25. July 2010 by admin.

There are many ways Christians know Jesus is God, but few more powerful than the testimony of His character.

For instance, as human beings we’re more than aware of our dependence upon other things, most notably through consumption. The human machine was built as a dependent object, something not only needing basic necessities such as food, air, and water, but also personal necessities such as the need to be loved and adored, the need to feel safe, and the desire to accumulate resources for survival.  At the base of our chemical, social, and spiritual existence, we’re really just needy beings, and at the very base of our need lies a personal connection: the need to experience our Creator, to know His presence, to have His guidance.

The average person–maybe even every person–can’t really give every second of the day to someone else without taking something, whether it be time, resources, or appreciation, so when we see people who impoverish themselves in order to give, many people are struck with a sense of admiration; as though, despite what we may all wish about humanity, perhaps charitable behaviors in the extreme were unnatural.  Or to put it another way, we all understand there’s no such thing as true human altruism.  And to a degree, we’re right. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in philosophy, Theology | Print | No Comments »

15. June 2010 by admin.

Earlier this week, I was surprised to discover that the Mormon church was using its money to buy a billion dollar mall in Salt Lake City.  Shockingly, the New York Times reports “When completed in 2012, it will encompass 900,000 square feet of retailing, including an outdoor pedestrian shopping mall capped by 115 apartments; 1.6 million square feet of office space in eight buildings; a grocery store; and five residential towers with about 600 condominiums.”  Yee-ikes.

My first reaction was one of outrage, my belief being that this project utilizes funds from its parishioners, who should be guaranteed proper stewardship of church property (while Deseret News reports that the funds came from Property Reserve Inc, the church’s real estate arm).  After all, when you pay 10% of your wages for the purpose of helping your particular ministry, you want it to fund something… holy.   But this is beside the point, since I’m not even a Mormon, which means I can’t hold them to Christian administrative standards, although those standards will be questioned later.  While there are certainly moral issues involved here, this massive expenditure raises serious questions about the separation of church, business, and state, the practical nature of philanthropy, and the nature of conservative values. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in philosophy, Theology, politics | Print | No Comments »

11. June 2010 by admin.

These last few weeks, as Israel has been receiving nearly universal condemnation for searching a potentially terrorist convoy, it may seem that Israel is more trouble than they’re worth.  After all, the entire world is watching their every move, and sometimes it can seem that the United States is placing itself in a perilous position by giving its support to the Jewish nation.

But the purpose of this article isn’t to convince you that Israel is perfect, or that people in Gaza have been living in comfortable conditions, or even that Helen Thomas is a scoundrel for saying the things she said.  This article is to show you what Israel is, why it deserves your respect, why you need to be on its side in terms of national defense, and what blessings the world has received through it.  This is a celebration of the miracle of Israel. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Theology, politics | Print | No Comments »

10. June 2010 by admin.

I’m not exactly sure how to begin writing about this, but I had an experience that made me think I was going to die today.  As I was sitting in the break room at work, I had a very sharp, sudden pain in the left side of my chest, about where my heart is.  The first incident I took as a random occurrence, but upon my second breath I realized something was wrong.  Another sharp pain split my chest, and I began to wonder whether or not this was really… it.

There were a few things that popped into my head as it happened, the first two being “not here” and  “not now.”  I suppose everyone thinks this as their life is coming to a close, as they begin to realize how fragile they were the entire time, and how much they’d taken their strength–and every possible misconception of invincibility–for granted.  If there’s one thing we can be sure of, it’s that not everyone is fortunate enough to die in battle, or to die rescuing someone, or to die a martyr, or doing anything with any purpose at all.  Actually, quite a few people kick the bucket and don’t have enough time to realize they’re about to meet their maker, and even less are likely to find Him even if they did.  But for some of us, there’s enough time to ponder what they did–and didn’t–do with their time. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Theology, Uncategorized | Print | No Comments »

24. April 2010 by admin.

Editor’s note: Although I wrote this article, it borrows so heavily from the work of others that I can’t claim credit for it.  For a list of resources, videos, and organizations responsible for this and similar work, please see the end of the article. Thanks!

Almost every American today is aware that biological beings are constructed and maintained by using the language of DNA.  But how on earth did DNA come to exist in the first place? 

Let us consider for a moment that the theory of human evolution is true, and that–for some unknown reason–lightning hit a pool of primordial goo billions of years ago, leading some small portion of protein-saturated matter into surviving life.  In order for us to exist today, that living organism must have reproduced.  And if it needed to reproduce, it had to have some form of DNA/RNA.  Without DNA/RNA, the life form would be completely incapable of replication.

Now, what exactly are DNA and RNA? They are one-dimensional programming codes for three-dimensional beings.  By translating these one-dimensional codes, a living being is able to build–piece by piece, in sequential order–another living, functional organism.  And as one might imagine, without the ability to process DNA properly by copying it and reading it properly (a very complex process done by a series of complex machines), the next organism which it would have reproduced could not have been built. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in philosophy, Theology | Print | No Comments »

28. March 2010 by admin.

Editor’s note: this Facebook discussion with a very intelligent evolutionist resulted after I created my sarcastic Facebook group (”Evolution affects my worldview on everything except racism and human rights”).  I felt that the conversation was too important to disregard, especially since it highlights critical arguments and topics regarding both evolution, intelligent design, and how racism is impacted by either philosophy.  I hope you enjoy this, and if  you decide to be persuaded by my side of the argument, feel free to join my group :)

Me: Just started my new group: “Evolution affects my worldview on everything except racism and human rights.”  Obviously I’m a Jesus guy, so don’t take this page seriously. Join it if you realize that evolution and human rights/racial equality are completely incompatible, and you’d like to make fun.  [Quote from group] “We also do not believe in social Darwinism, because every evolved monkey deserves a chance to feel good about themselves and have an education before they die a meaningless death on a rock which is flying in outer space. As such, we enjoy demonizing the rich for not sharing the wealth they accrued through superior adaption.”

Brad:  I guess for an evangelical Christian such as yourself, it would make a lot of sense to derive your worldview from your understanding of nature. Now, I’m not saying this approach is wrong, but without a good epistemic reason for doing so, it is not necessary. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in philosophy, Theology | Print | 1 Comment »

20. February 2010 by admin.

When I was a 19 year-old non-Christian, I argued that if the Bible was true, sin was God’s fault. At the time, it made sense to me that sin was a result of biochemical survival, in which an entire being’s existence is predicated upon—in theory—selfishness. Without the drive to eat and procreate and amass wealth for safety, the concept of sin seemed meaningless, and I was well aware that Adam and Eve had been eating in the Garden of Eden.

Of course, what eating implies is that the capability for sin already existed before Adam and Eve had eaten the forbidden fruit, since satiation and perfect circumstances prevented the need for selfishness. But when God expelled us from the Garden, that is when our real problems began, making the present-day human evils more His fault than anyone else’s. As a young socialist keen on the idea of crime reduction through government subsistence for all—an idea I now firmly reject—it seemed sensible enough to conclude that God had built us to fail, as though God should have built us differently so that sin wouldn’t have had to exist. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Theology | Print | No Comments »

11. February 2010 by admin.

Editor’s note: This article was written for a brother in Christ who’d brought this important topic up earlier.  Here’s to you, buddy. 

Oftentimes, those opposing an establishment of a so-called religiously-affiliated morality in government will argue that people who adopt and promote Christlike standards are the same kind of Pharisees who not only failed to meet God’s standards, but who ultimately killed Jesus.  Sometimes they’ll argue this point because they wish to engage in sinful behavior, and other times because they don’t believe enforcing religious morality is conducive to liberty, but the argument is always the same: people should keep their religious beliefs out of the legal system.

Either way, both parties agree on one point, which is the danger presented by a unified church/government structure like the historic Papacy or yesteryear’s Anglican church.  But whether or not the state formally declares a separation of church and state, there are only two realistic theological declarations a state can make regarding this issue.  The first is that God does exist and our entire existence is therefore predicated upon Him and His law.  The second is that He does not exist and our entire existence is futile, directionless, and entirely encapsulated in three concepts: pleasure, pain, and death.   It would be incredibly misleading to have a government which declares the sovereignty of God but does not enforce any of His principles, or a government which refuses to acknowledge His existence and yet takes stances only a theist can take. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Theology | Print | 1 Comment »

27. January 2010 by admin.

Christ is perfect, you are not.

Although easy to understand and easier to admit, the full reality of personal imperfection in the face of Christ’s perfection is incredibly difficult to live with.  In fact, as a young Christian, this is one of the most difficult and bothersome concepts to abide by, and oftentimes–if we’re being honest with ourselves–rather depressing.

For instance, in one of the Apostle Paul’s most terrifying writings, he states the following:  “Therefore, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, because through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life set me free from the law of sin and death. For what the law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the sinful nature, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful man to be a sin offering. And so he condemned sin in sinful man, in order that the righteous requirements of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the sinful nature but according to the Spirit. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Theology | Print | 2 Comments »

6. January 2010 by admin.

In modern society, one claim to progress is the alleged triumph of reason in many realms of daily living.  But the truth is that while reason allows humans to behave sensibly according to the world they are presented with, it completely loses function and ironically presents itself as a regressive danger in one of two areas: when it is used to explain the origins of the universe, and when it is considered supreme in the dictation of morality.  This essay will focus on the latter problem.

When the “rational” person considers reason to be the foundation of morality, what they find is known as the Heinz Dilemma.  In this dilemma, a man has a wife who gets cancer, and he has the option of either stealing from a selfish person to pay for her surgery, or letting her die while not stealing from someone else.  According to the rational person, Heinz has six moral directions to compare (thanks to Wikipedia): Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in philosophy, Theology | Print | 1 Comment »

8. December 2009 by admin.

One of the most difficult passages of the New Testament deals with divorce and the proper application of a marriage relationship.  When Jesus was asked by Pharisees whether a man is allowed to divorce his wife, He had a seemingly cryptic answer for them: divorce is wrong all the time, and the Creator did not intend for a man and a wife to separate unless the woman was found to have some sort of “sexual impurity,” but Moses allowed the Israelites to engage in divorce.  But since Jesus also stated that the Law and the Prophets were divinely revealed by Yahweh, and Moses allowed divorce, how can we tell which parts of the Old Testament are from God and which parts are from Moses?  Without the understanding that the entire Old Testament is from God, we cannot derive moral stances on many issues or be sure about the application of the Bible to modern living. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in philosophy, Theology | Print | 1 Comment »

3. November 2009 by admin.

Despite what either side of the political spectrum may say about the other, many Democrats and Republicans claim to be Christians.  Republicans claim to be the Christian party because they (are supposed to) take more conservative–or, Christian–stances on social issues, while Democrats claim that God has a heart for the poor and would be on their side because they engage in state philanthropy.  Actually, this and the Iraq War are the primary reasons Leftist Christians claim they voted for Obama, despite the fact the Obama’s stances on social issues are diametrically opposed to anything portrayed as righteous in the Bible.  So how can anyone tell if their stance is legitimate?

First of all, you can always recognize a legitimate Christian because they claim a couple of things: that the Bible is divine revelation, and that dependence upon Jesus Christ alone grants salvation.  If a claimed Christian won’t agree with this, then drop them like they’re hot: you’re dealing with an illogical heretic.  But if they agree with those statements, we can rest upon God’s divine law as presented in the Old Testament.  The reason we can say this is because Jesus commanded us to love one another, He said that loving interaction is defined by His divine law, and those laws were presented by Yahweh Himself for His covenant people. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Theology, politics | Print | 1 Comment »

26. October 2009 by admin.

There are a lot of people, especially in Seattle, who like to pretend that the Old Testament and a lot of God’s laws don’t matter to modern people. They say this for many reasons, but mostly because they believe that they themselves are somehow morally advanced beyond Biblical law, and as such, the Bible is oftentimes culturally irrelevant.  Aside from the problems which accompany this kind of thinking (like how nobody can really be sure which portions of the Bible are divinely inspired), Christians employing this kind of “logic” generally forget about someone.  He’s called the Devil.  You may have read about him somewhere in the Bible.

If Yahweh is the author of truth and the Devil is partially defined as the author of lies, then anything in the Bible which we suggest is false or evil is from the Devil.  This includes “culturally irrelevant” stances on gender roles (oppressive and unloving!), ideas about submitting to authority (unAmerican, of course!), and keeping the Sabbath holy (before the modern consumptive economy!).  But the most important thing “modern” Christians enjoy painting as the Devil’s work is Levitical law, as they claim it is archaic and oppressive, having completely unacceptable standards for treating women, or unacceptable intolerance of idolators, homosexuals, and false prophets.  These people would claim that when Jesus arrived, suddenly God changed His mind about standards and started preaching a philosophy of hugs while throwing any sort of orderly function–and justice–out the window (”love your enemies” apparently means letting them do whatever they want). Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Theology | Print | 1 Comment »

15. October 2009 by admin.

As a youngster, I was once convinced that imagining God’s existence as an explanation for the universe was silly, as it made the already unexplainable phenomenon of existence even more complex.  But in retrospect, I had already made one assumption that flowed concurrently with proper theology: that there must be an existence beyond time and space itself.

For instance, no reasonable person has ever read anything about physics and time and determined that the flow of time isn’t malleable, or that it has always existed. Einstein’s theory of relativity showed us that time could be slowed, and good old-fashioned logic showed us that the flow of linear time necessitates a beginning, or we could not have arrived at the present point.  Those ideas being clear, we must all be in agreement that if these statements about time and space are true, then something must exist beyond time and space, mostly because matter and space don’t create themselves, they don’t come from nothing, they aren’t universally constant, and time cannot exist without space.  These are logical conclusions of our existence, and the basis for any reasonable hypothesizing about reality. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in philosophy, Theology | Print | 1 Comment »

8. October 2009 by admin.

“And whoever welcomes a little child like this in my name welcomes me. But if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a large millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea.” -Matthew 18:5-6

It would be safe to say that since the Human Rights Campaign is one of the largest and best-funded homosexual lobby groups in the US, that they would have the resources to comprise the best case for “Biblical” homosexual advocacy.  As such, we can assume that this training course for their Biblical homosexuality seminar “For the Bible Tells Me So” is the best that their community has to offer. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in philosophy, Theology | Print | 1 Comment »

5. September 2009 by admin.

I’ve heard many times that drugs ought to legalized.  Never more frequently (and loudly, might I add) than from Ron Paul’s libertarian camp, generally because they believe that the pursuit of happiness is a legitimate right, and doing drugs doesn’t really hurt anyone. 

But this sort of hobgob is from people who understand neither happiness nor the pursuit thereof, and it should be a philosophy reserved for teenagers.  After all, if we can honestly determine that evil is never pursued without some sort of happiness in mind, then not all forms of pursuit are legitimate.  Any law is a testament to that.  And if we can determine that your inner state greatly influences your interactions with others (as behavior comes from nowhere else other than within you), then legalizing more forms of personal pollution would only seek to negatively impact social harmony.  The notion that drugs have any positive qualities was tossed aside only ten years after the drug experimentation of the 60’s, following the explosion of crime and illegitimate childbirth fueled by the excess consumption and rapid moral deterioration.

Nevertheless, since many are inclined to ignore visible consequences of drug abuse, a philosophical case against drug use–and even casual drinking–must be made.  As an ex drug-addict and a current drinker of alcohol, I feel there is no one better to make the case against drugs and alcohol than myself, though I make myself to be a fool for drinking.  So let us begin with some obvious statements. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in philosophy, Theology | Print | 1 Comment »

1. September 2009 by admin.

If a man sings a song to your little girl about having sex, what would you do?

If a man tells your little boy that it’s cool to shoot up and dress like a woman, what would tell that man?

If a man swears in your mother’s face, would you tolerate him?

If a man says your God is a fraud, and that His laws are worthless, would you give him your money?

There was a time when Americans would have been up in arms over these kinds of things, especially when these statements were produced in a mass-media form for youngsters.  Looking back 50 years ago, that seems almost fantastical: something from an alternate dimension in which people actually cared about statements, in which people actually believed that the person you were would determine what kinds of behaviors you exerted, and that inundating the mind with ideas would have some sort of effect upon the receiver.  Poppycock, we say today.  There is no Devil’s Music. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in philosophy, Theology | Print | No Comments »

4. July 2009 by admin.

Looking back on the New Testament, one of the most confusing and difficult commandments Jesus gave is the call to resist retaliation.  He said in the book of Matthew, “You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’ But I tell you not to resist an evil person. But whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also. If anyone wants to sue you and take away your tunic, let him have your cloak also. And whoever compels you to go one mile, go with him two.  Give to him who asks you, and from him who wants to borrow from you do not turn away.”

In short, Jesus seems to command us to not seek retribution for wrongdoings, ranging from physical assault to lawsuits to legal unfairness, covering the whole gamut of uncomfortable things that nobody likes to have happen to them.  At face value, taken in its most radical and consistent sense, that means you can’t even spank your kid. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Theology | Print | No Comments »

27. June 2009 by admin.

Earlier this week I had a conversation with an old friend of mine who doesn’t believe in Christianity. The discussion was over the French government possibly banning the burkha, which my friend found to be a gross violation of civil rights, most notably the choice of what to wear, as well as the separation of church and state (kind of an American thing, eh?). His friends–since I must note that this took place on Facebook–all joined the band-wagon, suggesting that the French government was taking an immoral stance against individual liberty, and that France should stay out of religious matters.

But most importantly, we came to a point in which I quoted the Qur’an, which stated that a man could beat his wife if she were acting out of line, and I asked both Eric and his friends if they thought the French government should have any say in practically ritual wife-beating.  His response?  A quote from Deuteronomy, which stated that a woman’s hand should be chopped off if she intervenes in a fight and grabs a man by his genitals. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Theology, politics | Print | No Comments »

6. June 2009 by admin.

Throughout human existence, many have asked themselves where evil came from, and most end up more confused than before they asked.  Let’s look at some great examples of futile thinking about evil (the titles provided in bold for easy memorization), and then proceed to some truth.

1) Authority and Situation

Philip Zimbardo, elected the president of the American Psychological Association in 2002, would say that evil comes from a combination between authority and situation, citing the Milgram experiments, the incidence at Abu Ghraib, and the suicides at Jonestown as prime examples.  But if you look a little closer, all Zimbardo and his psychologist friends are saying is that circumstances give an ability to express the evil that already exists within the human mind.  And what’s so “intellectual” about that?  Of COURSE evil can present itself when given a chance: without the situational potential to commit physical evil, you can’t commit evil.  Just like when you don’t have a car, you can’t drive into a tree.

2) Culture and Tradition

Some would blame culture and tradition as the source of evil, claiming that our corrupted cultures–and religions!–are polluting our minds and making us incapable of reaching forward into an intangible utopia.  Unfortunately for them, they didn’t ask themselves where the cultural corruption came from.  Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in philosophy, Theology | Print | No Comments »

30. May 2009 by admin.

If you’ve ever heard the term “I’m spiritual, but not religious,” you’ve probably at some point wondered whether organized religion encumbers people’s spiritual lives by interfering with the individual’s Christian walk.  And this is a normal thing to ask.  After all, it’s absolutely true that God interacts with individuals in individual ways.

But if God proves himself through personal interaction to be morally and doctrinally inconsistent, this makes God out to be either a liar or incapable of determining truth for Himself.  Either way represents a lack of the qualities necessary to make Him worthy of ultimate righteousness and thus respect.  That, or people are talking to themselves.

So if it must be that God interacts with humans in a consistent manner, religion would be the result of many humans being impacted by Him, and interacting because of His divine revelations.  Different stances may be taken on those revelations from His word, but this doesn’t affect whether the message–with an actual intent–was actually given, if in fact it was given. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Theology | Print | No Comments »

19. May 2009 by admin.

The other day, Obama gave a speech before Notre Dame that resulted in a lot of Catholics getting angry and Alan Keyes getting arrested (4).  Given the highly volatile situation, what would a man in Obama’s shoes speak about?

This article contains Obama’s paraphrased speech, comically restructured to more blatantly display his logical errors and actual statements.  If you’d like to read the original speech or even watch it, the text and video are provided and highly recommended before reading.   If you don’t read the actual speech, you won’t believe the actual stupidity that I point out in the following paraphrasing.  It should also be noted that this paraphrasing begins during the second video clip (out of the four), because the first portions of the speech were too boring.

Also, don’t expect this to make a whole lot of sense.  This is Obama speaking.

——————————————-

Obama: America is a terrible place to live.  Today, we live in a country where strong people take advantage of weak people, and we are committing prejudiced acts just like we were in ancient times.  This, my friends, is completely unacceptable, and as a college-educated crowd, you realize that our extreme prejudice as a society is a big, big problem because of White Christians (editor’s note: no other oppressive group available).  This is the reason I’m going to blabber on tonight. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in philosophy, Theology | Print | No Comments »

26. April 2009 by admin.

Since America’s inception, the pursuit of happiness has been considered one of the essential human rights owed to our citizens, and has lately been used to defend the “rights” of people traditionally on morality’s bad side: advocates of sexual revolutions, easy divorces, gay marriage, abortion, and even Satanism.  But just as almost everything our forefathers said has been redefined and misconstrued due to a lack of either morality or intelligence (as gun rights are definitely not for hunting), so has the pursuit of happiness been turned into a mockery of what it should be.  The reader should note that this can only happen if you don’t understand how happiness works.  As such, let us consider three points.

First, thinkers must understand that all evils are relational, either being between the offender and a person or between an offender and God.  It is conceptually impossible to commit an evil when you’re the only person in existence.

Second, all people in all portions of the globe pursue happiness, but both where they look and how they look determine whether happiness results, and even the happiness of those around them. Obviously, some pursuits are noble and others aren’t, with some leading to considerably more unhappiness as a result of immoral pleasure-seeking.  A man who seeks happiness through financial stability may either work hard or con people.  A person who seeks to maintain power can either persuade the masses with his good policies or by chopping heads off in the public square.  And most of us–excluding actual sociopaths with mental disabilities or the perverse–recognize the difference between proper and improper methods of pursuit. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in philosophy, Theology | Print | 1 Comment »

14. March 2009 by admin.

Editor’s note: We here at American Clarity would like to let the readers know that this article is a little different than the last ones, being primarily aimed at followers of Christ.  We highly suggest following any links that reference biblical doctrine, as this article would be tough to defend without the Bible on which it is based.  Enjoy, and God bless.

———————————————————-

With Obama’s declaration that no God condones abortion, one would expect a population of over 300 million people to—at the very least—wonder whether he was expecting a lightning bolt to strike (1). After all, saying something like that and then not only exporting abortions to other countries on our dollar, but also lifting the ban for federal funding on embryonic stem cell research and supporting the Freedom of Choice Act would seem a little bold (and by the way, the FOCA allows the termination of life until fetal viability, or the ability to survive outside the womb) (2)(3). But on the Kenyan goes, not only without blinking an eye, but also apparently secure in his belief that he stands within Christ’s favor.

But what exactly makes a Christian?

First of all, seeing where Obama gets his logic isn’t impossible. Coming from an eternal perspective, in which Christ declared that his kingdom was not of this earth and that we should render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s, one could argue that Christians should abstain from enforcing their will on the public(4)(5). After all, if the ultimate goal of this life is to personally follow Christ and win the hearts and souls of those you come in contact with, pushing your standards on anyone else isn’t going to win anyone. Not only is every single one of us fatally flawed and in need of redemption, but you can’t win the hearts of those outside the faith without loving them as human beings and extending the gifts of charity Christ has enabled you to give. This loving attitude extends to all, be they hookers, junkies, or the cast from How I Met Your Mother. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in philosophy, Theology | Print | No Comments »

2. January 2009 by admin.

Who would Jesus vote for?

As a Christian, this is a question you’ve got to ask yourself every time an election season comes around. Not necessarily because you actually believe Jesus would have actually voted for any particular person (since Jesus was pretty clear about his kingdom being in heaven and not on earth), but because you have a duty to your family and friends to be an active citizen, upkeeping the gifts of freedom and moral prosperity that have been handed to you by your forefathers. As such a Christian American, you’ve got to first find out which people most properly support the values of Christianity.

So where do you start? Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Theology, politics | Print | No Comments »