The video below is of Julie Meyer who is an associate of Extreme Prophetic’s Patricia King and is tied to the Bob Jones Ministry along with The Elijah List which is a part of Lou Engle’s Joel’s Army. And guess who they are supporting as ‘God’s Ticket’? Friends, Sarah Palin is not on God’s ‘ticket’. There is no such thing. I don’t like beating a dead horse, but friends, there is a reason why Christ told His people to come out of Babylon… and He was not meaning the Catholic Church or the Denominational Churches.
God's ticket? Really? Does that mean that if you vote Democrat, or even Constitutional Party, Libertarian, or Reform, then you are standing against God? When did God endorse anyone?
Do you believe what she said? Do you really buy into it? If you don’t, tell me, why do you think the adversary is using his broad army of false prophets to usher in this ticket?
Jesus answered, “My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, My servants would fight, so that I should not be delivered to the Jews; but now My kingdom is not from here.” (John 18:36 NKJV)
From here (who goes the hat tip for this post)
Like the boy who cried wolf, every four years Christians pull out this passage to ensure that the faithful understand that “This Election Is the Most Critical One Our Nation Has Ever Faced.™”
The passage in question:
If my people who are called by my name humble themselves, and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and heal their land. —2 Chronicles 7:14
I speak here as a fundamentalist supercessionist. We have to remember that when God talks about His people, He is not talking about political boundaries - at least not under the New Covenant (And remember, we are under the New Covenant, so those promises to Israel are overwhelmingly given to the Church). Instead, He speaks about the spiritual boundaries - the Church. The United States is NOT the Church. Christ DID NOT die to make this country free or to create the Republican Party. There is a song in Southern Gospel music that tells us that the flag flies high in the shadow of the Cross. Nearing blasphemy, this song helps to portray the idea that to be Christian is to be American and vice versa. Christ is not a Republican. If anything, His determination to help the poor, to upset the Religious Authorities and to separate Church and State...well, still new here.
For those not familiar with Joel's Army, it is a group that has aligned itself with the position that the Kingdom of God has to be established on Earth, and of course, the first place seems to be the American Republic. They have taken the idea of American Exceptionalism and made it a doctrine. Their states goal is to overtake the world by taking over the local congregations. Their peculiar view of Revisionist History has the Republic as annointed by God for the Final Days. This religious-political movement stands as a grave threat to the American Republic and indeed to religious freedom the world wide. The opinion that all other religions and denominations are hellbound is fine, except when it becomes a political force.
Does this worry anyone esle?
24 comments:
Great first post. It nicely complements the above one on Roger Williams. Your theology on Church/State matters is not unlike Williams'.
.
Polycarp (?) asks, "Does this worry anyone else?"
.
I don't know how much attention anyone has given to this video's kind of talk; but, it is completely complimentary to the neo-conservative interest for a global take over.
.
If these people are successful, they will make Hitler look like an angel of light.
.
Roger Williams?
.
.
Is this the same Julie Meyers that George W. Bush appointed to head the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency within the Department of Homeland Security?
.
God's ticket? Really? Does that mean that if you vote Democrat, or even Constitutional Party, Libertarian, or Reform, then you are standing against God?
Yes.
Nice debut post! I'm sure it will ignite some good discussion.
...tell me, why do you think the adversary is using his broad army of false prophets to usher in this ticket?
If I understand fundamentalist lingo correctly, what you're asking here is
"Why are the minions of Satan supporting McCain/Palin?"
Is my translation accurate?
Tom, yes you translation is correct.
All, thanks for the comments. I was unsure as to post this, wanting to look around first, but again, thanks for the comments.
I believe in the quick and sure separation of Church and State, and further, for the need for it to be maintained.
The minions of Satan support McCain? Geez, so the guys on Obama's side, Ayers, Ofleger, Wright, Rezko and on and on, that's the angelic host I guess?
Who knows, they may very well be, but none of those listed on Obama's side is promoting the idea that God is some how going to make him (or I guess Joe Biden) the new president because it is God's Ticket. None of them, as well, is promoting a take over of churches to bring about the Kingdom of God on earth.
I don't really care if 'satan' is behind this or just a really smart person, but the fact is, when you start using religion as your key to victory in politics, then you are turning to the dark side.
.
Polycarp closes with "...when you start using religion as your key to victory in politics, then you are turning to the dark side."
.
That's a fairly strong statement; but, I have to say that I certainly agree with it in some sense.
.
When we look for the source of the values most honored in society, much support is given for the idea that our values come from God. I've seen several references, in these blogs, to the idea that certain Founding Fathers credited religion with being the source of morality.
.
Be that as it may, we have come some distance since those days when our Founders had a very limited understanding about the workings of our minds and of how things come to be. Science has advanced by veritable leaps and bounds bringing even school children advanced knowledge over what George Washington had available in his mind--no disrespect for who he was or his position in human society during the Founding Era.
.
Our values are forged in time and we have come to see they do not originate outside our experience; but, come from within us. Yet, we tend to ignore the true values we have learned in deference to those given to us from the "good books" of whatever culture into which we happen to be born.
.
We know, from historical lessons, that religion takes us to the dark side.
.
Polycarp is correct.
.
IMO.
Okay, a few comments....
1. Jesus' kingdom is indeed NOT of this world, and I'm very uncomfortable with any group like "Joel's Army." I do not support the idea that McCain-Palin is "God's ticket." I would not apply the descriptor to Obama-Biden either or any presidential campaign.
That said...
2. Religiously minded individuals, including extremists like the ones featured in this video, have every right to engage the political process. They have their freedom of speech and participation. And it's NOT a violation of the separation of church and state for them to exercise that freedom. On the contrary, the First Amendment's "free exercise" clause protects the rights of groups like "Joel's Army" to say whatever they want about God's will, the election, John McCain, Barack Obama, etc.
Brian, you are right, except for the coercion factor. Many of these evangelicals, pentecostals, and fundamentalists believe that the 'prophet' is speaking directly for God. Look at how these people view their pastors, as if the pastor is infallible. For these people to imply that God has endorsed a ticket and that we must vote for that ticket is political coercion.
.
The issues here are complex to the extreme.
.
They start out with a Catherine Kuhlmanesque "prophetess" repeating words she has received directly from Jehovah God of the Bible and they end up with mention of the "free exercise" clause.
.
How can we deal with any of it without ascribing to each detail?
.
In other words, bringing in the idea that "...Jesus' kingdom is indeed NOT of this world,", puts us in the place where we can talk about the Second Coming which IS of this world according to Fundamentalist Evangelicalism. That takes us in every imaginable direction.
.
Polycarp asks the question about whether or not any are concerned about how such "free exercise" might impact on our society and, further, complains that the results are "political coercion" [on the faithful]. I think I have to agree.
.
I don't think the issue has anything to do with free exercise or free speech.
.
Right, and we can't have people freely choosing to be part of a religion that compels them to do something.
The fact is there are nuts invoking God on both sides of this election. Hell, Farakhan just called Obama the Messiah. People are going to make decisions based on all sorts of factors, some rational, some not. That will always be true.
How much stronger is this form of political coercion than, say, the influence placed on an urban black man to vote Obama?
I'd say Joel's Army is more coercive, but not by much.
Wake me up when Joel's Army represents 10% of the population.
Government can and should take steps to discourage coercion via mind-altering drugs, mental or physical abuse, kidnapping, extortion, blackmail, etc.
But let's not confuse persuasion with "coercion." Some cult leaders, preachers, and others (shoot, let's not limit ourselves to religion here) are very effective at propaganda and persuasion. Think about time share salesmen or some car salesmen.
We have to be very careful here. I sense that some people (not saying you, Polycarp, or anyone here) are so angry at 'organized religion' or 'religious extremists' that they entertain the idea that the government should restrict the free speech or free exercise rights of these groups.
We need to be careful here. As extreme as "Joel's Army" is, they have a right under the Constitution to engage the political speech. They have a right to say that John McCain and Sarah Palin represent "God's ticket." They have a right to say that. They're WRONG to say it IMO, but they have a right to be wrong.
Brian states:
"We have to be very careful here. I sense that some people (not saying you, Polycarp, or anyone here) are so angry at 'organized religion' or 'religious extremists' that they entertain the idea that the government should restrict the free speech or free exercise rights of these groups."
Exactly right!
It would be insane for the government -- or the public -- to demand that all forms of religious "radicalism" be done away with or restricted in some way. This is just nuts.
Brian also writes:
"let's not confuse persuasion with "coercion." Some cult leaders, preachers, and others (shoot, let's not limit ourselves to religion here) are very effective at propaganda and persuasion. Think about time share salesmen or some car salesmen."
One thing I would like to add to Brian's statements above -- and is often an element that we all forget -- is that people are INDIVIDUALLY RESPONSIBLE for believing what they choose to believe. Though I agree that there are a large number of religious nut-jobs out there, I am also forced to recognize the reality that NOBODY is holding a gun to the believer's head. People follow religious leaders of their own free will. To deny them that right would fly in the face of our rights to liberty.
In conclusion, though I strongly disagree with a number of religious institutions -- in fairness I agree with a number of others -- I am forced to acknowledge that Brian is 100% right on this one. We cannot deny people the right to believe and vote their beliefs, even if they are crazy.
Huisman, send me an email.
I have no problem with organized religion, rather I would promote it, however, I do have a problem with religious groups that would promote taking over the government. Wouldn't we have a problem with and Islamic 'Joel's Army?
Polycarp, I have a "problem" with Joel's Army. You get no argument from me there. My point is that, in spite of my personal "problem" with what they say, I would defend their political and legal right to SAY it. In other words, I believe in the free speech and free exercise rights of groups like Joel's Army - whether they be Christian, Muslim, Jewish, atheist, whatever.
.
Does anyone here know what meaning was applied to the word, infidel, during Washington's lifetime?
.
Generally, these days, infidel is used to connote a person of a different religious belief. Could not a staunch Catholic think of an Baptist as possibly being an infidel?
.
It seems like a "soft infidel" might be someone for whom you're not very sure about their belief.
Phil,
See my latest comment to Brian's post.
Hah!
.
I thought I posted my questions about infidel at Brian's post.
.
I must be getting old.
.
heh heh
Post a Comment