There is a very easy way in which misguided and mistaken purists (which includes plenty of evangelicals) can destroy America: simply allow Barack Hussein Obama back in. And that may well happen, because so many of these confused and undiscerning believers will in fact act much like the hypocritical Pharisees of old.
They will do this with a misplaced sense of purity – whether spiritual or theological or political. They will mistakenly think they must remain pure and only vote for a perfect candidate. Otherwise they foolishly think they have become involved in “evil” compromise.
They simply forget that we live in a fallen world, and there is no perfect political party, no perfect politician, no perfect public policy, and no perfect voters. There is nothing perfect in a fallen world, so if they think they can somehow wait around until Jesus Christ finally runs against Obama, they are living in la la land. It just ain’t gonna happen.
As I have said so often now, Romney is not my preferred candidate – not by a long shot. But he is the only one we have now to face Obama. So we either vote for Romney to displace Obama, or we allow him back in by default – with all the evil which that will entail.
These Christian purists, who think they can just sit this one out, or vote for a third party, will do only one thing: ensure that Obama gets back in to do even more damage. These purists then will have blood on their hands. But they will offer plenty of lame excuses as they push their mistaken notions of purity. Here are four of them:
One. ‘Romney is a Mormon so I just can’t vote for him.’ But this election is not so much about voting a Mormon in, as voting out the worst president ever. And it is not just about Romney v Obama, but the Republican Party v the Democratic Party. We are not really voting for a Mormon or a Marxist, but one or other of the parties. That must not be lost sight of here.
As Al Mohler rightly argues, we have two different worldviews competing in this election: “The nation’s political polarization is clearly evident in the radical distinctions between the Republican and Democratic platforms. But this polarization is not merely political. It is fundamentally moral and ideological. These two platforms present two contradictory understandings of realities as basic as human life, liberty, and the institution of marriage. Though the two parties have taken opposing positions on many of these issues for years, the radical nature of this current polarization is new.”
The Democratic worldview is fundamentally different from that of the Republicans. And if Romney gets in, he of course is greatly restricted by his own party, by Congress, and so on. So it is not a theologian-in chief we will be voting for here, but an entire worldview – either a good one or a bad one. But see more on this here:
https://billmuehlenberg.com/2012/05/13/on-mitt-romney-and-americas-future/
https://billmuehlenberg.com/2012/05/17/on-mormon-presidents/
Two. ‘But Romney has flip flopped on many key issues, is not really fully pro-life, and so on.’ As I said, he is not my preferred candidate and yes he has flip-flopped. But he and his party are light years ahead of Obama and his party on pretty much every issue. So refusing to vote for him because of some misplaced purity will help no one – it will just mean we get more Obama, more abortion, more of the homosexual agenda, more pro-Islam and more anti-Christian agendas. So the purists will have that on their consciences to deal with. But see my links above for more on this.
Three. ‘God is sovereign so we should just leave this all in his hands – it is not our responsibility.’ Sorry, this is another foolish cop-out. It is our responsibility. There is always cooperation between God and his people. When he commanded us to make disciples of all nations, he expected us to actually do something, not just sit on our butts and talk about God’s sovereignty. It is the same with being salt and light.
The idea that we should just sit back and do nothing is irresponsible and unbiblical in the extreme. Simply try telling the Christians who languished in concentration camps under Hitler that “God is in charge” and things will sort themselves out. Sorry, it took allied tanks to stop Hitler, in addition to prayers and trust in God. God works through his people, and we all have a role to play.
Four. ‘But it is evil to choose between the lesser of two evils.’ These purists foolishly insist on perfection or nothing. They want an unblemished candidate, or they want one who is 100% on side with their views on abortion, or whatever. “We can only have a perfect candidate or we are not voting.” This is simply more Pharisaical baloney purity. Such a thing is just not going to happen in a fallen world, and we always have to choose between the lesser of two evils in all areas of life.
Gary DeMar has just written an excellent piece on this and is worth quoting at length: “You’ve heard anti-Republican critics say, ‘I just can’t vote for the lesser of two evils.’ If this is true, then you can never vote since we’re all evil, although some are more evil than others. I have a number of Calvinist friends who use the ‘lesser of two evils’ argument. If you know anything about Calvinism, then you know the acronym TULIP. The ‘T’ in Tulip stands for Total Depravity. It also goes by the names total inability or total corruption. It’s not that a person is pure depravity but that all his actions and thoughts are tainted by evil. Sin has corrupted every part of our being.
“This means that any choice of a political candidate is a lesser of two totally depraved people. The people that say they will not vote for the lesser of two evils will get one of the two evils whether they vote or not. In this election, they may get the greater of two evils. And it’s not just the greater evil of one man we may get, but we may get the greater of two evils when it comes to judges, new laws, executive orders, wealth confiscation, and a whole lot more. The past four years should be a wake-up call to the no lesser than two evils crowd.
“Then there’s the claim that there’s not a dime’s worth of difference between the two parties. Nonsense. Let’s say that since 1980 all conservatives had followed the ‘I won’t vote for the lesser of two evils candidate.’ Where do you think we would be today?”
He continues: “What’s so irritating about those pushing a third party is that they never really do it. The presidency is the last political office they should be pursuing. If the no lesser than two evils crowd were really serious, they would be putting up local candidates in elections all across the country. They should have been doing it for 30 years. If you can’t win locally, you’re not going to win nationally. If there is no broad-based national grassroots support and a demonstration of success politically, what do the critics of the ‘Republicrats’ expect to accomplish at the top of the ticket?
“There’s talk of Ron Paul running as a third-party candidate. What’s it going to prove? Let’s say he gets 10 million votes. He won’t get a single electoral vote. And even if elections were won by majority vote totals and not by electoral votes, he still wouldn’t win anything. The lesser of two evils franchise will say that they will be ‘sending a message.’ Yeah, that they’re idiots.”
Exactly right. There is one person who simply loves all these purists: BHO. He knows he will get back in because all these confused and muddled Christians somehow think they must be pure, and must refrain from voting, or vote for a third party candidate in some misguided protest vote.
They are doing nothing but this: ensuring that BHO gets back in. That may well spell the end of America as we know it. That may well make the homosexual and abortion tidal waves even greater. That may well mean the end of our religious freedoms.
But these foolish purists will sit back and pat themselves on the back. They will see America destroyed, but hey, at least they retained their precious and perverted “purity”. Not only will they have to explain their total irresponsibility to their children and grandchildren who will have to suffer through all this, but one day they will have to explain their gross abdication of responsibility and unbiblical actions to God as well.
Why do the strong words of rebuke Jesus gave to the Pharisees keep coming back to me here?
29 Replies to “How the Purists Can Destroy America and the West (and Still Feel Good About Themselves)”
Let me be the first to comment.
Here is just one absolutely vital reason why I think the purists are dead wrong. They think by not voting for Romney (because he is not perfect as a prolifer or anything else) they will somehow have a clear conscience.Of course all they will have is Obama back, more lefty judges, and even less chance of ever overturning Roe v Wade. See the new piece by John Hawkins:
“The Supreme Court currently has four doctrinaire liberal justices (Kagan, Sotomayor, Ginsburg, and Breyer), three conservative originalist justices (Alito, Thomas, Scalia) and two right leaning moderates (Roberts, Kennedy). Four of the justices, Ginsburg (79), Scalia (76), Kennedy (75), and Breyer (73) are over 70. Given the ideological split of the SCOTUS and the ages of the judges, the next President may have an opportunity to create a historic shift on the Court. Replacing a single justice with an ideological opposite could be a decisive factor on cases from Roe v. Wade to Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.”
You may be interested to know that I Googled your name to find out more about you. One of the suggested searches was “Bill Muehlenberg bigot” and halfway down the first page was a link to a blog, seemingly run by rabid atheists, criticising you. They may be God-haters but they certainly have the measure of you, Mr Muehlenberg.
Unlike you, I am not one for mud-slinging, name-calling and twisting other people’s words to serve my own agenda. I have however left a comment on the atheists’ blog simply stating my experience of posting here.
Have a really great day.
Alan Rowe
Thanks Alan
I have said you are history here on another post, but I have allowed you at least partially back on here. I will let my readers decide how free you are of name-calling and mud-slinging, and what a terrific Christian you are.
And I trust your day will be neat as well.
Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch
lol – if the “rabid atheists” have the measure of Bill, Alan, why is it they cannot present their case without resorting to “mud-slinging”?
As anybody who engages in debating knows, the moment you are reduced to insults (ie. “bigot”), you give your opponent the argument. Because if you had a superior argument, you would use it, wouldn’t you? Wouldn’t you?
Alan, I’ve been aware of some of that stuff for ages, but in my experience most of them don’t even have the courage of their convictions enough to use their real name. That says enough right there. What a waste of time it would be to engage with these haters online. They could have someone rise from the dead in front of them and they would not believe! And when faced with an (intellectual) battle, they send a sock puppet or a remote control robot instead.
You tell me what kind of person you would rather have influencing culture – ones who want to have a civil debate and discuss evidence to get closer and closer at truth, or ones resorting to obsessive personal-attack websites hiding behind anonymous web-identities and promoting hateful speech and even death threats?
Hope the sun is shining in your part of the world too.
Mark Rabich
Back on topic:
I’m sure the Pharisees considered themselves righteous and pure before God as they simultaneously condemned His Son to death too.
There are no perfect choices in this world until Jesus comes. You have never made one in your life. If we act as if there are or there should be, what we are actually saying that we can be as righteous as God on our own efforts and the life and sacrifice of His Son was no big deal. But Jesus is not running this election cycle, and even if Bachmann, West, Cain, Santorum, Palin, (insert your own choice here) or any of the other substantially better candidates were in the frame, consider the following verse:
Maybe people have also forgotten what Paul wrote in Romans 3 (using two sources in Psalms): “None is righteous, no, not one;
no one understands;
no one seeks for God.
All have turned aside; together they have become worthless;
no one does good,
not even one.”
I guess part of the problem is also that people have been successfully duped into considering the election as one man vs another, rather than two different ideologies competing.
I cannot fathom how any Christian might’ve paid attention to the anti-God, anti-freedom, anti-life, anti-family and anti-future platform the Democrats just recently presented at their convention and remotely consider doing their utmost to getting deranged people like that away from power in the most influential country in the world today. They openly rejected and booed God three times! They hate Him. They hate the giver of life and the rescuer of our souls! Do you not get that?!? You are guaranteed to get a worse world with them in control.
Mark Rabich
Thanks Mark
Yes it is nice to get back on topic here. And you are quite right. The purists have a lot to answer for here. Genuine biblical purity is of course one thing. But this sham Pharisaical purity is quite another. They will be so proud of themselves in refusing to vote for the only hope we have of turning things around this election. So when the nation continues to decline, abortion gets worse – maybe with infanticide getting the full go ahead – they will smugly sit back and say to themselves, “Yes, but we did not contaminate ourselves. We kept ourselves pure!”
Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch
At least in the US you have a choice this November.
At the last General Election in the UK, not one of the three main parties had Same Sex Marriage in their Election Manifesto. Yet as it turns out, the present Coalition Government as well as the Opposition Labour Party are all in favour of it, and the Government intends to press it through by 2015.
Who might we have voted for to stop this happening?
David Haslam, UK
Bravo Bill. Yes this needs to be broadcast. Evangelical Christians (and economic conservatives) are the absolute WORST political supporters in the world. Cross them by failing to achieve a goal they elected you to dictate (not attempt to legislate) or fail them by being the sinful human and they will dog you with cold resentful bitterness. Ironic in the extreme. Who would want to have or encourage these kind of supporters? One wonders how King David would have fared under their judgmental convictions (condemnations) when you have a track record of adultery, murder, military failures, double-dealing with the enemy and a bad father raising a bad family to boot (offending the Dobsonian Family Cult). The DEMs, of course, have their own junkyard dogs to contend with but they actually RAISE and FEED them over there).
Dean Daniels
Here’s another analogy; Mammon and the shrewd manager.
We can easily argue governments have corrupted the economy: printing money, lying about debt and inflation, manipulating stock markets, fixing interest rates, bailing out the banks they choose…
Therefore, since the whole system (mammon) is corrupt, the purist could say “I don’t want to participate in ungodly mammon so I refuse to have anything to do with the economy”.
Haha. Yeah – right.
In contrast, Jesus commended the shrewd manager who used UNGODLY mammon to do something smart.
“… make friends for yourselves by unrighteous mammon, that when you fail, they may receive you into an everlasting home”. Luke 16:9
and…
“Therefore if you have not been faithful in the unrighteous mammon, who will commit to your trust the true riches?” Luke 16:11
I doubt the purists would hesitate to take out a low interest loan for their cause – money from a corrupt bailed-out bank that was paid off with the FED’s fake money. And yet, suddenly, their not allowed to show any support for Obama’s only rival. Not very shrewd.
So if they can’t be trusted with a simple vote, who is going to give them true riches?
Tim Lovett
This morning I was translating some of Luke 6 as an exercise to keep my Greek up to scratch and it included those verses about being blessed when people hate us because of their enmity towards God. I have just read Alan Rowe’s comment and it is clear that you are blessed, Bill.
David Morrison
Bill, I’m new to your website having been introduced to your articles by a friend. Thank you for your uncompromising approach. It’s a little unsettling to accept at first as my natural man battles against some of your logic. But I must say that I am both comforted and challenged by your words. Much like the Bible, funnily enough!
Keep up the great work.
Peter Wall, NZ
Many thanks indeed Peter
I of course don’t always get things right, and prayers are always appreciated, but I will keep on keeping on. Thanks for your encouragement.
Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch
Hi Alan, really! I will bite, Bigoted Bill is into mud slinging, name calling, twisting other people words to suit his own agenda, I am open to learn about these uses of the English language (mine leaves a bit to be desired) to slime those he disagrees with. Please can you give me your examples with links to where he has done these things so I can increase my knowledge? If you are unable to then show some character and apologize please!
Rob Withall
This attitude reminds me of Saul who didn’t wait for Samuel, but commenced the sacrifice, and Saul saving the best for the sacrifice instead of obeying God and wiping out the enemy right down to the animals.
People who ‘know better than everybody else (including God)’.
John Angelico
I think the third party option is the best one, call me a purist if you like.
I’m not an American citizen and don’t live or have ever lived in the US, but I am a morally conservative Christian (against abortion and against same sex marriage). That means you can’t blame me for “not having done anything about a third party during the last 30 years”. I guess that’s the Americans purists’ fault, following your reasoning.
Anyway, it is also your fault, and other people like you, that there aren’t any third party options which are viewed as plausible. This line of reasoning that a third party is a waste of votes, even calling it “the idiots”, is precisely the best weapon against that possibility. It’s like a self-fulfilling prophecy.
If 40 million born again Christians voted for a morally conservative party which was sensitive to the needs of the poor – which the GOP is totally not, just the other way around – as Jesus taught us, you might actually have a theoretically perfect Christian party.
It wouldn’t be perfect because, as you well said, and the Gospel teaches, people would still be imperfect due to every man’s and woman’s corruption -even after being saved, since we live in a fallen world and still have a sinful nature. And political parties are made up of people.
I have argued against real Communist professors in European universities. Mr. Obama is very wrong when it comes to abortion and same sex marriage, but he is not a Communist, his economic policies are pretty much in the center of the spectrum. The GOP is just at the very right fringe, and calls anybody to its left a Communist.
Joan Jove Flaherty
Thanks Joan
It may well be neat to have a viable third party, but we simply do not one at this moment in time. That is the hard cold reality. So any vote for a third party today will mean only one thing: Obama gets back in again. That is also hard cold reality.
It would be great to have a genuine conservative party but we don’t. It would be nice to have a perfect candidate to run against Obama, but we don’t – and never will. We live in a fallen world where nothing is perfect or ideal. So the most Christian thing, the most biblical thing, and the most sensible thing in this case is to make do with what we have (while perhaps working on some creative alternatives along the way).
Thus I am not and can never be a purist – a purist in this case means one thing and one thing only: we get more Obama and we further destroy America. Sorry, in good conscience I cannot allow that to happen.
And by any comparison, the party most helpful of the poor has been the Republicans, certainly not the Democrats. Also, for what it is worth, I used to be a radical lefty myself, so I would say it is perfectly correct to call Obama a cultural Marxist at least.
But thanks for sharing your thoughts.
Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch
I agree with your assessment. But I recently heard Herman Cain (I think it was him) suggest that another four years with Obama would send a strong message to the Republican party that we will not accept any more moderates. They have for the past two presidential elections given us moderates who are not really pro-life or even all that fiscally conservative. How else can we make ourselves clear? If we accept Mitt, according to Cain, we are sending the message that it’s okay to shift our party significantly to the left, that we will accept that. What are your views about his opinion? It was something I hadn’t considered before. I am still planning on voting for Mitt Romney. But I wish it was Rick Santorum or even Newt Gingrich who had won the nomination. It is definitely a conundrum.
Megan
Thanks Megan
(My commenting rules do require a full name here!) To be honest I am not sure America can survive another four years of Obama. He may cause so much damage that we will be hard-pressed to turn anything around, let alone abortion.
As to Romney, yes he is certainly not a real conservative and he is certainly not my first choice by any means. And yes I would much prefer a Santorum or someone like him. But unfortunately that is not our option here. We are stuck with Romney. Better him than Obama any day.
“Romney, while far from perfect, has got to win this election if we are going to have any hope of preserving biblical morality or the American dream. I never look for the best Christian to be President – I look for the one who best reflects a strong moral character, and who is most likely to preserve my rights as a Christian and freedom-loving American.”
These “purists” deny at the outset the fallen nature of man and pretend instead that they can transform a broken world into a whole and fixed world. Truth is, only God can and He doesn’t do it through methods, systems, laws etc, He does it by transforming one heart at a time. We don’t fight for good laws, so we can have heaven on earth, that would be a denigration of the real heaven, but we fight for good laws to lift up the name of Jesus, for the law points to Him and so the gospel can be preached without hindrance
Many blessings
Ursula Bennett
Thank you Mr. Muehlenberg for your article on the purist approach to voting, or not voting I should say, I am saddened and disheartened by so many taking the all or nothing stance, and at the expense of baby’s lives. Sometimes man waits for a response from God when what God has provided is right under our noses, Why God provided a Mormon and a Catholic for this purpose is not for me to question, but instead trust that God is giving America back it’s morals in increments such as we will have with Romney, our other option Obama is a dismal thought indeed. I pray your article has encouraged others to vote that otherwise wouldn’t have.
A. Lyle
Thanks guys
Some believers say not voting for Romney does not mean they are voting for Obama. That is technically true but practically false. One might as well say, ‘I will not fight against Hitler, but that does not mean I support him’. Yeah right, try telling that to those languishing in concentration camps. To refuse to vote for the only person on the planet who can displace Obama is to side with Obama. Thus the purists are fully complicit with evil, despite all their protests and false righteousness. They are Pharisees pure and simple.
Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch
Bill Whittle gets it quite right here. This 5-minute video is well worth watching:
You are right on! I grew up in a communist country and I can attest Obama’s views are very similar. Why else would Castro, Chavez and other ‘fine’ leaders support him?
Watch 2 great YouTube videos: “Anti Socialism Ad of Hungarian-Born Billionaire Republican Thomas Peterffy – Freedom To Succeed”
Hey!! I think that could really work. I conservative, orthodox like Catholic that has a back bone and not afraid of approval from man, but diligently working for God. Someone like that I am certain would quash same sex marriage across the USA, abortion, and euthanasia, among other moral values. One whom is also anti-Marxist. Also one that would work hard to get the majority of Americans once again working, get out of central government control. This fellow would support Israel among many other important biblically based teachings. Remember is it separation OF Church and State, NOT separation FROM Church and state.
Let me be the first to comment.
Here is just one absolutely vital reason why I think the purists are dead wrong. They think by not voting for Romney (because he is not perfect as a prolifer or anything else) they will somehow have a clear conscience.Of course all they will have is Obama back, more lefty judges, and even less chance of ever overturning Roe v Wade. See the new piece by John Hawkins:
“The Supreme Court currently has four doctrinaire liberal justices (Kagan, Sotomayor, Ginsburg, and Breyer), three conservative originalist justices (Alito, Thomas, Scalia) and two right leaning moderates (Roberts, Kennedy). Four of the justices, Ginsburg (79), Scalia (76), Kennedy (75), and Breyer (73) are over 70. Given the ideological split of the SCOTUS and the ages of the judges, the next President may have an opportunity to create a historic shift on the Court. Replacing a single justice with an ideological opposite could be a decisive factor on cases from Roe v. Wade to Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.”
http://townhall.com/columnists/johnhawkins/2012/09/11/barack_obama_vs_mitt_romney__10_big_differences_going_forward
Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch
You may be interested to know that I Googled your name to find out more about you. One of the suggested searches was “Bill Muehlenberg bigot” and halfway down the first page was a link to a blog, seemingly run by rabid atheists, criticising you. They may be God-haters but they certainly have the measure of you, Mr Muehlenberg.
Unlike you, I am not one for mud-slinging, name-calling and twisting other people’s words to serve my own agenda. I have however left a comment on the atheists’ blog simply stating my experience of posting here.
Have a really great day.
Alan Rowe
Thanks Alan
I have said you are history here on another post, but I have allowed you at least partially back on here. I will let my readers decide how free you are of name-calling and mud-slinging, and what a terrific Christian you are.
And I trust your day will be neat as well.
Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch
lol – if the “rabid atheists” have the measure of Bill, Alan, why is it they cannot present their case without resorting to “mud-slinging”?
As anybody who engages in debating knows, the moment you are reduced to insults (ie. “bigot”), you give your opponent the argument. Because if you had a superior argument, you would use it, wouldn’t you? Wouldn’t you?
Alan, I’ve been aware of some of that stuff for ages, but in my experience most of them don’t even have the courage of their convictions enough to use their real name. That says enough right there. What a waste of time it would be to engage with these haters online. They could have someone rise from the dead in front of them and they would not believe! And when faced with an (intellectual) battle, they send a sock puppet or a remote control robot instead.
You tell me what kind of person you would rather have influencing culture – ones who want to have a civil debate and discuss evidence to get closer and closer at truth, or ones resorting to obsessive personal-attack websites hiding behind anonymous web-identities and promoting hateful speech and even death threats?
Hope the sun is shining in your part of the world too.
Mark Rabich
Back on topic:
I’m sure the Pharisees considered themselves righteous and pure before God as they simultaneously condemned His Son to death too.
There are no perfect choices in this world until Jesus comes. You have never made one in your life. If we act as if there are or there should be, what we are actually saying that we can be as righteous as God on our own efforts and the life and sacrifice of His Son was no big deal. But Jesus is not running this election cycle, and even if Bachmann, West, Cain, Santorum, Palin, (insert your own choice here) or any of the other substantially better candidates were in the frame, consider the following verse:
Maybe people have also forgotten what Paul wrote in Romans 3 (using two sources in Psalms):
“None is righteous, no, not one;
no one understands;
no one seeks for God.
All have turned aside; together they have become worthless;
no one does good,
not even one.”
I guess part of the problem is also that people have been successfully duped into considering the election as one man vs another, rather than two different ideologies competing.
I cannot fathom how any Christian might’ve paid attention to the anti-God, anti-freedom, anti-life, anti-family and anti-future platform the Democrats just recently presented at their convention and remotely consider doing their utmost to getting deranged people like that away from power in the most influential country in the world today. They openly rejected and booed God three times! They hate Him. They hate the giver of life and the rescuer of our souls! Do you not get that?!? You are guaranteed to get a worse world with them in control.
Mark Rabich
Thanks Mark
Yes it is nice to get back on topic here. And you are quite right. The purists have a lot to answer for here. Genuine biblical purity is of course one thing. But this sham Pharisaical purity is quite another. They will be so proud of themselves in refusing to vote for the only hope we have of turning things around this election. So when the nation continues to decline, abortion gets worse – maybe with infanticide getting the full go ahead – they will smugly sit back and say to themselves, “Yes, but we did not contaminate ourselves. We kept ourselves pure!”
Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch
At least in the US you have a choice this November.
At the last General Election in the UK, not one of the three main parties had Same Sex Marriage in their Election Manifesto. Yet as it turns out, the present Coalition Government as well as the Opposition Labour Party are all in favour of it, and the Government intends to press it through by 2015.
Who might we have voted for to stop this happening?
David Haslam, UK
Bravo Bill. Yes this needs to be broadcast. Evangelical Christians (and economic conservatives) are the absolute WORST political supporters in the world. Cross them by failing to achieve a goal they elected you to dictate (not attempt to legislate) or fail them by being the sinful human and they will dog you with cold resentful bitterness. Ironic in the extreme. Who would want to have or encourage these kind of supporters? One wonders how King David would have fared under their judgmental convictions (condemnations) when you have a track record of adultery, murder, military failures, double-dealing with the enemy and a bad father raising a bad family to boot (offending the Dobsonian Family Cult). The DEMs, of course, have their own junkyard dogs to contend with but they actually RAISE and FEED them over there).
Dean Daniels
Here’s another analogy; Mammon and the shrewd manager.
We can easily argue governments have corrupted the economy: printing money, lying about debt and inflation, manipulating stock markets, fixing interest rates, bailing out the banks they choose…
Therefore, since the whole system (mammon) is corrupt, the purist could say “I don’t want to participate in ungodly mammon so I refuse to have anything to do with the economy”.
Haha. Yeah – right.
In contrast, Jesus commended the shrewd manager who used UNGODLY mammon to do something smart.
“… make friends for yourselves by unrighteous mammon, that when you fail, they may receive you into an everlasting home”. Luke 16:9
and…
“Therefore if you have not been faithful in the unrighteous mammon, who will commit to your trust the true riches?” Luke 16:11
I doubt the purists would hesitate to take out a low interest loan for their cause – money from a corrupt bailed-out bank that was paid off with the FED’s fake money. And yet, suddenly, their not allowed to show any support for Obama’s only rival. Not very shrewd.
So if they can’t be trusted with a simple vote, who is going to give them true riches?
Tim Lovett
This morning I was translating some of Luke 6 as an exercise to keep my Greek up to scratch and it included those verses about being blessed when people hate us because of their enmity towards God. I have just read Alan Rowe’s comment and it is clear that you are blessed, Bill.
David Morrison
Bill, I’m new to your website having been introduced to your articles by a friend. Thank you for your uncompromising approach. It’s a little unsettling to accept at first as my natural man battles against some of your logic. But I must say that I am both comforted and challenged by your words. Much like the Bible, funnily enough!
Keep up the great work.
Peter Wall, NZ
Many thanks indeed Peter
I of course don’t always get things right, and prayers are always appreciated, but I will keep on keeping on. Thanks for your encouragement.
Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch
Hi Alan, really! I will bite, Bigoted Bill is into mud slinging, name calling, twisting other people words to suit his own agenda, I am open to learn about these uses of the English language (mine leaves a bit to be desired) to slime those he disagrees with. Please can you give me your examples with links to where he has done these things so I can increase my knowledge? If you are unable to then show some character and apologize please!
Rob Withall
This attitude reminds me of Saul who didn’t wait for Samuel, but commenced the sacrifice, and Saul saving the best for the sacrifice instead of obeying God and wiping out the enemy right down to the animals.
People who ‘know better than everybody else (including God)’.
John Angelico
I think the third party option is the best one, call me a purist if you like.
I’m not an American citizen and don’t live or have ever lived in the US, but I am a morally conservative Christian (against abortion and against same sex marriage). That means you can’t blame me for “not having done anything about a third party during the last 30 years”. I guess that’s the Americans purists’ fault, following your reasoning.
Anyway, it is also your fault, and other people like you, that there aren’t any third party options which are viewed as plausible. This line of reasoning that a third party is a waste of votes, even calling it “the idiots”, is precisely the best weapon against that possibility. It’s like a self-fulfilling prophecy.
If 40 million born again Christians voted for a morally conservative party which was sensitive to the needs of the poor – which the GOP is totally not, just the other way around – as Jesus taught us, you might actually have a theoretically perfect Christian party.
It wouldn’t be perfect because, as you well said, and the Gospel teaches, people would still be imperfect due to every man’s and woman’s corruption -even after being saved, since we live in a fallen world and still have a sinful nature. And political parties are made up of people.
I have argued against real Communist professors in European universities. Mr. Obama is very wrong when it comes to abortion and same sex marriage, but he is not a Communist, his economic policies are pretty much in the center of the spectrum. The GOP is just at the very right fringe, and calls anybody to its left a Communist.
Joan Jove Flaherty
Thanks Joan
It may well be neat to have a viable third party, but we simply do not one at this moment in time. That is the hard cold reality. So any vote for a third party today will mean only one thing: Obama gets back in again. That is also hard cold reality.
It would be great to have a genuine conservative party but we don’t. It would be nice to have a perfect candidate to run against Obama, but we don’t – and never will. We live in a fallen world where nothing is perfect or ideal. So the most Christian thing, the most biblical thing, and the most sensible thing in this case is to make do with what we have (while perhaps working on some creative alternatives along the way).
Thus I am not and can never be a purist – a purist in this case means one thing and one thing only: we get more Obama and we further destroy America. Sorry, in good conscience I cannot allow that to happen.
And by any comparison, the party most helpful of the poor has been the Republicans, certainly not the Democrats. Also, for what it is worth, I used to be a radical lefty myself, so I would say it is perfectly correct to call Obama a cultural Marxist at least.
But thanks for sharing your thoughts.
Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch
I agree with your assessment. But I recently heard Herman Cain (I think it was him) suggest that another four years with Obama would send a strong message to the Republican party that we will not accept any more moderates. They have for the past two presidential elections given us moderates who are not really pro-life or even all that fiscally conservative. How else can we make ourselves clear? If we accept Mitt, according to Cain, we are sending the message that it’s okay to shift our party significantly to the left, that we will accept that. What are your views about his opinion? It was something I hadn’t considered before. I am still planning on voting for Mitt Romney. But I wish it was Rick Santorum or even Newt Gingrich who had won the nomination. It is definitely a conundrum.
Megan
Thanks Megan
(My commenting rules do require a full name here!) To be honest I am not sure America can survive another four years of Obama. He may cause so much damage that we will be hard-pressed to turn anything around, let alone abortion.
As to Romney, yes he is certainly not a real conservative and he is certainly not my first choice by any means. And yes I would much prefer a Santorum or someone like him. But unfortunately that is not our option here. We are stuck with Romney. Better him than Obama any day.
But see my further thoughts on him here: https://billmuehlenberg.com/2012/05/13/on-mitt-romney-and-americas-future/
Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch
Thanks guys
Rebecca Hagelin gets it right:
“Romney, while far from perfect, has got to win this election if we are going to have any hope of preserving biblical morality or the American dream. I never look for the best Christian to be President – I look for the one who best reflects a strong moral character, and who is most likely to preserve my rights as a Christian and freedom-loving American.”
http://townhall.com/columnists/rebeccahagelin/2012/09/13/can_a_christian_vote_for_a_nonchristian_candidate
Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch
These “purists” deny at the outset the fallen nature of man and pretend instead that they can transform a broken world into a whole and fixed world. Truth is, only God can and He doesn’t do it through methods, systems, laws etc, He does it by transforming one heart at a time. We don’t fight for good laws, so we can have heaven on earth, that would be a denigration of the real heaven, but we fight for good laws to lift up the name of Jesus, for the law points to Him and so the gospel can be preached without hindrance
Many blessings
Ursula Bennett
Yes quite right Ursula
Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch
See here for more on all this:
https://billmuehlenberg.com/2012/09/09/the-aha-needs-to-think-much-more-carefully-here/
Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch
Thank you Mr. Muehlenberg for your article on the purist approach to voting, or not voting I should say, I am saddened and disheartened by so many taking the all or nothing stance, and at the expense of baby’s lives. Sometimes man waits for a response from God when what God has provided is right under our noses, Why God provided a Mormon and a Catholic for this purpose is not for me to question, but instead trust that God is giving America back it’s morals in increments such as we will have with Romney, our other option Obama is a dismal thought indeed. I pray your article has encouraged others to vote that otherwise wouldn’t have.
A. Lyle
Thanks guys
Some believers say not voting for Romney does not mean they are voting for Obama. That is technically true but practically false. One might as well say, ‘I will not fight against Hitler, but that does not mean I support him’. Yeah right, try telling that to those languishing in concentration camps. To refuse to vote for the only person on the planet who can displace Obama is to side with Obama. Thus the purists are fully complicit with evil, despite all their protests and false righteousness. They are Pharisees pure and simple.
Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch
Bill Whittle gets it quite right here. This 5-minute video is well worth watching:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5v7QQ5vQWg&feature=youtu.be
Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch
And Wild Bill is certainly right here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TfWIxRrvFy8&feature=share
Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch
Hi Bill,
You are right on! I grew up in a communist country and I can attest Obama’s views are very similar. Why else would Castro, Chavez and other ‘fine’ leaders support him?
Watch 2 great YouTube videos: “Anti Socialism Ad of Hungarian-Born Billionaire Republican Thomas Peterffy – Freedom To Succeed”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vzh-9LBDsGQ&feature=youtube_gdata_player
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKOem7wiVIQ&sns=fb
blessings,
Monica Smithson
Voting on the basis of principle is carefully discussed here by Bill Whittle – well worth watching:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wPjBXufufUU&feature=youtu.be
Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch
Hey!! I think that could really work. I conservative, orthodox like Catholic that has a back bone and not afraid of approval from man, but diligently working for God. Someone like that I am certain would quash same sex marriage across the USA, abortion, and euthanasia, among other moral values. One whom is also anti-Marxist. Also one that would work hard to get the majority of Americans once again working, get out of central government control. This fellow would support Israel among many other important biblically based teachings. Remember is it separation OF Church and State, NOT separation FROM Church and state.