vs.
This was an important and historic exchange that happened this morning. I hope you didn't miss it. When watching both Obama and Cheney I kept asking myself: who is the one that speaks with authority; who is the one whose words have weight; who brings the gravitas?
You can read a combined and edited transcript of both their remarks in a point/counterpoint format here from the Washington Wire. A great synopsis of today's speeches on national security.
Former Vice President delivered today one of the great compelling moments on post-911 national security. It was nothing short of superb. You can read the transcript here.
However, Precedent Obama was nothing short of empty rhetoric. It was an apology to the terrorists; it was a national embarrassment. Obama is not cool; he's cold. And on the issue of national security, he is woefully inept. I guess governing all 57 states, One is bound to make gaffs. Take this morning for example The Precedent introduces his Defense Secretary (reading from a script mind you) as William Gates. William Gates? For those less informed, our Defense Secretary is Robert Gates. (William Gates is the founder of Microsoft.)
Says Brett Ratner of the Center for Constitutional Rights,
“He wraps himself in the Constitution, talks about American values and then proceeds to violate them.”
It would bode you well to read through Tom Maguire's recap at his JustOneMinute on this important issue of national security. It is brilliant. One of the great pundit lines on this morning is from ALLAHPUNDIT over at HotAir. He says this,
"In a nutshell: We must look forward while also remembering that everything is Bush’s fault, and we must not abandon our core ideals unless doing so would make things too difficult for The One."
Obama really is quite intellectually slow of mind. And they dare called Bush stupid. You can read Precedent Obama's speech here.
As always, pray our national leaders according to 1 Tim. 2:1-4.
47 comments:
Some trust in chariots, some trust in horses (or men, governments, or nations), but we will trust in the name of the Lord our God.
Neither man is an example to the believers.
Rick
I don't often, but I must disagree a bit here with you brother in this regard:
Not speaking politically, but ideologically, Cheney's words took courage and integrity to say. His yes is yes... That can be a good example to believers to remember to stand firm for the gospel.
IOW, some will exemplify tremendous courage for political causes, how much more should we as believers in the Lord Jesus Christ and His gospel demonstrate unwavering conviction and courage to contend for the truth of our Lord?
Well, Mr. Chaney uses public profanity and is in favor of gay unions (understandably because of his daughter). However, for me, Steve, I find the affection for a country as idolatry, and that usually leads to divided loyalties.
The debates on the tactics designed to protect this nation are of no concern for me, the gospel, only the gospel. Entangling ourselves with the affairs of this world and the political machinations of men obscure the gospel and portray us as part of a multi-faceted conversation about dead nationalism and morality.
Why should anyone protect a governmental construct which on some level is a machine for infanticide? Perhaps that might be working against God.
* I feel strongly about this issue with no disrespect for anyone.
"Obama really is quite intellectually slow of mind."
That statement is condescending and untrue, unless it is a clever way to say "I disagree with him". He may be an unbeliever, but he has accomplished much, is a loving and committed husband, adores his daughters, cares for his mother-in-law, and seems to have a pleasant disposition.
We should not, as believers, suggest a limited intelligence with those we disagree. It is definitely something some talk show hosts would say.
No voting believer should have cast their vote for Obama, however this is not the battle to which we are called. Our party is the Redemption Party.
Rick
I used the term "slow of mind" not meaning stupid, but the inability to discern correctly.
I.e. That is why I cited that Obama refers to the US as having 57 states; and still can't get his own Secretary of Defense name correct - even when written out for him.
Those are obvious gaffs. But those gaffs have more serious consequences when he wants to treat international terrorists as American citizens deserving of due process of law and to be housed on US soil rather than to be treated as terrorists who are prisoners of war.
I out of 7 detainees at GTMO released returned back to assume their terrorist duties. For Obama to embrace this strategery is deadly for our national security.
He is naive; unpresidential on this issue; and his speech today was nothing short of an apology to terrorists and especially those who have been stayed at GTMO.
The Democratic Leadership has shut him down on closing GTMO - that is good news. But Obama still remains more concerned with national imagery around the world, rather than national security for our nation.
Hope this helps a bit more to clarify.
Steve
I believe the 1 out of 7 recidivism rate would be considered a success in our own penal institutions. What do we as believers think will happen when these detainees are returned to the same poverty ridden and godless cultures?
Steve - we cannot become consumed with protecting America, we must see those detainees in the same redemptive way we see our own children. Have we been vocally demanding gospel access to these men? So home they go, some having been subjected to torture, without having received any significant gospel witness, and we are outraged only that they return to terrorism?
I know of no church or believer (including myself) who have requested the names of the detainees or who regularly pray for their souls. God is not interested in playing nationalistic games, His kingdom can only spread through a bold and loving witness of the gospel of Jesus Christ.
The pursuit of protecting our hedonistic lifestyle and our many moral injustices and our continuing infanticide is not what our Lord is all about. It cannot be supported by Scripture at all, if indeed that is solely what we profess to obey.
Steve, when it comes to politics I do not feel that you show the "discernment" you yourself seem to hold in high regard. Neither does there seem to be any sense of balance here.
There has been much posted here in recent months decrying abortion as murder and celebrating those who supposedly stand against sexual immorality. Yet, I believe it is Revelations 22 verse 15 that puts those who practice falsehood equally outside God's favor as the murderers and sexually immoral.
It seems clear to me that Mr. Cheney is one who practices falsehood. He led America to war saying that Iraq had WMDs when it was clear afterwards that there had been no evidence for it, and this fact was well known by those in power.
As a practicer of falsehood, Mr. Cheney should not be celebrated as a man of integrity or honor. If you proclaim Obama is ungodly you should admit Cheney is equally so.
Steve, I feel that you have an entrenched political view and were never going to see Obama's speech in a positive light or Cheney's in a negative one. I belive that when it comes to your political viewpoint, you are unthinkingly drinking the Kool Aid the likes of Hannity and Limbaugh peddle on their shows and in their books. I challenge you to turn a more critical eye on the propaganda certain pundits on the right espouse.
While neither man is a great example of godliness or honesty, I do think that Mr. Cheney is right to defend himself. However, his party would not have lost the election if the Bush administration had made these points as boldly as Cheney did today.
In the past few months while feeding our newborn I have been watching Lou Dobbs in the middle of the night. I think his independent views and those of such 3rd parties like the Constitution Party and Libertarian Party make very good points.
I've quit trusting in the 2 main parties. I do vote, but my trust is in the Lord. I'm a conservative but the Republican party has moved from conservatism to neo-conservatism. I'm looking forward to the government of King Jesus. Come quickly, Lord Jesus!
wow... Mr. Camp, I really respect you, but I couldn't possibly disagree with you more vehemently on this subject.
Are we not citizens of 2 kindoms? Can we not operate in the here and now with a view to the Kingdom that will be (and that already has begun)? Steve has the right to passionately pursue his politics as a human being living in the time and space of his temporal surroundings even as his ultimate allegiance remains strongly in submission to King Jesus.
The problem comes when we conflate the 2 kingdoms (of man / of God) and in practice act as if the Kingdom of God is going to somehow show up through the agency of the politics of the kingdom of man. Never!
Gosh, I think I'm rambling. It's too late at night. I'm going to bed.
We cannot serve two masters and we cannot serve two kingdoms. When beliveres gather on Sunday morning on July 5th this year and place their hand over their hearts and pledge ALLEGIANCE to a piece of cloth that represents a hedonistic culture that specializes in infant murder and open sin and pluralism (idaoltry) we commit sacrilege.
I say without hesitation that if any of the apostles were in that service they would aghast. John the Baptist would interupt the service. All our lives patriotism has been drummed into us, even in Christian schools, therefore it is difficult to see the spiritual duplicity in that. And we have been lied to when we've been taught God created America.
Someome show me from Scripture where revolting violently against your government is Scriptural. It does not matter whether it was over taxes (which it was) or the right to worship, violence is never allowed in Scripture.
The American church continues to assume a position of national arrogance and spiritual idolatry. Come out from among them and be ye separate, and, whta agreement has light with darkness.
Lots of good comments here I think...I particularly agree with Risk Frueh and Dave Algie. I am reminded of an article written by R.C. Sproul in reference to a discussion he had with Francis Shaeffer (Tabletalk Magazine) in which he warns of the dangers of what he calls "statism". Here is a partial quote:
"Throughout the history of the Christian church, Christianity has always stood over against all forms of statism. Statism is the natural and ultimate enemy to Christianity because it involves a usurpation of the reign of God. If Francis Schaeffer was right—and each year that passes makes his prognosis seem all the more accurate—it means that the church and the nation face a serious crisis in our day. In the final analysis, if statism prevails in America, it will mean not only the death of our religious freedom, but also the death of the state itself. We face perilous times where Christians and all people need to be vigilant about the rapidly encroaching elevation of the state to supremacy."
just a thought from a chubby old lady;)
eep... i meant *Rick* Frue, not *Risk*...
like i tell my kids: proofreading is a good thing☺
Rick Frueh,
Love you brother, but if you really believe what you're saying than aren't you an anarchist?
"We cannot serve two masters and we cannot serve two kingdoms."
I mean no disrespect; however, I'm trying to follow your logic. It seems that you're potentially ignoring the elephant in the room. Let me describe it: You're already serving 2 kingdoms. As a human being who loves Jesus and longs for His appearing you're living in the here and now and are part of an established nation that has been ordained by God to exist (whether it's an evil nation or not is another topic - fact is God wills it to exist).
Do you not have duties as a citizen of this country? And, if so, aren't those duties ways to "honor the king" and isn't seeking to "live a peaceable life working with your own hands" for the common good a way to have the door open for the gospel's expression through your chaste life?
Incidently, I agree with you regarding some of what you've said. I don't think we should conflate the two kingdoms in our minds and especially in our corporate worship gatherings. But just because the gathered church and the voice of the church institution shouldn't be focused on politics doesn't mean that individual Christians can't engage the political process and seek to be salt and light in a dark world for the common good and for God's glory.
What do you think?
To AllA few clarifying statements:
1. I am against statism
2. The remedy is not more and better government
3. We do live here first and foremost as citizens of heaven, but also as citizens of earth; therefore we are beholding to the laws of this nation to honor them and the leadership of this country
4. It is a good thing to support leaders in a free voting society that not only line up on some issues with a biblical ethic, but also with those whose policies and convictions are for the betterment of ones neighbor and world.
5. President Obama's worldview is to weaken national security, pass legislation to promote the further slaughter of unborn children, to increase government's hold on its citizens and businesses, and to honor the practices that undermine family.
6. Therefore I choose to state publicly my support of individuals within government, both republican and democrat, who as a conservative I personally think represent not only a biblical worldview on key issues such as abortion, but also have the best interests of our nation and its security in mind. Dick Cheney represents much of those convictions for me.
7. Lastly, the role and function of the church is not to act as an arm of the political process as some sort of religious PAC or value voters coalition. I have written against that more than any other blogger in evangelicalism over the past four years bar none - and it has cost me.
But it is the role and purpose of the church to proclaim His gospel; worship Him in spirit and truth; disciple other believers to maturity in Christ; fellowship; love our neighbor; fulfill the Great Commission and the Two Great Commandments, etc.
It's time for the church to be the church again.
But as a believer in the Lord Jesus Christ and His Word - and as an individual citizen of this country; within the boundaries of the law I may speak out from time to time on political issues that demand a response. This is such a time.
Yesterday was historic. Cheney delivered; Obama did not. Cheney was strong; Obama was weak. Cheney was resolved; Obama wants to retreat. Cheney spoke with authority; Obama spoke with sentimentality.
That is my opinion. And in that spirit I open my blog to other opinions different than mine to further and promote helpful discussion here.
Enjoy the day. Pray for our leadership in this nation at all levels.
Grace and truth,
Steve
1 Peter 2:11-17
We should obey the laws, and we should be good citizens in our communities. My point is involvement and partisanship. We should have no dog in this political fight, and we should be keenly aware that legislating morality cuts both ways as well as being humanistic.
In general, we are operating completely in God's eternal kingdom, even when certain parts appear to intersect. The church's involvement inpolitics have diluted our message and represents a law gospel that projects moral issues far greater than redemption.
The "religious right" vehemently addresses issues such as abortion, gay rights, and others with a noticeable and painful absence of the cross. In this pluralistic endeavor the church has stoog shoulder to shoulder with Mormons, conservative Jews, the Roman Catholic Church, and many other unbiblical partnerships.
Our calling is Christ and His gospel, and the accompanying moral issues are dealt with inside the church where people who are inhabited by God's Spirit can understand and obey. But when we go without the camp, we must bear His reproach.
God's institution of human government are according to the dictates of His own will. But nowhere are we commanded to become involved, and in fact, the Scriptures where written under Ceasar, and does not refer to the humanistic form of government called democracy. And these subtle forms of democracy within the church should not be.
The eternal divide rests completely on Jesus, and when we replace Him with issues we diminish His Name.
Rick
May I ask you a question: did you vote in this last national election for President and congressional leaders; and if so for whom did you vote?
Thank you my brother,
Steve
James Hunt
A good balanced and helpful word... Thank you.
musicmike
However, his party would not have lost the election if the Bush administration had made these points as boldly as Cheney did today.
Bingo.
I agree with Hannity and Limbaugh on this point: McCain's whole campaign was a concession speech to Obama. He was more interested in tone than truth. And you can have both without sacrificing the other. Cheney's tone yesterday was brilliant but more than that it was substantive Even the most liberal of commentators gave him kudos for his speech. AND at the same time were honest about their angst towards Obama for being cowardice and shallow on such an important issue. It's no longer the conservatives that are having at it with Obama - his own leadership is taking him to task as well.
By endorsing Cheney yesterday doesn't mean that I applaud him on all levels either. But comparing the two from yesterdays speeches - my money is with the former VP. He spoke not politically, but as a legislator. And there is a difference.
Obama gave a campfire speech that sounded like he was still running for office; and this time, against Cheney.
BTW, if you all haven't heard, Cheney's speech was scheduled to occur yesterday several weeks ago. It was the Obama White House that wanted to possession itself in a stand off with him and scheduled just prior to his speech. That is why I said it wasn't politically motivated by Cheney - but it was by Obama.
He didn't look, sound or come off as Presidential, but as Commander in Community Organizer. And the world is watching.
The cross waves higher than the flag.
Steve
Dave Algie
It seems clear to me that Mr. Cheney is one who practices falsehood. He led America to war saying that Iraq had WMDs when it was clear afterwards that there had been no evidence for it, and this fact was well known by those in power.
That is not exactly true. The intelligence not only by our government, but France, England and Germany as well also supported the notion that Iraq had WMD. They had them in the past and the evidence then they thought were supporting WMD's currently.
Cheney didn't lie about that fact; but, if memory serves me correctly admitted publicly when the evidence revealed to the contrary. Since then, global intelligence has become more efficient and pronounced.
I don't think it is particularly fair or discerning to fault him or the heads of other nations for not being omniscient.
Steve
Steve - consistent with my views I have not voted for a decade. In the 2000 election I became very disquieted in what I was feeling toward liberals and was disturbed at the feeding frenzy in my church concerning the election.
I saw energy and discussion about politics that eclipsed any discussion about Jesus. I did a clandestine experiment and for months I arrived at church early, the place where we were supposed to be gathering to worship Jesus, and I listened to as many conversations as possible. The topics included:
Politics
Economy
Clinton, Kerry, Bush, etc.
Football
Sports
Children
Jobs
Health
Activities
The Election
Others
Amazingly, I did not hear one conversation that centered upon Jesus the Christ. I also saw my own compromising in years past. The church I was teaching at had Jeb Bush, a Roman Catholic, step up and give a short greeting in the Sunday morning service. Pamphlets were passed out with candidates and views.
It was amidst that atmosphere that I began a Biblical view of the relationship between the church and the government under which we live. I am convinced that our partisanship makes us less likely to love liberal sinners and conservative sinners. And the visceral dislike and even hatered for men like Obam reveal a spiritual duplicity that is created by a "love" for the country called America.
America, in practive, is no better that ancient Babylon. How in God's dear name can we claim God's will in embracing this nation as our own, and not just a part of the geographical sovereignty of our Maker?
And I know that some consider my views heresy, and I have come under some of the most virulent attacks within the church simply because I am not a patriot. What does that tell you?
"The cross waves higher than the flag."
No, the cross waves alone.
BTW - I hold no disrespect for anyone and claim no air of revelatory superiority. I appreciate being given a venue for some thought provoking issues.
This is iron sharpening iron without using our axes against each other.
I have to say, though I am not as articulate as Rick, I agree totally with his three comments above mine. So I just say, "Ditto." Or in my Gen-X speak, "WORD." :-)
@ Rick,
No voting believer should have cast their vote for Obama, however this is not the battle to which we are called. Our party is the Redemption Party.True no Christian could have nor can continue to support President Obama. However, being that the Left refer to him as our first ever Pastor in Chief and Obama's continual use of Matthew 25 to justify the legislation of immorality, I do think we need to be involved. Yes our battle is against spiritual hosts of wickedness but there are physical manifestations of that battle, and this is one example.
@ Rick,
America, in practive, is no better that ancient Babylon. How in God's dear name can we claim God's will in embracing this nation as our own, and not just a part of the geographical sovereignty of our Maker?I liken Liberalism to the Great Whore in Revelation. For me the only thing that keeps me voting, and voting for Republicans is that they are the only thing standing in the way of another Reign of Terror or purge of Christianity when Leftist Totalitarians completely control the State.
"Yes our battle is against spiritual hosts of wickedness but there are physical manifestations of that battle, and this is one example."
Those manifestations are feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, caring for widows, visiting the imprisoned, showing love to our enemies, and taking up our cross daily in a perplexing display of selfless humility while preaching Christ's gospel.
Taking political sides to protect a godless country is not among them.
Should the Chinese believers be patriotic? You may find they view their nation as a mission field not a sentimental object of love.
@Rick,
Those manifestations are feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, caring for widows, visiting the imprisoned, showing love to our enemies, and taking up our cross daily in a perplexing display of selfless humility while preaching Christ's gospel.
Taking political sides to protect a godless country is not among them.I was referring to opposing Obama in that comment in regards to his legislation of immorality. Yes we need to do those things but we are witnessing the emergence of a Totalitarian State that will seek to replace the Church and punish those who do those righteous things. I strayed from the issue of Obama vs Cheney.
Republicans offer only a slightly different level of morality. They are still political marionettes that have their own interests at heart and compromise when it is in their best interests.
The American government is a pluralistic machine that spends obscene amounts of money and is corrupt on many levels. The campaigns lie incessantly about each other, make unattainable promises, inflate their own record, produce manipulative commercials, and conduct their campaigns by polls and sociological groups.
Democracy is a form of government that allows the fallen nature of man to oversee itself and makes the church operate on their terms. God has called us to invade the darkness with a gospel sling and not Goliath's sword.
The church has been corrupted by human power at the expense of pursuing the divine. Do a google search and read how unkind and visceral are the attacks on Obama from Christian blogs. Even the respect that the Scriptures command are ejected due to "conservative values".
Until the church gets consumed with God's business, the kingdom of souls, we will continue to be diverted with the clang of political nonsense which is a redundant narrative that gains momentum every four years.
Rick,
I put this thought out, but hopefully it is still within the context of the original post. The way I see the End Times unfolding and what I get from Revelation is that there will be an unholy Unity of Politics, Religion and Economics. I am concerned about how the State will seek to replace the Church, not the other way around, which seems to be the assumption these days. I think Steve is right to oppose President Obama and I am less concerned about defending Republicans, because I think eventually they will cave as well and then Christians will be forced to focus on Jesus as Lord and Savior. My focus is to try and get people to prepare for that likely eventuality.
People assume this threat is from the Right, but I think it is likely from the Left. It does not mean Republicans will not contribute to it, but for now they are it. What were the options under the Nazis or Marxists? Once a Party has complete control over the State it will come after the Church.
"Once a Party has complete control over the State it will come after the Church."
And perhaps that is exactly what the "American" church needs. The underground Chinese church has experienced more growth in 50 years than any other indigenous church in history. They rejoice in their persecution, we attempt to avoid it.
And perhaps that is exactly what the "American" church needs. The underground Chinese church has experienced more growth in 50 years than any other indigenous church in history. They rejoice in their persecution, we attempt to avoid it.Agreed!
Psalm - We must remember that in all our strong convictions to remain humble. Steve is not a compromiser, he is pursuing the same journey as are we all. Breaking away from nationalism is fdifficult since it is so ingrained in us, and my enlightenment was all by His grace through His Spirit and none of my own intellect.
We should obey all the laws that do not conflict with God's, and this issue must never be brought up among unbelievers. I attempt to guard against pride about it even though I feel passionately about its dangers.
I appreciate the ministry of Steve Camp. BTW Steve, I continue to bring Dave and Sarah Puebla over to me view on this subject! I have known them for two decades and Dave has worked for me for 15 years. They are some of the finest Christians I have ever known (even they are Cal...never mind. :) )
Psalm
Though I appreciate the passion with which you have posted here, you have done so in an arrogant and accusatory manner. This does not represent our Lord well David nor His Word.
Please be careful, there is a difference between ranting, commenting, exhortation and slander.
I have deleted your comment for it does not keep within the guidelines of this blog or Christian humility, charity and biblical truth.
May I encourage to take these kinds of things elsewhere until you can honor the rules of this blog and communicate your thoughts in a manner that is helpful and beneficial for those who post here.
Grace and peace to you,
Steve
I liked Rick's first post in this thread.
First of all, Rick - couldn't agree more with your points. You have made them clearly, eloquently and humbly.
For too long, the church has become known for what it's against - not what it is for. This I believe is largely due to its entanglement in politics. We need to demonstrate our convictions by positive action, not negative reaction. For example - if we're anti abortion, the church needs to actively support single mums, and be encouraging more christian couples to adopt. If we're against socialism, then lets ensure that we're at least not using our riches to feather our own nests, but to provide for the poor and needy. If we're outraged at the murder of innocent American civilians by terrorists, then we should be as equally outraged at the killing of innocent civilians in Afghanistan by American fighters.
Just being against things achieves nothing, the church needs to demonstrate Kingdom values by the way we live; infiltrating the worlds values like yeast through a batch of dough.
@Ian,
For too long, the church has become known for what it's against - not what it is for. This I believe is largely due to its entanglement in politics. We need to demonstrate our convictions by positive action, not negative reaction. For example - if we're anti abortion, the church needs to actively support single mums, and be encouraging more christian couples to adopt..
I agree that the Church needs to act consistently on this. I also blog for a pro-life CPC: Crisis Pregnancy Clinic, something Liberals wish did not exist and want to see them shut down. I also hope to adopt, but my wife is not there yet. You could pray that God would change her heart.
But I do not like this new polemic coming out that frames it as what Christians are against and not for. Because I think this is essentially an issue about Christians living like we are priests of God, set apart, holy and righteous because our God is holy. And yet many "Christians" are helping to propagate sin via the influence of Liberalism in the Church.
As you should know it has gotten so bad that these Liberal "Christians" are even calling President Obama pro-life and that is truly sad and reflects how the Church is being changed by the culture, not the other way around, and this does have political implications. Someone said that war is politics by other means, well I take a step back because one's politics flows from one's theology, so politics is theology by other means.
You will now see the handwringing and anxiousness of many believers who say they trust in God's sovereign control but seem completely disquieted about the new Supreme Court nominee.
Either God is in control, or He is not. Is God panicked?
"Fear ye not, stand still, and see the salvation of the LORD, which he will shew to you to day"
God gets glory from those who exhibit complete trust in Him. We should have no place in the coming firestorm of subjectivism. There is only one person who sees without subjectivity. Jesus.
Rick
You will now see the handwringing and anxiousness of many believers who say they trust in God's sovereign control but seem completely disquieted about the new Supreme Court nominee.
But Sovereignty isn't fatalism. Christians should be concerned about this Supreme Court nominee of Sonia Sotomayor and her ideological and political convictions. There is a process of confirmation for any SCOTUS nominee by which we should learn what we can about this individual; make our voice known through the legislative process; and pray that the Lord would open or close this door as it meets his purposes and objectives.
Sovereignty doesn't relieve us of our responsibilities for either biblical worldview citizenship or as how we live as believers in the gospel. I.e., just because the Lord has marked out His chosen ones from the before the foundation of the world doesn't mean we don't proclaim the gospel and plead with men to flee the wrath to come and be reconciled to God.
In the same way, we must render unto Caesar the things which are Ceasar's... taxes, responsible citizenship, active participation through voting, and doing so to seek the welfare and betterment of our neighbor.
Concerned about this latest nominee? Yes. Surprised? No. Disquieted? No. Trusting in the Lord and His sovereign will on this? Yes. But still willing to do my homework and stay informed even as an example to my own kids as a future generation that will have to think about these matters very carefully, biblically, and circumspectly as well.
I will never understand the brand of democracy that touts freedom and elections, and then when a liberal gets elected, and his constitutional right is to nominate a Supreme Court Justice, and everyone acts like the President did something illegal.
Are God's hand's tied now? Has his throne been reduced a notch? Absolutely not - nothing has changed except the darkness has increased and the church should trim their wicks, not be concerned about the will of man.
I often feel like I out-sovereignty my Calvinistic brothers. I don't care who is elected or nominated, I care that God's church continues to view the problem and the solution through a window and not a mirror.
Our condition is so powerless, so worldly, so hedonistic, and so void of desperation that like Joshua we must clean our own house before we can even see clearly enough to pick out the wrongs in others.
Through the prism of pluralistic America, Sonia Sotomayor has a wonderful American story and her resume is outstanding. One man's legislating from the bench is another man's interpreting the constitution. And here is where the world cannot see Christ and His gospel because they can never understand the invective laced attacks against this poor women already on the vicious talk radio.
She ( a Catholic) is probably not saved and we should look at her as does God - lost. We need to project something different than morality for sinners to see redemption. And perhaps, if you believe God is involved in these things, it just may be God's will for Obama and his nominees as an open rebuke to His church.
But we seem to busy condemning others to even enetertain the though of a divine judgment upon us.
Dick Cheney on why, unlike John Kerry, he did everything he could to avoid combat in Vietnam.
“I had other priorities in the
60's than military service”
Not exactly the guy I want to be lectured about National Security and supporting the troops. He does not claim to be a christian and is not wise. Obama claims to be a christian though I am confused by his actions as I am by George W. Bush who told David Brody of CBN he doesn't take the bible "literally". I will let the Lord be the judge. Rick is right to not put faith in any man. Its amazes me how many christians actually believe there is virtue in being conservative or liberal. What a crock and a lie straight from the pit of hell. There is virtue in Christ alone.
Rick, you said:
...it just may be God's will for Obama and his nominees as an open rebuke to His church.
But we seem too busy condemning others to even entertain the thought of a divine judgment upon us.Rick, did you ever consider praying, "Lord, deliver us from evil" instead of always looking at the world's affairs as a way of God punishing the Church?
Too often I'm hearing Christians say that perhaps God is judging His Church. Well, "there is now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus". But Christ did come to judge the world. And remember, we are not of this world.
So, Rick, consider the Scripture that says, "And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to His purpose."
You said, "...the church should...not be concerned about the will of man", but shouldn't the Church be concerned if God is judging them?
And if you say that Sonia Sotomayor is a "wonderful" pick, then why would you say that God is judging the Church?
You can't have it both ways, unless you are saying that it is wonderful that God is using Sonia Sotamayor to judge the Church and the Church shouldn't be concerned. Your reasoning is quite flawed.
You sound like you have it in for the Church, like we're the bad guys.
There's a difference between chastisement and judgment. God doesn't condemn His Church, He chastises it (which is simply loving correction). And Jesus said that we are not condemned with the world. He said, "He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already..." (John 18:17-19)
My assessment of Judge Sotamayor was in an American context, not a Christian one. I do not believe God has it in for the church, but judgment must begin at the church, the unbeliever's judgment will be worse.
To whom much is given much is required. My objection to all of it is that the world sees no gospel and spiritual redemption.
And we are the bad guys who have been saved by grace alone. Paul wished himself accursed for the sake of his countrymen, would to God we demonstarted that same kind of sacrificial love.
No one can intercede and accuse simultaneously. Could we say, like Paul, that we are willing to go to hell in the place of all the liberals, gays, abortion doctors, Michael Moore, President Obama, Barney Frank, and the rest of the pitiful dead men headed for hell?
As a non-American I am profoundly perplexed by this debate.
A biblical view of national secuity is not even being discussed. In my view that it is not even close to setting up prison camps and torturing suspected terrorists. If even 1 in 7 is a terrorist what a monstorus injustice the the other 6!! National security measures in America have been profoundly troubling for the globe. America may be a safer place (or at least no more risky)however ask the Christians in Pakistan, Afganistan, Iraq, Iran, Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, Saudi arabia etc how US security measures have impacted their security! Biblical themes such as reconcilliation, forgiveness,mercy, blessing, justice, reason have flown out the window and been replaced by the idols of imperialism, nationalism, cooersion and belligerence. I am not an obama apologist, he dissapoints me on many fronts, however I am profoundly more dissapointed by the previous presidents actions. American national security measures have made the world a more dangerous place for the innocent. Even Conservative- pro-republican commentators will agree with me. So will the dead relatives of many families in the middle east.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/06/01/cheney-offers-his-support_n_209869.html
Cheney supports gay marriage. Therein lies the danger of holding up "conservative" leaders as examples to the believer.
Wow. Rick Frueh has spoken with incredible wisdom in this thread. Thank you, brother, for your commitment to the Kingdom.
My question is why do conservatives say they want less government, but then completely rely on the government when it comes to moral issues? Because it is way easier to pass a law against abortion than to take the love of Christ to young women in your community. As long as women have a desire to kill their children, no law will stop them. Only the love of Jesus can change their heart.
Post a Comment