That is baloney and you know it.
Right.
It's baloney because you and others want to justify endorsing that which is against God.
Joseph interpreted Pharaoh's dream and told him to prepare for the upcoming famine. This allowed Egypt to become very rich and prosperous and to rule over the other nations around it. If that is not endorsing someone, I don't know what is.
Then you don't know what endorsing someone is then.Pharaoh was already the ruler. Joseph was submitting to that which God had placed in authority over him. Joseph's people are the same people that Moses led out of bondage. So you can stop with all this craziness about the man of God endorsing that which is against God. He submitted to Pharaoh because that's what he was supposed to do. And when God was ready to get His people out from under the rule of that which was against Him, He did.
And the Bible says the powers that be are ordained of God. God ordained that Obama and Romney would run for President. God ordained that we be allowed to vote for our President. It is our responsibility to vote for who we think is best for the country.
It is our responsibility to keep God and His eternal Kingdom FIRST just as His word directs. And this supersedes any responsibility to do what you think is best for this temporal country.
I believe Romney would have been far better for our country than Obama.
Yes the vote of 78% of evangelicals supporting that which is against Christ establishes that 78% of you were dead wrong because the focus of many of that 78% was on this country and not God's Kingdom.
Your no choice was in effect a vote for Obama.
And??? At least with Obama everyone already knew he was unGodly. Now 78% of evangelicals got folks thinking that a man against God is moral.
http://i.imgur.com/NsphD.gif
It is true that Daniel did not choose to be in captivity, but he did choose to serve these kings. He did not have to serve in their government, he could have refused. He might have been put to death, but I don't believe Daniel was afraid of that.
Again, this has NOTHING to do with endorsing someone who is against God to rule over anyone. HE served in submission to those who had been placed in authority over him.
No one is endorsing Romney being a Mormon, where do you get that?
Then no one was endorsing Obama to be pro-abortion or pro-same sex marriage. Where did yall get that?
We are endorsing him being President. I can only think of three Presidents who were Baptists, Truman, Carter, and Clinton, and I did not endorse or vote for the last two. Simply being a Baptist doesn't necessarily make a man a good President or leader.
But no one said anything about the endorsement of a saved person to mean they would be a good President. You vote to put him before the world, then you're putting him and all that he is before the world. And if his Mormonism was a none issue, it wouldn't have been avoided like the plague by every evangelical who was trying to convince people that it was in the country's best interest to support him. If his Mormonism was not an issue, the Billy Graham Organization wouldn't have taken it down as a cult.
A lot more folks who are willing to admit it recognized that to the world it looked like evangelicals were saying that Mormonism was just another brand of Christianity and that's why 78% of evangelicals had no problem backing a Mormon.
And one and all can continue to pretend like it didn't matter, but it does indeed matter.
Serving these men faithfully is an endorsement. I would not work for Obama, would you?
Serving has nothing to do with endorsing. It has to do with obedience. Scripture directs us to submit. And submission is about serving, not endorsing that which is wrong.
I am called to submit to President Obama's authority. But I in no way endorse his wickedness. By endorsing to be in authority over them a man whose very identity is based in that which is against GOD, 78% of evangelicals have given the world the impression that they endorse that wickedness.
And God's word says to not give the appearance of evil. So either there is nothing wrong with Mormonism, or there is and we have given the world the impression that there is not.
And it's all well and good to say we weren't electing his Mormonism, but that is not what the world is going to see anymore than it would ignore the atheism of a would be atheist candidate that we would back.
But if I were to work for Obama, that does not necessarily make me a bad Christian. It would depend on the particular job I was doing. If I was promoting abortion, that would be evil. If I was doing something truly good, that would be good.
Again, God has called us to submit to authority. But He has not called us to disobey Him in submitting tot hat authority.
Mitt Romney was not in authority. He was running to be in authority. And there is a stark difference between submitting to someone whom God has placed in authority over you and endorsing that person who is against God to be placed into authority over you.
There just isn't any cause for the people of God to be seen as yoked to that which is against God.
Had that man been elected, it would have completely changed what Christianity is in the eyes of the world. And to an extent, it probably already has.
I did not have that choice, my only choice was to vote.
You did too have a choice just like the other 78% of evangelicals had a choice. They simply decided that it was more important to win an election and get Barack Obama out of office and "turn the country around" than it was to not give this appearance of evil in supporting that which is against God.
I endorsed Romney and not Obama. Not because Romney is a Mormon, but because he is conservative.
And no matter how folks continue to try and distinguish between the two, Romney and his Mormonism, the world does not.
Not to mention that I saw very little of anyone who was supporting Romney attempting to make sure that people understood the Church's stance on Mormonism and how it is not Christian. But how could they rightly explain that to folks when the organization of a man who is considered the greatest evangelical of the 20th century takes down Mormonism as a cult?
He would very likely choose justices that would overthrow Roe vs. Wade.
I can't speak to what his politics would have been. I can only say that his truth is based in lies so I don't think I would trust him period.
We know Obama is the most pro abortion President EVER.
What I know is that everybody is always talking about Obama and abortion. But no one ever seems to talk about all the folks Mitt Romney has led to an eternal lake of fire with the false teachings of Mormonism. His entire family is on the way to hell because he has taught them these lies. He was a bishop in the church teaching over thousands the very same lies. Does this not matter?
If Obama is wicked because he supports abortion then Romney is wicked because he teaches that which leads to eternal destruction.
Again, you fail to realize that God picked these two men.
Again you fail to realize that GOD let US pick them. God does not author confusion. And God ain't picked anything that is against Himself. Why would God PICK that which would divide His house? He would not.
The picking of these two wicked men who are against GOD is strictly man's doing.
That is the choice God gave us.
Nope. It is the choice we gave ourselves. God just let us give it to ourselves. It is completely unBiblical to say that God chose that which is against Himself.
I spoke to someone the other day who said they had spoken to someone who said that God told them the President He had chosen for this time was aborted back in 1970. Interesting thought.
It is our duty to pick which man would best serve and help our country.
It is your duty as a Christian to honor GOD FIRST above yourself, family and country.
A non-vote is a vote for Obama. That is what you chose whether you admit it or not.
I don't know where you're getting your misinformation, but I voted. :laugh:
A none vote by someone may have been a vote for Obama, but a vote for Obama is no more against God than was a vote for Romney.
