It always amuses when the Godless gibber about Christianity. They have no idea what they are talking about, though this ignorance does not at all stop them. They naturally consider themselves refined, well-spoken and urbane, but they are in fact little more than apes in trousers. The Carpenter warned the faithful about such men 2000 years ago.
Here is a fine example of the type. His name is Ed Schultz, and he is a media maven and Obama supporter—and pardon the redundancy. With earnest mien and furrowed brow he asks the question, “What would Jesus do about universal health care?” Of course—but of course—Schultz claims that Jesus would be all for it. Observe the fool in action, and try to stomach it for the full 9 minutes.
One could say a great deal about Schultz and his thoughts on Christianity, but such an undertaking would be pointless. Believers would laugh at him. Non-believers would agree with him. So excepting a few things, let us leave it at that for now.
Schultz says that Obama is a Christian. No Christian would ever say such a thing of the man, though the Obama supporters claim this about him all the time. One wonders why they are so intent on making folks believe Obama follows the God of Abraham and Isaac. One wonders why the Godless really must insist that their hero is God-fearing. They must think that Christians are as easily duped as they are about Obama. Sorry to all you Obama boys out there, but we believers long ago took the measure of your little tin god and found him wanting— Mene mene tekel upharsin and all that.
Like all well-schooled and well-fed propagandists, Schultz trots out a couple of poodles to make his case about Christ supporting Obama’s health care package. These poodles he calls Christian pastors, and I have no doubt that they are indeed called that. But being called that and actually being that are quite different things. I have said before that no one who supports Obama can make any logical claim to Christianity. We can safely state that Obama is the most anti-Christian man ever to sit in the White House. Whether Schultz understands this or not is entirely irrelevant.
Schultz is himself a dupe, though he does not comprehend that. He is in fact in the pay of Moloch, and does his bidding. Obama is likewise, though he is a bit farther up the scale of Moloch worship than any mere fool like Schultz. No, Obama is the Real Deal. His worship of Moloch extends to the sacrifice of children and creating a tremendous, ubiquitous and omnipresent State in place of the worship of Christ. His every speech, his every program, his every desire, is to increase the size of his Moloch State and decrease the influence of the followers of Christ.
Men like Obama and his boot-lick Schultz are of course damned unless they repent, though the further along a man is in his sins the less likely he is to repent—or to even recognize the need for it. And to state the obvious of the obvious, Obama is very far along in his sins. He is on his way to Hell, which would be a private matter between him and God, except that as president he can bring millions with him into the abyss.
Perhaps the entire nation. Perhaps the entire world.
55 Comments;
-
AaronS August 22, 2009
-
Scipio August 23, 2009
-
James August 23, 2009
-
Scipio August 24, 2009
-
James August 24, 2009
« Previous 1 2You are deeply misguided in your Christianity. I’ve been a Christian since a night in October 1968. I’m the son of preacherman. I know church; I know Jesus. And to say that Obama would not be called a Christian by a true Christian is nothing more than a loaded statement meant to close debate.
Perfection in doctrine has never been a scriptural litmus test for being saved. The jailer cried out, “What must I do to be saved?” Paul said, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved.”
Ah, but today, that jailer’s cry would be answered with, “Well, registers as a Republican, vote conservatively, protect the right to bear arms….”
I am a conservative Christian–and citizen. But I loath when we “de-Christianize” someone because he or she doesn’t do it like we do it. People can come to different conclusions–or be at different places on their journey into the knowledge of the truth–and still be a believer.
Socialism is not inherently non-Christian–as anyone who has read the Book of Acts knows. No, it shouldn’t be forced on us, but every law does some forcing somewhere. It may be forcing bigots to integrate, or people to stop holding slaves. You get the idea.
Yes, I’m a capitalist (though not a raw one–since we see that greed will be happy to have children work 16 hour days, if it can get away with it). But just as capitalism isn’t inherently Christian, neither are other political approaches inherently un-Christian.
Yes, other approaches may be inherently stupid, unwise, unreasonable, illogical, hurtful, damaging, and destructive. But we WIN THE ARGUMENT by arguing the point, and not assuming that someone cannot possibly be a Christian because they don’t agree with our political philosophy.
The Scriptures are worlds above the Constitution. And as important and beautiful as the Constitution is, it bows before the Scriptures. Let’s not debase Jesus by making Him a Republican when He is above ALL powers and principalities. That’s like making a Medal of Honor winner a security guard–poor form.
Again, if Obama believes in Jesus for His salvation, He’s a Christian. And he doesn’t stop being a Christian because you or anyone else doesn’t like his political slant.
Let’s just say that Obama is a Christian with very illogical and poorly-thought-out political beliefs and goals.
I’m a Christian–been a sincere one for over 40 years–have a degree in philosophy, am an armchair theologian…and I say, “Yes, Obama is a Christian.”
Dear AaronS:
My writing that Obama is not a Christian does not at all “close off debate.” You are debating me, yes? It simply provides information about the man. And it has nothing to do with Doctrine or politics.
You claim that “socialism is not inherently non-Christian” is absurd. All socialist states have persecuted Christianity to one extent or another. The Book of Acts has nothing to do with socialism, but with a voluntary giving of goods to the community. No government is involved.
A Carpenter says, “By their fruits you shall know them.” What are Obama’s fruits? Obama is a man who promotes infanticide, who supports the murder of children who happen to survive an abortion attempt, who is manifestly corrupt, who is full of lies and deceit and who clearly worships himself over Christ. And you call him a Christian? Then who would not be?
Evidently you define a Christian as anyone who claims to be one. Is that what they taught you in your theology classes?
Wow… reading this blog is certainly something else. I was going to say something about Christianity, but I am “godless” and can only gibber, and anyway AaronS took the words right out of my mouth.
Scipio, you have a lot of anger and hate (and yes, I know the difference between hatred and contempt—hatred is the genus, contempt is the species). AaronS speaks compassionate words from his heart. They strike me, a gibbering heathen, as the kind of words that would gladden Jesus. Although he describes himself as a conservative Christian (though what true Christian could believe that Obama is a Christian, as well?), that means something to me, a leftist Buddhist. You might want to ponder that as you consider your messaging strategy, unless your goal is just to lash out at shadows–in which case, lash away, dude; just don’t say I didn’t warn you. Hatred is poisonous.
You responded to AaronS, “My writing that Obama is not a Christian does not at all “close off debate.”” But that is not what AaronS said. He was referring to your remark that “No Christian would ever say [that Obama is a Christian].” You should respond to the objections people actually make rather than moving the goalpost.
Dear James:
Can your types ever begin to argue without claiming the other side is filled with anger and hate?
And if Aaron “took the words right out of your mouth,” then why do you feel the need to comment?
Scipio: Yes, when we’re not responding to anger and hate. That’s just not the case this time. Sorry, bro. Perhaps it would help to re-read your post, which is just dripping with venomous scorn.