A functional view of voting

My topic in this series is to think through a philosophy of voting. As with all these posts, my aim is not to tell you whom to vote for or even how to think about every issue, but rather to put in place some foundational ideas that will help us approach politics intelligently and wisely.

It’s important at the outset to remember what we are voting for. In our American system we will go to the polls in November and vote for many things: a president, a representative (at the state and federal level), possibly a senator or governor, maybe a mayor or drain commissioner. We’ll probably vote on a number of proposals, referenda, and tax increases. But we won’t be voting for our next pastor or who will we have dinner with next Friday. We won’t be voting on a confession of faith or a statement of Christology. We’ll be voting for politicians and for political proposals.

This is not to suggest that we must sequester politics from “spiritual things” and have no business bringing our faith into the voting booth. My point is simply that we must remember what we are doing (and not doing) on the first Tuesday in November.

Continue reading at thegospelcoalition.org

« Previous Article

Posting Policy

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse. Read more.

If you find a comment offensive, please flag it as inappropriate by hovering over the down arrow to the right of that comment and clicking on the "Flag as inappropriate" text. Once a comment receives three "flags," it will be hidden from further view.

http://www.missiontoisrael.org/ Ted R. Weiland

Whatever happened to Exodus 18, Deuteronomy 17, etc.:

"Moreover thou shalt provide out of all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness…." (Exodus 18:21)

"Thou shalt in any wise set him king over thee, whom Yahweh thy God shall choose: one from among thy brethren shalt thou set king over thee: thou mayest not set a stranger over thee, which is not thy brother."
(Deuteronomy 17:15)

Those instructions are not optional. Therefore, to do anything less is rebellion against Yahweh. This whole idea of electing the lesser of two evils is what came of the framers thinking they knew better than Yahweh and substitution their idea of elections for Yahweh's. That not even one constitutional framer contended for Yahweh, as did King Jehoshaphat, speaks volumes about the framers’ disregard for Him and His system:

'And he [King Jehoshaphat] set judges in the land throughout all the fenced cities of Judah, city by city, and said to the judges, Take heed what ye do: for ye judge not for man, but for Yahweh, who is with you in the judgment…. And he charged them, saying, Thus shall ye do in the fear of Yahweh, faithfully, and with a perfect heart." (2 Chronicles 19:5-9)
- Steve03
  
  For the love of God, your fellow citizens, and the nation, Ted, do not vote until the Lord gives you — written so "that he may run that readeth it" — the name of the candidate which is His choice. On second thought, however, given your views of the Constitution, it would by hypocritical of you to vote at all. So we needn't worry.
  - http://www.missiontoisrael.org/ Ted R. Weiland
    
    Steve, I already have His written Word to know that neither of today's candidates qualify according to His leadership qualifications. But, then why should they, being that the framers through out Biblical qualifications when, in the Article 6, they banned Christian test oaths?
    - Vladimir
      
      Give it a rest, Ted R. Weiland. We on this site enjoy the protections granted to us by the U.S. Constitution. We don't want it destroyed and we are suspicious of you and your kind who work to destroy it.
      
      You've been hired to just destroy the U.S. Constitution and remove the barrier to those who wish to subjugate us. We aren't buying, Ted R. Weiland. Give it a rest.
      - http://www.missiontoisrael.org/ Ted R. Weiland
        
        Nehemiah 6:8
      - Vladimir
        
        Nehemiah 6:8
      - Vladimir
        
        Also, Ted R. Weiland, Proverbs 1:7.
      - Evermyrtle
        
        I hope that you read that verse and applied it to yourself. A fool in his heart says, "There is not GOD" We know better that than but to know and not to practice the truth is worse than never to have known. Other people do not blind us we blind ourselves when we refuse to see the truth
      - Jeff Dixon
        
        The intelligent say it out loud.
      - Jeff Dixon
        
        Malachi 2
      - http://www.facebook.com/david.hodges.5070 David Hodges
        
        I would be interested in knowing which of God's laws you oppose, and why you exalt your own above His.
      - http://www.missiontoisrael.org/ Ted R. Weiland
        
        David, Vladimir is not likely to respond to this question being that he's a Mormon who exalts the Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants (which declares the Constitution is divinely inspired), and the Pearl of Great Price above God's Word and who personally shuns Yahweh's law, having no compunction, for example, about breaking the Ninth Commandment and bearing false witness against others.
      - Vladimir
        
        Well, Ted R. Weiland, you are batting almost zero again. I responded to your disciple's post, so you missed that.
        
        You erred when you claimed that I exalt other of God's scripture over His Bible. That's pretty hard to do. To illustrate, do you exalt the Old Testament over the New Testament? I don't think so and neither do you now that you've been enlightened.
        
        You are 100% correct on one point, however, I do believe the framers of the U.S. Constitution were divinely inspired. And there are a lot of non-Mormons that believe that too. It's pretty hard to swallow the thought that the founding fathers accomplished this monumental feat without divine help. The fruits of their inspired work has been a gigantic blessing to Americans for generations.
        
        As for your accusation that I have borne false witness against you, do you forget what transpired? You were given a chance to deny that you were/are receiving funds from leftist organizations directed by George Soros, who wants to destroy the U.S. Constitution.
        
        That's a pretty specific accusation. You refused to deny it. Why would you refuse to deny it? Because if your list of contributors is made public, you'd be exposed as breaking the Ninth Commandment. You chose deceit over bald faced lying. You could have chosen the truth.
      - http://www.missiontoisrael.org/ Ted R. Weiland
        
        Vladmir, Vladmir, more of your deception (I hope you're not typical of other Mormons). Your post to David Hodges was 3 hours after my post to you. Mormons you ought to rebuke this man; he's giving you a bad name.
        
        Furthermore, you know full well, I've denied your false charges several times. You just didn't like the way (with Nehemiah 6:8) that I did so. Well, get used to it, because that will be answer every time you accuse me of being financed by Soros or falsely accuse me of anything else.
        
        Even I had chosen not to answer your charges at all for the very fact their are asnine, wouldn't change the fact that you're guilty of violating the Ninth Commandment.
      - Vladimir
        
        Ted R. Weiland, I answered your toadie before I read your response to him. I then answered your post to him. My motive is to expose your hidden agenda to destroy the U.S. Constitution. Scoring points against you is just too easy to be satisfying.
        
        Your response to me with only a Bible passage is highly suspicious when a simple denial is all that was required. That's a tactic called deflection. You didn't deny anything. You only insinuated that I wasn't worthy of being responded to. That really aroused my suspicions.
        
        However, you just stated that you have denied my charges. You definitely haven't denied my charges! So now YOU STAND BEFORE US UNEQUIVOCALLY A LIAR.
        
        Ted R. Weiland, you should have quit a long time ago. Your kind eventually gets exposed. Just too much hubris.
      - Esther
        
        I see what you mean about Ted R. Weiland. See our conversation below. Dead End. And Evermyrtle: who is she to say she never rests? She never gets to the point where she is going, if you know what I mean.
      - Esther
        
        Mr.Weiland, the Saints believe each one of God's children are individuals who are protected by the tenant of free agency, given to all. Vladimir, thus, is not in trouble for standing for something about which he feels strongly, in fact he is earning points of which the angels are recording as he speaks. Remember, also, that we, as saints, do not have to believe anything that is not true, which is also an individual trait where each of us are at a unique stage in our progressing to know whatever.
        
        I think many people here do not understand these principles so do not understand just how reasonable our religion is…. not easy… just reasonable. Personally, I believe that Jesus was the same way. But many people do not see these aspects of a very well structured church that Christ would attend if he were here. Can you say that about your church?
        
        We have many more than ten commandments actually too numerous to list. If you will read just the first few paragraphs of Moses in the Pearl of Great Price, you will see that the Father's words are endless, also His meanings are spiritually discerned. That takes some practice, it's easy to let the secular world take hold and you could never hear the still small voice..
      - http://www.missiontoisrael.org/ Ted R. Weiland
        
        So, provided Vladmir is standing for something he feels strongly about, it's okay for him to libel me?
        
        Let me ask you, Esther, is there any of the tenets of the Mormon Church with which you disagree? Please enumerate them.
        
        I have read the Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants, and the Pearl of Great Price, and its for the very reason that you've explained (that they have added to the Word of God) and the many contradictions that I (and other Biblical Christians) condemn the Mormon Church as heretical.
      - Esther
        
        I have read Beale, Gaffin, MacArthur and heard lots and lots of Sproul, and I know for a fact that the crux of the entire practice of the Protestant religion is the constant search to relieve themselves of gross contradictions to the extent they don't even practice the simple Christ-like duties taught by Christ, their lives are essentially void of true human relationships and they are always sticking the bible verses in your face. I call such people pseudo-Christians. And Catholics are by far no-less hypocrites in the priesthood, where they practice total separation as in another, higher class from the people they serve. The latter are also classified by me as pseudo-Christians. I have asked you to do one real thing and you throw in my face that you have read this that and the other book. I do not recall any script anywhere where Christ-like behavior was to read a book. Now as I said before, sir, you don't know what I am simply talking about, for the simple reason you have not judiciously investigated the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the saints, as I have asked you, so this tells me really you don't want to know. Furthermore, any libel that is caused by any other person towards you will have to be between you and him.
        
        I already told you that we do not have to believe anything that is not true. Ponder that Ted. I am like Vladimir in the sense that any progress one makes in this life is between you and God and is therefore something that is sacred and not for public consumption. There are many things that are personal, and/or sacred, not secret, that in a one on one with a person one could share, but if you notice in this forum, trust is earned, therefore, I for one, stay on the defensive, as I believe is perfectly in keeping with my beliefs..
      - http://www.missiontoisrael.org/ Ted R. Weiland
        
        Nice. You didn't answer my simple questions, so let me pose them to you again:
        
        So, provided Vladmir is standing for something he feels strongly about, it's okay for him to libel me?
        
        Esther, is there any of the tenets of the Mormon Church with which you disagree?
      - Esther
        
        But I did. Now twice already. You do not have the precious talent of discernment. Ask Vlad how to get it. I am not a priesthood holder. He is. I am the teacher of 6 year olds.
      - http://www.missiontoisrael.org/ Ted R. Weiland
        
        I take it your "priesthood holders" are as Biblically qualified as are your "elders." Obviously, that they are slanders doesn't matter.
      - Esther
        
        This statement borders on slander. Is this where you wanted to take this conversation, then so be it. You corner a single saint and you must feel superior now that I won't answer your absurd statement. We never got past square one. So sorry.
      - Vladimir
        
        Esther, ignore Ted R. Weiland's posts. But for some real fun Google him. He's made some enemies and they aren't shrinking violets. Our guy's a busy little leftist beaver. Denigrating the U.S. Constitution isn't his only job, he's also attempting to infiltrate the Tea Parties.
        
        He runs a real anti-American ministry. He's got Alinsky's methods down pat. Bet he's bucking for Religion Czar if Obama gets re-elected. Jim Wallis better look out.
      - Esther
        
        An Alinskyite. Ted R. Weiland? Like Kronae et al? They ruin my day on a regular basis. Worse than that, they ruin our children's futures. Don't they know how obvious they are? Like I told him, he is totally lacking in discernment. It cannot be feigned.
      - Vladimir
        
        I hate to burst your bubble, Ted R. Weiland, but your attempt at victim status is about to be exposed. You have not been libeled because you did exactly what you are accused of.
        
        All posts are still available, so go back and show us where you denied that you were receiving funds from leftest organizations. All you did was post a bible passage.
        
        Now we ask ourselves, why would anyone post a bible passage instead of a simple denial? With suspicions aroused we press you again for a denial.
        
        We still get no denial but you double down and LIE that you HAVE issued a denial. Since that's an unequivocal lie, you can't cry victim with any credibility. You are guilty as charged.
        
        Now you triple down and libel me. By the way, now that we know you lie, don't bother denying that you receive funds from leftists. It would be meaningless.
      - http://www.missiontoisrael.org/ Ted R. Weiland
        
        Nehemiah 6:8
      - Esther
        
        Thank you, Vladimir!
      - Jeff Dixon
        
        Christians have been adding to the word of god for the last 2,000 years. It is hardly something new.
      - Esther
        
        You are so wrong. The way you put it, is in such a way who would want to untangle the mess in your brain, to then and only then, tell you what the saints believe. I guess this is the reason Vladimir would not respond. Your brain on this subject is knotty, an extremely serious condition I am afraid, the type of which afflicts the young and their ability to learn new concepts the way the Father intended. Sad really. I am sorry.
      - Vladimir
        
        Both of us, David Hodges, do not oppose any of God's laws. I do not have any of my own laws and neither do you. So what are you talking about?
      - Jeff Dixon
        
        Really, you do not oppose any of the laws attributed to god in the bible? Then why do you not enforce them?
      - Esther
        
        I differ on this point from Vladimir, but if you press him, I think he will probably agree with Joseph Smith that "the KJV is the most correct bible to the extent it is correctly translated."
      - Jeff Dixon
        
        So?
      - Esther
        
        So read it to your children like it is Aesops fables.
      - Jeff Dixon
        
        Do you tell your children that if they do not accept the stories in Aesop's fables, they will never go to heaven? If not, they are not remotely the same.
      - Esther
        
        That is correct. They are not the same. However, my remark was meant to be tongue in cheek since there are similarities at least for those who do not understand the depths of meaning, that they are indeed similar to fairy tales, at least from your point of view, no?
      - Jeff Dixon
        
        No, not at all. As I said, if you do not consider Aesop's Fables to be to true, then there is no comparison.
      - Esther
        
        I am confused at this point. My meaning for fairy tales is just a euphemism because I am talking to you. Wait a minute and I will take our fairy tales, or aesops fable and write in the Book of Mormon and the KJV Bible
      - Esther
        
        I understand what you are saying: Aesops fables are innocuous, the bible is threatening… is that the point?
      - Jeff Dixon
        
        In part. In addition, No one believes that the events described the Aesop's fables actually occurred.
      - Esther
        
        Can we back up here? I did not mean to imply that anyone believe Aesop's fables actually occurred, Mr. Dixon! When I referred to it initially it was to suggest one read the Book of Mormon to become introduced to the storytelling aspect of it…. in other words forget the religious aspect… just read it for pleasure. That is all I meant. I know you are an atheist and I believe you have no interest in the religious aspects, however there are some ethics stories and the characters involved, that assuredly you would find interesting maybe useful, to say the least. Is that any clearer?
      - Jeff Dixon
        
        I am not saying you did imply they occurred. I am saying that one difference between religious texts and Aesop's fables is that people believed the stories in the religious texts actually occurred. They do not think that way about Aesop's fables.
      - Esther
        
        I enjoy your clarity Mr. Dixon. Gee, this is an interesting outcome. The clergy must have been very busy gathering the sheep, to see the information spread in such a way as to see to it people believe and thus, change history. You must admit that Jesus Christ did change history. It is very difficult to suppose he did not exist. The commitment to make people believe was indeed an awesome task and must have been crucial to have so taken effect as it did. I never thought about it before actually.
      - Esther
        
        What part is the point, which is not?
      - Jeff Dixon
        
        I was referring to your entire comment when I said in part. The other part is what I added.
      - Vladimir
        
        Jeff Dixon, you are lumping me in with those who have only the Bible. We take a lot of criticism for having additional scripture and modern day prophets, but, man o man, does it come in handy when you want to cut right to the truth. I use to be a Methodist and I was blown to and fro on every wind of doctrine. Probably would have ended up like you, had it not been two sister missionaries who knocked on my door in Mainz, FRG many years ago.
        
        I learned that modern prophets had been called by God and directed to re-establish and run His church under His direction with all the saving ordinances restored. The priesthood was also restored to the earth as was the Gospel of Jesus Christ in all its fulness.
        
        That suited me just fine because I wanted the truth, but wasn't into digging through acres of books written by people from the dawn of time to the present who may or may not have had any idea of what they were writing about. The kicker was that I could KNOW for myself whether it was true or not. I put their promise to the test and I've been at peace ever since.
        
        I, therefore, am not riled by passages in the Bible that shock most godfearing folk who believe without understanding and have no place to go for the understanding. You've seen how the "guardians of the various faiths" eschew James 1:5 but quote a hundred passages to prove their point of the moment. I just relax and reflect on those days when I suffered as they are now, knowing that some will find the truth in spite of themselves and some unfortunately will not.
      - Jeff Dixon
        
        Whether you are bothered by the bible or not, you should be bothered by the silliness of the Book of Mormon.
        
        "I make a record in the language of my father … the language of the Egyptians." That's a strange language an Israelite around 600 BCE to write in! 1:2
        
        "I know that the record which I make is true."
        The book of 1 Nephi is true because Nephi says it is. And if you can't believe a pompous, Egyptian-speaking Hebrew that supposedly lived 2600 years ago, whom can you believe? 1:3
        
        After Lehi saw the burning pillar on a rock, he "he thought he saw" God, lots of angels, Jesus, and the 12 apostles — which is a strange sight for a Jew that lived 600 years before Jesus was born. 1:8-10
      - Vladimir
        
        Jeff Dixon, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints makes the bold claim that it is Christ's restored church on the earth today. It invites all to investigate and then ask God if that claim is true.
        
        If you really read the Book of Mormon and aren't someone who just visits anti-Mormon sites, tell me what is the first divine principle you come to while reading the Book of Mormon from the beginning.
      - Jeff Dixon
        
        Yes, I understand that. However, on what basis can you make that claim? There is Zero evidence of the Hebrews living in the Americas before the Europeans started to settle here. Not just a little evidence. Zero evidence.
      - Vladimir
        
        Jeff Dixon, God will confirm that we are preaching the truth. What can matter after that?
      - Esther
        
        Hi Mr. Dixon. I have to challenge you on this one. After all it is one of my favorite book of scriptures. Please Read KJV James 1:5. Following that, read Moroni 10:4. As they say in Japan at the Nike factory: Just do it. Have absolutely no preconceived notions about it. As though you are in weight-lifting class and the teacher says focus, and you full well know how to do it in that scenario. Deep breath, erase all doubt from your mind like it is "tabula rasa", an erased tablet. Do not think of anything unless the scripture tells you to. So please, just do it. Consider it an experiment.
        
        After that is done take your time to begin reading the text again directly from the BofM, without any preconception of any contradiction. In other words put the text aside that you have written about it and read straight from the book… or even try this with The NT Gospel of John from the King James Version.
      - Jeff Dixon
        
        What, pray tell, do the activities in Japan have to do with whether the verse is true or not?
      - Esther
        
        Did you say "pray"?
        
        It's just that I like the phrase and that was probably written when I was half asleep and I guess I did it to impress you with my knowledge of economics and business, that the request was not coming from some flake. Is that feasible?
      - Esther
        
        We do need that factory back in this country.
      - Esther
        
        your prayer was answered
      - Jeff Dixon
        
        No actually, it was not.
      - Esther
        
        that one needed a smiley face :)
      - Esther
        
        I told you why I used the Nike phrase "Just do it". You know Mr. Dixon, we are pragmatists, realists, scientists, business school grads, and so on in the Mormon church, too, We don't leave our brains – which I recognize we have two sides of it – at home when we go to church.
        
        You said, "Pray tell" and I won't repeat what you said about it, just re-read it yourself. I answered your prayer, oh, yes I did. :)
        
        Are you thinking subconsciously that I am some kind of a deity perhaps? (How do atheists think?) If so I hope it is the good kind. I don't mind being thought of as an angel for example. :) But not one with wings. That's pagan and Saints are not pagan.
        
        Here is what you get from an inactive scientist in the middle of changing jobs with nothing on her hands to do but type away on the blogs. My mind races through these kinds of questions in every direction because it is a new experience to be queried on things one rarely even thinks about, so I apologize.
      - Jeff Dixon
        
        I said pray tell, because it seemed amusing to me for an atheist to use that expression.
      - Esther
        
        yes, very. that's why I wanted to make sure it got on the record :)
      - Esther
        
        Vladimir, thank you for sharing your wonderful conversion story with us!!!
      - Jeff Dixon
        
        Well, the main issue is cutting to the core. I would say that since Mormons cannot support anything regarding their belief about the Golden Plates or that the Native Americans are actually Hebrews, your beliefs are just as absurd as any other religious group.
      - Vladimir
        
        It is too bad that you, Jeff Dixon, believe that Mormons cannot support anything regarding our belief. We have God and He has "supported" our position to millions of His children. How good is that!
      - Jeff Dixon
        
        People of any religion can and do make that argument. It does not show that Mormonism is more valid simply when you use it.
      - Esther
        
        Ah, but Jeff, you ignore the awesome practical side of the Saints, and how does that aspect of Mormonism become a reality!!! It is the secret recipe the Saints have, the others don't!!! It is the driving force to do things far beyond the others! It can't be explain other than in a, seemingly to some, nebulous way, But it is very connected with the plan of salvation, the details of which you know nothing about. You know you respect practical ways. Would you care to know about that?
      - Esther
        
        Other people of any other religion do not have the stats to show the productivity of the use that the Saints do. (Jeff: Please note that LDS or Saints are more correct terms for quick reference of The church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.)
      - Vladimir
        
        You are right, Jeff Dixon. Just saying God will confirm that we have the truth doesn't mean anything to those who don't put it to the test. So my advice to you is, put it to the test yourself. Then get back to me.
      - Esther
        
        Hi Jeff: :) You have another criticism I see about "lumping" us together with people who have just the bible… i.e., Vladimir's response
      - Jeff Dixon
        
        You want to be considered to be Christians yet do not want to lumped together with other Christians?
      - Esther
        
        I don't want to be lumped in with pseudo-Christians.
      - Jeff Dixon
        
        Why do you assume that Mormons are not pseudo-Christians?
      - Esther
        
        That is not an assumption Mr Dixon
      - Jeff Dixon
        
        Of course it is. You want to believe that the Mormons know how to get to heaven. But until you show it to be factual, it is an assumption.
      - Esther
        
        That was my answer to this question: Jeff Dixon • 31 minutes ago • parent−
        
        Esther: Why do you assume that Mormons are not pseudo-Christians?
        
        The Mormons have different fairy tales remember? So we are not the same as pseudo-Christians. Mr, Dixon you will not win your entire battle against us on the same front as you will on the pseudo-Christian front …. it will require some entire different strategy :)
      - Jeff Dixon
        
        The specific fairy tale is meaningless. If you believe in fairy tales, then your belief system is wrong.
      - Esther
        
        I thought we talked about it and the words fit your conception of it, so I will have to edit.
      - Esther
        
        Jeff, Please check the rewrite
      - Jeff Dixon
        
        Simply because you use different books does not mean you are not also pseudo-Christians.
      - Esther
        
        Because their beliefs are short of the plan of salvation
      - Esther
        
        They also have three books the Christians don't use: The Doctrine and Covenants, The Pearl of Great Price. The Book of Mormon: Another Testament of Jesus Christ.
      - Vladimir
        
        Mormons are Christians so, yes, we would like people's opinion of us to be accurate. However, we can't and won't defend statements made by other Christians that are not in keeping with what God has revealed.
      - Esther
        
        I could say the same thing about you Mr. Dixon! Can you please make the distinction for us as to the specific characteristics you possess that make you different than other atheists of questionable even fearsome character, for example,other than your disbelief in God? Do you have an essay with an outline of those beliefs, strengths and weaknesses, online we could read. If you are not a threat to the community of Christians as some fear, can you please explain why.
      - Jeff Dixon
        
        I could give it a shot if you tell which atheists you consider fearsome and why?
      - Esther
        
        I was thinking of the ones that argue for sex with animals… that is the absolute worst aspect I know about atheists. But of course there are other things that are maybe less disconcerting yet bothersome, but it is connected to my main question. I once saw the comment made on an atheist website blog and the daughter of a prominent atheist was mentioned as supporting that view about sex. I recall you said you did not support this view, but in general you will be lumped into their group at least on the superficial level. How do you distance yourself from those and would you even? Also, if they think that is right, what is human life to them?
      - Jeff Dixon
        
        So, if I grasp your question if one person of a group says something idiotic, that automatically means that everyone in that group believes the same thing? So, when people ask about the "mormons" who believe that plural marriage is correct, should we assume that means you believe in plural marriage?
      - Esther
        
        Yes, people do think things like that. Why do do think I do not being lumped in with pseudoChristians?
        
        Please notice I rewrote the whole comment!
      - Jeff Dixon
        
        For some reason, your earlier comment now says
        
        Esther • 9 hours ago • parent
        
        −Jeff Dixon: comment under construction
        
        Re: atheism / realism / humanism / pragmatism0
      - Esther
        
        Sorry about that. I told you it was under construction because you answered it while I was editing it which was within five minutes of the original post in the middle of the night. :)
        
        Thanks for the reminder and here is the first edit … I realize from your initial response though that you will not entertain being lumped together with these kind of atheists any more than I would care to be lumped into your concept of Christians, and so I came up with the term pseudoChristians, to point to the fact we are not the same, in fact. You have insisted they are. Now you say, in parallel, you are not like other atheists. Well, that in some ways has brought up the questions I have tried to extemporaneously construct that I would like to see answered.
        
        As I tried to tell you last night on the blog, I am about to retreat into my shell, keeping my religion to myself, and visibly revert to the way I have lived for publicly for years as far as everyone out there is concerned: that is, being a humanist and a pragmatist, the ways of science. And if you don't believe me take a few courses in advanced applied mathematics and see where it takes you.
        
        Here is the first edit of my questions to you assuming you to be a card carrying atheist:
        
        Being a realist is different than being an atheist. Isn't it? You have used both terms and yet I believe technically — in philosophy that is — they are distinctive, not so much that they cannot overlap. What is the significant difference we need to know to at least come to some understanding? How is it you are both? Is realism also a general consequence of your lack of belief in God? Example most fearsome: I was thinking of activities of humans with animals other than the human species. Do I need to say why? There are other things that are maybe less disconcerting; for example, most people have a religion that has some guide lines, commandments. What can you tell us about your source of right and wrong. How do you develop ethics without a higher power? I once saw the comment made on an atheist website blog and the daughter of a prominent atheist was mentioned as supporting that view about such activities with animals. I recall telling you about it, you said you did not support this view, but in general you will be lumped into their group at least on the superficial level. How do you distance yourself from those and would you even? Do you have rules for atheists and realists that people like Christians and Saints would need to see, to understand they are not threatened? Also, if atheists in general think activities with animals are right,
        what is human life to them?
        
        These are general questions I think whose answers might soothe my mind some about you and since I notice generally your friends on zionica are really worried about all of it.
      - Jeff Dixon
        
        Yes, a realist is different than being an atheist.. A realist is someone who deals with life based on the actual events that are occurring. Atheism is not a philosoply, no matter how often theists attempt to say it is. Atheism is simply a disbelief in god(s). There is overlap, but they are seperate concepts.
        
        Atheism has nothing to do with accepting sex with animals. Just because you read of one atheist who said she was in favor of it, it does not mean that the concept of atheism also is in favor of it. As I already said, atheism is a disbelief in god(s), period.
        
        People create laws and rules for life based on what is beneficial or harmful to humanity. That is why you see laws against murder, rape, arson or theft occurring universally around the world.
      - Esther
        
        "Atheism is not a philosophy. Atheism is simply a disbelief in god(s)."~Jeff Dixon
      - Esther
        
        Jeff, I think you need to find out exactly what realm of philosophy you personal realism fits into, for the simple reason you give to others, since people often accuse atheism of being a philosophy. I believe you are most closely aligned with the Philosophy of Pragmatism. [def: dealing with the problems that exist in a specific situation in a reasonable and logical way instead of depending on ideas and theories.] I think you are pragmatic. I often think of the word "practical," because that is the description introduced to me in general philosophy class.
        
        http://www.learnersdictionary.com/search/pragmatic accessed 103012
      - Esther
        
        @Jeff_Dixon Re: pragmatism vs pragmaticism: We don't need compromise or appeasement when it comes to Islam.
        
        So the latter of the two levels of the realist/practical philosophies is the one congress should employ to make the crucial decisions. I am looking for proponents: John Stuart Mills is one. I will have to look him up.
      - Esther
        
        I thought you said you would give it a shot if I told you what atheists I was talking about! Why are we talking about the Saints?
      - Jeff Dixon
        
        Because I am pointing out that people within a group can hold odd views. That does not mean the group holds the same view.
      - Esther
        
        Yes, that point is clear to me. I agree and I see the distinction. Yet, there remains the dangers of being associated with some very odd views. Why? You have seen the attacks here on the Saints by those who do not make this distinction … the reason I do not want to be lumped together with a such a population.
      - Jeff Dixon
        
        There are so many idiotic laws in the bible, it is hard to know where to start. But let's take a run at it.
        
        Don't let cattle graze with other kinds of Cattle (Leviticus 19:19)
        
        Don't have a variety of crops on the same field. (Leviticus 19:19)
        
        Don't wear clothes made of more than one fabric (Leviticus 19:19)
        
        Don't cut your hair nor shave. (Leviticus 19:27)
        
        If a man cheats on his wife, or vise versa, both the man and the woman must die. (Leviticus 20:10).
        
        If a man sleeps with his father's wife… both him and his father's wife is to be put to death. (Leviticus 20:11)
        
        If a man sleeps with his wife and her mother they are all to be burnt to death. (Leviticus 20:14)
        
        If a man or woman has sex with an animal, both human and animal must be killed. (Leviticus 20:15-16). I guess you should kill the animal since they were willing participants. (eyes roll)
        
        If a man has sex with a woman on her period, they are both to be "cut off from their people" (Leviticus 20:18)
        
        Psychics, wizards, and so on are to be stoned to death. (Leviticus 20:27)
        
        If a priest's daughter is a whore, she is to be burnt at the stake. (Leviticus 21:9)
        
        People who have flat noses, or is blind or lame, cannot go to an altar of God (Leviticus 21:17-18)
        
        Anyone who dreams or prophesizes anything that is against God, or anyone who tries to turn you from God, is to be put to death. (Deuteronomy 13:5)
        
        If anyone, even your own family suggests worshipping another God, kill them. (Deuteronomy 13:6-10)
        
        If you find out a city worships a different god, destroy the city and kill all of it's inhabitants… even the animals. (Deuteronomy 13:12-15)
        
        Kill anyone with a different religion. (Deuteronomy 17:2-7)
      - Evermyrtle
        
        Christians never "give it a rest" for the work that GOD gave us to do, If we did that we would be "sluggards for Satan." I promise that a true Christian will not do that. Actually it is past time that Satan's people tuck their tails and " and give it a rest" because GOD does have control and HE will hot allow this evil to continue forever.
      - Jeff Dixon
        
        Right, he has control yet allows everyone who expresses an opinion against him free reign.
        
        Have you ever noticed that the only time people are punished for speaking out against a god are when people hurt other people? I am, of course, talking about actual events and not fairy tales from the bible.
      - Vladimir
        
        Evermyrtle, my sweet Evermyrtle, you are so innocent. Not everyone who sets himself up as a "minister" is a Christian.
        
        Ted R. Weiland isn't interested in preaching the Gospel of Jesus Christ. He serves a very different master. He is a servant of the Satanic forces dedicated to the destruction of our way of life.
        
        He is paid to erode our support for this country's institutions that are the barriers to the evil ones seeking to subjugate us. Count the number of times he has denigrated the U.S. Constitution on this site. He's definitely not subtle about it.
        
        If he and his kind are successful, when the gathering storm of adversity breaks over us, our protections will fail and we will suffer the brutal slavery of tyranny.
    - Esther
      
      they banned religious tests
      - http://www.missiontoisrael.org/ Ted R. Weiland
        
        Read the Federalist Papers or Constitution commentaries and you'll see they are one and the same . Actually, the word "tests" alone is more powerful being that it implies more than mere oaths.
    - Jeff Dixon
      
      Who, in your opinion, would qualify?
- seektruth
  
  this is exactly why the framers placed a requirement that the POTUS be a TRUE citizen of our country. and if you really examined where both of these leading candidates stand as compared to the Founding Fathers – neither one would be worthy of our vote.
  - http://www.missiontoisrael.org/ Ted R. Weiland
    
    Wishful thinking. There is nothing in the Constitution, nor the Federalist papers, or any of the framers personal writings that indicates Deuteronomy 17:15 inspired their citizenship requirement. The same is found in most nations' constitutions, regardless their religious proclivity.
    
    Furthermore, there is more than this one requirement in the Bible.
- http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=58215905 Wesley Woods
  
  up until the last 100 years or so the United States did have a king, the Lord Jesus Christ who rules the entire universe from his throne in the New Jerusalem the same place he as ruled since about mid-Spring 30 AD. Jesus is king of this nation and all nations. our constitution at its best allows for the US to reflect God's kingdom on earth. at its worst provides for enough separation to keep dictators in check like we have seen the last two years.
  - http://www.missiontoisrael.org/ Ted R. Weiland
    
    Wesley, thanks for responding. However, I would ask you to consider how a constitution which is antithetical to Yahweh's sovereignty and morality in nearly every article and amendment and that established a government of, by, and for the people can reflect God's kingdom on earth? We need to go back to the 17th-century colonials, who established their governments of, for, and by Yahweh upon His immutable law to find governments that reflect the kingdom of God. For example:
    
    Fundamental Agreement of the Colony of New Haven, Connecticut, 1639
    
    Agreement; We all agree that the scriptures hold forth a perfect
    rule for the direction and government of all men in duties which they
    are to perform to God and to man, as well in families and commonwealth
    as in matters of the church; so likewise in all public officers which
    concern civil order, as choice of magistrates and officers, making and
    repealing laws, dividing allotments of inheritance, and all things of
    like nature, we will, all of us, be ordered by the rules which the
    scripture holds forth; and we agree that such persons may be entrusted
    with such matters of government as are described in Exodus 18:21 and
    Deuteronomy 1:13 with Deuteronomy 17:15 and 1 Corinthians 6:1, 6 &
    7….
    - http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=58215905 Wesley Woods
      
      Ted, you can never force someone to obey God's laws or even believe in God for neither is of the heart. Israel had the laws of God, and time and time again they turned their back on the Lord and turned to gods their fathers never knew. the Lord sent prophets to warn them to return to the Lord, but they killed many and went their own way. the Lord punished them and any return to the Lord was short lived about a generation or so. we even read of their idolatry in the New Testament with the worship of the temple, Jerusalem, and even angels. each colony had its own denomination and believed the others were heretics. with thirteen colonies and at least half a dozen denominations that did never got along especially in the north the founders decided a non-sectarian republic would both protect each state's sovereignty while allowing for the common defense of the United States. what you are proposing is that our nation continue on its path to a white supremacists theocracy like the Islamic theocracy of Iran where the religious leaders dictate to the people. under your system there will be neither liberty or security for there cannot be real security without true liberty.
      - http://www.missiontoisrael.org/ Ted R. Weiland
        
        So, what you're really saying is that unregenerate men with man's fickle laws can run a country better than can regenerate men with Yahweh's perfect law and altogether righteous judgments (Psalm 19:7-9).
      - Vladimir
        
        We've heard that one before, Ted R. Weiland. And next you will tell us that you are the regenerate man for the job. Or perhaps one of your toadies.
      - http://www.missiontoisrael.org/ Ted R. Weiland
        
        Also, you never answered my question: "Wesley, thanks for responding. However, I would ask you to consider how a
        constitution which is antithetical to Yahweh's sovereignty and morality
        in nearly every article and amendment and that established a government
        of, by, and for the people can reflect God's kingdom on earth?"
      - Vladimir
        
        What constitution are you referring to, Ted R. Weiland? There is no constitution that is AS YOU SAY, "antithetical to Yahweh's sovereignty and morality
        in nearly every article and amendment".
        
        Why don't you tell them why you are trying to destroy the U. S. Constitution? That will make for a short response.
      - http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=58215905 Wesley Woods
        
        how about the eleventh to fifteen centuries of medieval Europe were the church had become corrupt because of help of the corrupt monarchs who wanted to keep the Bible out of the hand of the layman. unholy alliances were made between the monarchs and church leadership. the founders knew their European history and knew how if they let the civil and spiritual spheres intertwine like Europe had experienced since the fall of Rome both would become corrupt with each other leading to a new dark age. they learned from history while you want to continue in your insanity hoping to prevent a new dark age while blurring the lines between the civil and spiritual spheres.
      - http://www.missiontoisrael.org/ Ted R. Weiland
        
        That doesn't answer my question at all. You said, "our constitution at its best allows for the US to reflect God's kingdom on earth." My question concerning this statement is "how can a constitution which is antithetical to Yahweh's sovereignty and morality in nearly every article and amendment and that established a government of, by, and for the people reflect God's kingdom on earth?"
      - Vladimir
        
        The answer, Ted R. Weiland, to your question is YOUR PREMISE IS FALSE. The U. S. Constitution is NOT antithetical to God's sovereignty or morality. It is the foundation of our liberty and protection from tyranny. It provides the best environment on earth for us to pursue the true worship of God unfettered by a government or people like you, Ted R. Weiland.
    - Vladimir
      
      Sorry, Ted R. Weiland, I can't let your preposterous premise go unchallenged. You stated that the, "..[U. S.] constitution … is antithetical to Yahweh's sovereignty and morality in nearly every article and amendment…".
      
      We've heard your song before and it still doesn't pass the smell test. You are only dedicated to tearing down the U.S. Constitution. You think you've found a way to do it by arguing that it doesn't establish God's laws as supreme in the land.
      
      What you don't admit is the U.S. Constitution provides the best environment on earth for us to work to establish God's laws as supreme in the land. It even has provisions to amend it to do away with its protection of religion and allow you to make your concept of religion supreme in the land.
      
      How about that? All you need to do is get sufficient numbers of your followers to agree with you and presto you have what you claim you want, a constitution that isn't "antithetical to Yahweh's sovereignty and morality".
      
      So now you can stop trying to destroy it and simply gather support to change it. Better check with George Soros and the other socialists who (allegedly) fund you to make sure that's okay. Don't want your "ministry" to dry up, do we.
      - http://www.missiontoisrael.org/ Ted R. Weiland
        
        Nehemiah 6:8.
      - Vladimir
        
        I am actually glad you don't respond, Ted R. Weiland. It is just that much less you will have to repent of.
John Adams

I have no intention of voting for either of the major party candidates. I must vote for a man who believes as I do; a man who honors God, lives a life in obeidnece to His commands, and one who honors God's Holy Word, the Bible.
I think that there is such a man running for President of the United States of America. That man is Virgil Goode of the Constitution Party.
I know that there are many who think I will be "throwing my vote away" or "will thereby be electing obama", but I don't believe so. I believe that by voting for a born-again believer, I am placing my faith and trust in the Lord. I believe that my responsibility is to obey God and support the good, not the "lesser of two evils".
We must understand that God's man WILL win. God will use whomever wins to bring about His will and His glory.
- Vladimir
  
  Virgil Goode is only on the ballot in Virginia. Go ahead and waste your vote.
  - John Adams
    
    We can write-in on the ballot in Indiana. I will use my write-in privilege and do not believe that I will be wasting my vote.
    - Vladimir
      
      You can write in Mickey Mouse, too.
      - John Adams
        
        I couldn't, but maybe you could if he meets your qualifications to be President.
      - Vladimir
        
        He's more qualified than Virgil Goode. But I'm not wasting my vote like you will.
      - John Adams
        
        I would really like for you to explain why you think mickey mouse is more qualified to be President than Virgil Goode.
      - Vladimir
        
        Mickey isn't trying to spoil Romney's election.
        
        Are you biased against rodents who stand for truth, justice and the American way?
      - John Adams
        
        I don't believe that Virgil Goode's purpose is to "spoil Romney's election". I believe he is trying to return the US to constitutional standards. Neither romney nor obama seem to have any clue what the US Constitution says. They are both big government guys. They both have supported government health care, abortion, queer marriage, etc. Neither of them have any intention of allowing God and His Holy Word, the Bible, to direct and guide their decisions.
      - Vladimir
        
        And the possible result of his actions is to continue Obama in office for four more years. And that will "return the US to constitutional standards"?????
        
        This is politics not religion. But politics that will have a profound influence for good or evil. Don't push the button that will help evil because you think you are acting on principle. Vote to remove evil from office. We need good results.
      - John Adams
        
        You seem to have forgotten that we have a sovereign God who put into office whom He will. Our job is NOT to elect a president; our job is to obey God and His will WILL be done.
      - Vladimir
        
        While you are NOT electing a president, John Adams, some Obama supporter is. I am multitasking so I'm going to do both, obey God and boot out Obama.
      - John Adams
        
        I don't believe that romney is a man of God.
      - Vladimir
        
        And I believe Barack Obama is a Christian because he plays golf on Sunday. What's your evidence that Romney isn't a man of God?
      - John Adams
        
        romney is a mormon, therefore he CANNOT be a man of God. obama is NOT a Christian. He may or may not be a muslim, but he certainly is NOT a Christian.
      - Vladimir
        
        Time for a little homework, John Adams. Go to http://www.mormon.org and find out what the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints teaches.
      - John Adams
        
        I know enough of what mormons believe to know that they are not Christian the way the Bible defines Christian.
      - Vladimir
        
        So you wish to remain ignorant, John Adams. Fine. Don't go to http://www.mormon.org and learn something. Your choice.
        
        But I know more about Mormons than you do because I know that Mormons are Christian by biblical standards. Every Christian should covenant with God to take on the name of Jesus Christ, always remember Him and keep His commandments. Mormons do this formally over forty times a year.
        
        We pray to Jesus Christ's Father in the name of Jesus Christ. We express our gratitude to Him for sending His Son to atone for our sins and make possible the Plan of Salvation. We express our gratitude for the awesome sacrifice Jesus Christ preformed on our behalf.
        
        We fast two meals a month and put the money into a giant welfare system that helps both Mormons and non-Mormons alike. I know because my wife and I are currently serving as volunteers in that system.
        
        I could go on, but right now I'll bet you are wishing you had gone to http://www.mormon.org and studied up before accusing us of not being Christian.
      - John Adams
        
        No one gets to Heave by their works.
        
        Mat 7:22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
        Mat 7:23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
      - Vladimir
        
        That's correct, John Adams, no one gets to Heaven by their works. But because Jesus Christ atoned for our sins, He will reward us for our good works. Do you understand the difference?
        
        Without Jesus Christ's atonement no one gets back to Heaven.
      - John Adams
        
        God will NOT reward the "good" deads of those who are not True Christians. ALL of those who have not received Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Saviour and repented of their sins will spend eternity in Hell, no matter how many "good" deads they have done. The Bible says that all of our "good" deads are as filthy rags.
        
        Isa 64:6 But we are all as an unclean [thing], and all our righteousnesses [are] as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.
      - Vladimir
        
        John Adams, you raise a good point and I don't know off the top of my head if the good works of those who are wicked will benefit them in some way.
        
        I do know that if we don't qualify as joint heirs with Him, there's nothing, in my opinion that can replace that.
      - KentPerry
        
        Do Mormons believe they will have their families in heaven, as they were on earth ? Do they believe their wives will be females and they males ? Will they still be married ?
      - Vladimir
        
        Yes, KentPerry, God has revealed that families can be forever. But don't delay because there is neither marrying nor given in marriage in the resurrection. It must be done in mortality. For me, my wife and our children, heaven would be missing what we treasure now on earth if we couldn't be a family there, too.
        
        Go to http://www.mormon.org for more information.
      - KentPerry
        
        I think Heaven would have something even better than what we treasure here on earth. Since there would be no need for reproduction I don't think there would be sex but something else and better than sex. But I haven't seen where God revealed this idea about families as you say. Ill keep looking
      - Vladimir
        
        What you bind on earth will be bound in heaven. Not "until death do you part" or "for as long as you both shall live".
      - http://www.facebook.com/david.hodges.5070 David Hodges
        
        I would think that you would like your Constitutional president, Obama, being Deuteronomy 17: 15 (God's law, you know) prohibits his ruling over us. Do you feel that the Constitution "protects" you better than our nation's first constitution, the Fundamental Orders of Connecticut of 1639, which plainly said that God's law was our law?
      - Vladimir
        
        May I refer you, David Hodges, to Wesley Woods' post above which begins, "Ted, you can never force someone to obey God's laws…" Both you and your leader, Ted R. Weiland, will benefit from a careful read.
      - http://www.facebook.com/david.hodges.5070 David Hodges
        
        If you are like the men who brought the woman caught in adultry to Jesus, you can't force people to obey God's laws. This is because pressing charges brings public scrutiny upon the plaintiff. God's law requires individuals, rather than such tyrannical man-made institutions described by Wesley Woods, to press charges. You can be sure that the agents (IRS, EPA, etc.) of the god "We the People" can force you to obey them. The beauty of God's law is that it not only protects us from the blatant thugs, but it also protects us from hypocrites. Anyone who wishes to press charges must live a life beyond reproach. God's law makes all of us better people, with a force that cannot be matched by any false god.
      - Vladimir
        
        I'm not arguing that God's laws are inferior to man's laws, they aren't, they are superior. But Ted R. Weiland is condemning the U.S. Constitution and trying to drum up support for its demise on this website with the ridiculous premise that our Constitution is in opposition to God.
        
        The U.S. Constitution provides us with protection and liberty. Both of which are extremely helpful if we are going to obey God's laws. Temporal laws are necessary for a civil society so I don't understand your problem with enforcement of temporal laws.
        
        And finally, you and your fearless leader don't have something better to replace the U. S. Constitution with. And before you say God's law, just remember God's law has been around for a lot longer than our Constitution, but only here in America can we keep God's laws without fear of a 3 a.m. knock on the door.
      - Jeff Dixon
        
        He is a manmade character, which is what you seem to enjoy pretending is actually a real character. No real difference, except that Mickey Mouse has never stated he will send people to hell.
      - Vladimir
        
        Nor have I, Jeff Dixon, especially you.
      - KentPerry
        
        It was much more interesting reading when all of you simply ignored Jeff Dixon. His posts add nothing to the conversation other that his opinions the Bible is baloney and he doesn't believe in God and neither should anyone else blah blah blah. Same stuff everyday *Yawn* He's an atheist and atheists are the Philosopher Kings of Science! Just ask them. Its the same thing, All of you are pretending this fairy tale is true blah blah blah. Seen it for years and NOTHING you say will make a dent in that demonic follower of Satan.
      - Vladimir
        
        But Jeff Dixon seems to enjoy posting. Allow him some enjoyment now, he's got nothing to look forward to.
      - KentPerry
        
        Yeah and he has nothing to look back on either. Just a lot of time wasted on negative thoughts and malevolent ideas but if being a Christian antagonist is how he gets his jolly's,, I think ignoring him would make him cry. I know he isn't here to win friends and influence people. I actually think Jeff finds it satisfying making enemies and being hated. Since its easier I mean to get people to hate you when all you got to do is act like a jerk to everyone. Doesn't matter to his brand of narcissism when its merely the attention he craves.
      - Vladimir
        
        Can't argue with that.
      - Esther
        
        Vladimir, have you been following KentPerry's evil rants? He is a Calvinist of the highest order. With respect to Jeff, I regard him as a truth-seeker not unlike Joseph Smith, with the same opinion of the bible as did Joseph Smith. It is not God,Himself, with whom Jeff takes issue, but with men like KentPerry of the Calvin order, who control through the confusion brought about the contradictions, obvious in stories of the BIBLICAL god who, as described in the bible, has questionable existence. Indeed, Calvinists don't want to look back because their past is very dark indeed! Please do the research just on this forum about KentPerry.
        
        – The "Protestant Inquisition" is a term applied to the severities of John Calvin in Geneva and Queen Elizabeth I in England during the 1500s. Calvin's followers burned 58 "heretics," including theologian Michael Servetus, who doubted the Trinity. Elizabeth I outlawed Catholicism and executed about 200 Catholics.
        – The Thirty Years' War produced the largest religious death toll of all time. It began in 1618 when Protestant leaders threw two Catholic emissaries out of a Prague window into a dung heap. War flared between Catholic and Protestant princedoms, drawing in supportive religious armies from Germany, Spain, England, Holland, Denmark, Sweden, France and Italy. Sweden's Protestant soldiers sang Martin Luther's "Ein 'Feste Burg" in battle. Three decades of combat turned central Europe into a wasteland of misery. One estimate states that Germany's population dropped from 18 million to 4 million. In the end nothing was settled, and too few people remained to rebuild cities, plant fields, or conduct education.
        – When Puritans settled in Massachusetts in the 1600s, they created a religious police state where doctrinal deviation could lead to flogging, pillorying, hanging, cutting off ears, or boring through the tongue with a hot iron. Preaching Quaker beliefs was a capital offense. Four stubborn Quakers defied this law and were hanged. In the 1690s …
        
        See also the Critique of Calvinist 5 Points: http://www.auburn.edu/~allenkc/openhse/calvinism.html accessed 102612
      - Vladimir
        
        Esther, I was responding to his post without consideration of anything else.
      - Esther
        
        He is one scary man.
      - Esther
        
        Doyou know Robert Mathews? http://eom.byu.edu/index.php/Joseph_Smith_Translation_of_the_Bible_(JST) accessed 02612
      - Esther
        
        You are the narcissist KentPerry. It is a shame that people who look at your occasional seemingly-sane critique, do not take the time to look into your utterly insane ramblings.
      - KentPerry
        
        Hey esther,, BLOW IT OUT YOUR FAT ASS AIRHEAD.
        
        There How do ya like me now. I wouldn't blame ANYONE for cussing idiots like you and Jeff out and anyone reading my ramblings "Gets that" got it gidget? SPLENDID! Then we understand each other.
      - Vladimir
        
        Having a bad day are we?
      - KentPerry
        
        Actually when dealing with the likes of Jeff Dixon and Esther his sock puppet, I am having an ordinary day vlad., thanks for asking just the same lol
      - Esther
        
        Actually, I understand you quite well, oh-proponent-of-screwtape-KentPerry
      - KentPerry
        
        As if you would know anything about sanity Esther.
      - Esther
        
        KentPerry: You are the one littering these pages with negative thoughts.
John Englehutt

"But part of honoring Christ means instituting and advancing a form of government which pleases him".
If I had to pick one satement from this article with which I have no argument, that would be it. So, let us pose the question: does the current system allow us to establish a government which pleases Him? Well, let's see; no matter who wins, it is more likely than not that masses of babies will continue to be murdered in the name of the so-called "woman's right to murder–er, um, I mean 'choose'", that sodomites will continue to push and make gains in terms of having their perversions recognized and legitimized by all levels of government, and that out of control spending, funded by robbery(er, taxes) taken from the productive, and wasted on the unproductive, in clear definace of God's commandment :thou shalt not steal" will continue full-steam ahead. Does anyone doubt this? Come on, really?
No, voting for Romney is not a long-term solution; it may slow certain evils down a bit(or, on the other hand, it may well not), but it won't stop them nor reverse them. We need evil stopped and reversed. How? By returning to God and His WORD, and living our lives, and running our countries in accordance with HIS LAW. The Constitution is, at best, an abettor of evil, because it ALLOWS evil and immoral men to become leaders in government, and enact evil and immoral legislation in CLEAR AND OUTRIGHT DEFIANCE OF GOD. If you don't ackowledge the Lord Jesus Christ, then you won't see a problem with any of this, and you will have your reward, as all will in due time. But, for those of us in Christ, this state of affairs must be recognized as unnacceptable, and we must repent. The WORD of God must be our only rule in life, and we must do all in our power to peacefully reform our societies, starting at the individual, familial, and local level. Only such a ground-up approach, grounded in the Word of God, will have any LONG-TERM effects. It may well be easier to vote for the lesser of two evils candidate and then pretend we did all we could, but we need to be honest with ourselves. We need to think long-term, we need to think GODLY OBEDIENCE.
- daves
  
  Jesus' concerns were with kindness, love, and the poor. Not abortion and homosexuality. That's all old testament stuff.
  - http://www.missiontoisrael.org/ Ted R. Weiland
    
    "But he [Jesus] answered and said unto them, Why do ye [Daves] also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition? For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death…. Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying, this people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men." (Matthew 15:3-9)
    - Evermyrtle
      
      Remember Daves is anti-GOD and anti-CHRIST. I just hope that he does not wait too long, to learn the truth.
      - KentPerry
        
        Daves is a reprobate lost in his delusions. Best not cast your pearls before swine, dust off your shoes wash your hands of his want for being a fool Rebuke him, shun him and ignore him. If there was such a thing as a God Gene, Daves would pay to have it surgically removed as a birth defect, while defending the right of homsexuals to leave there gay gene intact. That is how far gone he is and intends to stay at all costs, with all his most determined effort.
        
        God uses his presence here like he does that of Jeff Dixon, to have as examples, the price they pay choosing their depraved nature over the living God and savior Jesus Christ. They are but mere sparring partners giving us the best arguments atheists have got and those they have copy pasted from their atheist faith hating websites. While matching wits with them may seems as simple as boxing a paraplegic, they are oblivious to how foolish they appear and to those with ears and can hear, the calling of the lord, they will see their atheist comments and pity them for their foolish ideas.
        
        They may even feel sorry for them
        
        but the last thing they will do,,
        
        is want to be, anything,
        
        LIKE them.
- Vladimir
  
  John Englehutt, you said the, "The Constitution is, at best, an abettor of evil…". To demonstrate just how ridiculous you sound, tell us what is the Constitution at its worst?
  
  Do you want your accusation applied to God, also? For He allows evil and immoral men to become leaders in governments.
  
  The U. S. Constitution also allows RIGHTEOUS and MORAL men to become leaders and for legislators to enact RIGHTEOUS and MORAL laws. Forget about that, John Englehutt?
  
  How much better you would have sounded if you had placed the blame where
  it belongs on godless voters and those who created godless voters. Want some hints? Liberal media, liberal elitists, liberal preachers, liberal public school systems, teacher unions, liberal library associations, godless socialists, ignorant people denigrating the U.S. Constitution, Satan, etc.
- Evermyrtle
  
  You are exactly right BUT I am afraid we have gone too far to return to common sense and a truly Christian nation. The Bible describes the and or the last days of this earth's existence and it describes America and the world exactly as it is today. HE says in Isaiah 57;16 I will not contend forever, neither will be always wroth: for the spirit should fail before e. And the souls which I have made. I think HE is just about had enough of our shenanigans. of evil
- Esther
  
  I would not agree with you for the simple fact that most people I know who claim to follow Christ do NOT exhibit Christ-like behavior. By Christ-like behavior I just mean good behavior, like that of Jesus Christ is fabled to be, as a child is humble to his good father. I believe we might as well pick the first 20 people out of the phone book, with term limits, than so many people who actually think they are good representatives of the people but become career politicians. (there is a famous person who once said that about the Boston phone book, but I don't remember his name.)