a liberal. You vote wrong because you are a liberal. it has nothing to do with the party in your case. You are a liberal, therefore you are always wrong about anything, political, theological, or about how is the best way to fry an egg.

Liberals are just wrong. But we conservatives love you anyway and are trying our best to protect you from yourselves, but I must admit, you guys are some real hard cats to clean after sometimes.

100 Chris Roberts October 21, 2012 at 10:32 pm

Trying to protect people from themselves? Now *you* sound like a liberal! Next thing we know, you’ll be proposing things like limits on drink can sizes.

101 cb scott October 22, 2012 at 8:03 am

Chris Roberts,

Tom Parker “ain’t heavy, he’s my brother” so I must protect him from himself.

But you are right. He could get heavy and be hard to carry if we don’t downsize the size of those drinks. Point well made and I shall take it under advisement.

102 Greg Alford October 21, 2012 at 10:19 pm

Tom,

“… does SBC=REPUBLICAN?”

The SBC may not be 100% Republican… But the vast majority are 100% Conservative… And that means that in this election the vast majority will vote Republican… Which means that given the choice between Obama and Romney, they will vote for Romney.

Your calling this “linguistic gymnastics”… Just shows the extent to which the Liberal mind does not understand Conservative Christians… and in this case the SBC.

103 Jess Alford October 21, 2012 at 8:21 pm

I vote for Russ Troll.

104 Christiane October 21, 2012 at 10:06 pm

. . . . just read the best article!!!
it was written in 2007 but it still applies so much to the troubles of some Christian communities of faith today. It’s short but thought-provoking for sure.
Here’s a quote from it:

“We’ve identified the gospel with a political and social perspective that few people can identify with who haven’t been raised in it. We’ve essentially said, “You can’t join our club unless you’re willing to subscribe to all twenty-six points of our worldview.” And then we wonder why our churches stagnate, growing, if at all, through transfers from other churches. We are relevant only to one another. Welcome to the Christian ghetto.”

Here’s the web site:
http://www.schooleyfiles.com/2007/04/ghettoization-of-american.html

this article reflects on what happens when the focus of the Church becomes directed away from ‘Christ and Christ Crucified’,
and from the ‘mission’ of Christians to bring Christ to the world.

I don’t know much about the author, but I think at the time, his article may have applied, but today in our time, his article seems downright prophetic. It’s a good read.

105 Jess Alford October 21, 2012 at 11:07 pm

Greg Alford

I don’t think that the vast majority of Christians in the SBC are conservative. I believe it is more of an even split. It would be great if you are right.

106 Les Sinks November 4, 2012 at 11:17 pm

Dave,
I wished your comments above had appeared in the Illinois Baptist along with your article blasting Billy Graham and urging for Romney to come to Christ. While I too believe MOrmonism to be a cult and do not believe in aligns with orthodix Christianity, I join in in a hunger for a change in the White House.
I am one evangelical who is nauseated with his stand and support of murder of the unborn and greed to be reelected so passioning to adopt the gay agenda and endorse same sex marriage. And worst than that for our country is his love for radical Islam and thorwing at least 5 iftar parties in our White House. He has lied and decieved America long enough and must go! As the Bible speaks of antichrists in the last days-I for one believe he is one. He has taken us down the same tunnel of belief mentioned in the Communist Manifesto (to socialism and getting the general populace to depend on the government. Thanks

107 Tom Parker November 5, 2012 at 7:56 am

Dave Miller:

You said:”So, I am a conservative Christian ready to vote for a Mormon to be the next president of the United States”

I just can not believe you and other SB, especially Southern Baptist Pastors are willing to vote for a Mormon.

All the talk by many in SB life over the years preaching about the Bible being our authority for our daily lives and then the 2012 election comes along and its a new story when it comes to voting especially in my opinion for a Republican.

For years and years the SB position on Mormonism was it was not a christian organization and that Mormons were not christians. That is what I was taught and heard preached at all the SB churches I ever attended.
From where I sit it has been very sad to watch the gymnastics performed by some to justify voting for Romney.

Politics and religion sure make strange bedfellows.

What will be the next position that–especially SB leaders change to suit some current need?

108 John Wylie November 5, 2012 at 9:22 am

Tom,

I thought you liberals were all about tolerance and diversity. No one here is for Mormonism, but the truth is that even in his Mormonism Governor Romney probably believes the Bible more than the president does. There is no substantive difference between liberal Christianity and Mormonism so it makes your whole religious litmus test a wash.

President Obama has demonstrated that he does not govern as a Christian would. His stands on homosexual marriage and military service and his stands on abortion disqualify him from claiming the moral high ground over any person of any religion.

109 John Wylie November 5, 2012 at 9:48 am

Did you miss the sermons teaching that homosexuality is wrong? Or abortion? You come on here and act as if our choice is between a Mormon and a bible believing Christian. President Obama does not govern as a Christian.

110 Debbie Kaufman November 5, 2012 at 2:18 pm

My thoughts go to the book of Daniel and Daniel’s capture and how he handled allegiance or non-allegiance to the government of that day.

111 Dwight McKissic November 5, 2012 at 4:17 pm

Joe,

It is untrue, unkind, ungodly, and not in keeping with the spirit of Christ , to say to Debbie-or anyone else–”you don’t have enough upstairs to have “thoughts”.

You need to repent to the Lord and Debbie for your attitude and speech. You language is sexist, condescending, and arrogant. I deeply resent, and I’m highly offended at the attitude you’ve displayed here. Please repent, in order to be right with God, and with your sister in Christ.

Dwight

112 Dave Miller November 5, 2012 at 6:21 pm

Normally, Dwight, when I delete comments, I delete the comments that refer to the deleted comments. But I am leaving yours up because it makes a righteous call for repentance that my friend Joe Blackmon needs to heed.

Joe, I have reached the end of my tolerance for your unkind and ungodly insults toward others. You are free to comment here at any time, but until you demonstrate an ability to comment within the boundaries of Christian kindness, I will have to approve your comments before they appear.

113 Dave Miller November 5, 2012 at 6:29 pm

Tom, since neither candidate, in my view, is an orthodox, Bible-believing Christian, I vote for the candidate that most closely holds to the values I hold.

Since President Obama is an enthusiastic supporter of the brutal act of killing babies in their mother’s wombs, he does not get my vote. I cannot imagine why anyone with a conscience could consider voting for someone who supports the murder of babies in their mothers’ womb.

Would you even consider someone who thought that kind of murder was morally acceptable, Tom? Would your conscience allow you to vote for such evil?

I can’t.

114 Jake Barker November 5, 2012 at 1:21 pm

I said it before the last election (2008) and I have not recanted. I say it again and use the polls that have been taken in the other pagan nations of this world as proof, Obama is the antichrist. It would suit me just fine if the rapture came at dawn tomorrow. I know it didn’t happen today because you guys are still here arguing ;-)

Comments on this entry are closed.

{ 3 trackbacks }

Previous post:

Next post: