49 votes

Chuck Baldwin: Get Off The Sinking Ship

"My email inbox and mailbox filled with vitriolic rebukes from pastors and Christians. I was called just about every dirty name in the book and relegated to the depths of the damned–and those were the mild ones."

From LibertyCrier.com:

This column dated November 21, 2013, created a firestorm of outrage and venom from hundreds of pastors and Christians. It was a rude awakening for me, for sure. I have long maintained that the vast majority of today’s pastors and church members are smugly content in abject apathy and indifference. However, after the vehement reaction to the above-mentioned column, I can now state dogmatically that the problem is actually much, much worse than I realized. Today’s churchmen are not merely content to not being involved; they are absolutely committed to not being involved. It goes much deeper than apathy; it is apostasy.

...

Here are just a few examples of what pastors have said:

“If federal agents or troops came to my house and put my wife on the kitchen table and raped her, Romans 13 tells me I could not interfere.”

“If government forces came to my home intent on harming my wife and children, I would not resist; I would simply tell my family to run.”

“America’s Founding Fathers were rebels against God. They had no right to fight a war for independence. Subjection to a king, even a tyrannical one, is God’s Will.”

“Anyone who resists civil government is going to hell.”

“There is no such thing as natural law, and anyone who promotes it is of the devil.”

Continue reading...

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

“If federal agents or troops

“If federal agents or troops came to my house and put my wife on the kitchen table and raped her, Romans 13 tells me I could not interfere.” - Then you'd better read Genesis 2, Genesis 12 and Exodus 20.

“If government forces came to my home intent on harming my wife and children, I would not resist; I would simply tell my family to run.” - Contradiction: By telling your family to run, you will be charged with obstruction of justice.

“America’s Founding Fathers were rebels against God. They had no right to fight a war for independence. Subjection to a king, even a tyrannical one, is God’s Will.” So this implies we have an illegitimate/non biblical government?

“Anyone who resists civil government is going to hell.” Actually Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah showed that those who resist civil government's hellish furnace will be delivered. Notice that I reference their real names and not their civil government bestowed names.

Jesus taught: keep a watchful defense greater than the thief

Jesus said, "And this know, that if the goodman of the house had known what hour the thief would come, he would have watched, and not have suffered his house to be broken through." - Luke 12:39

The goodman has his household to defend, but "the thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy" - Joh 10:10

ANYONE, of any title, spiritual-sounding or not, who supports giving ANY advantage to the thief by prescribing defenselessness, or even less than adequate defense; is ONLY serving the thief's advantage; albeit inadvertently by naivety, or even knowingly!

When the known outcome of such an inadequate defense is plunder, death, and destruction, ANYONE who allows it, pretending it is the will of God simply because of some misplace faith in the words of some titled-person is NOT following the truth as it is revealed in Romans 12 AND 13! They only have themselves to blame as they watch the thief break through, and then stand before God to answer for their error!

http://www.dailypaul.com/299433#comment-3202818

Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have the exact measure of the injustice and wrong which will be imposed on them. - Frederick Douglass

Just show the pastors Ephesians 6:12

For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.

We fight corrupt governments as a rule, that's a Christians job.

Is Jesus talking in that

Is Jesus talking in that passage? If yes, it make Ephesians 6:5 a bit weird.

GoodSamaritan's picture

It is the Apostle Paul

speaking in his letter to the church at Ephesus.

Ron Paul - Honorary Founding Father

How do mainstream Christians,

How do mainstream Christians, or libertarians for that matter, explain away the slavery bit?

Servants and slaves differed then and now

Noah Webster's first American dictionary, published in 1828, 33 yrs. before the Civil War, wrote the definition of "servant" this way:

1. A person, male or female, that attends another for the pupose of performing menial offices for him, or who is employed by another for such offices or for other labor, and is subject to his command. The word is correlative to master. Servant differs from slave, as the servant's subjection to a master is voluntary, the slave's is not. Every slave is a servant, but every servant is not a slave.

The Holy Bible in common use then, the Authorized Version of 1611, later renamed the King James Version, defines only the servant/master relationship in those voluntary terms:

"Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ;
)Not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but as the servants of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart;
)With good will doing service, as to the Lord, and not to men:
)Knowing that whatsoever good thing any man doeth, the same shall he receive of the Lord, whether he be bond or free.
)And, ye masters, do the same things unto them, forbearing threatening: knowing that your Master also is in heaven; neither is there respect of persons with him." - Ephesians 6:5-9

Similarly, Paul also wrote further to the Colossians:

"Servants, obey in all things your masters according to the flesh; not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but in singleness of heart, fearing God:
)And whatsoever ye do, do it heartily, as to the Lord, and not unto men;
)Knowing that of the Lord ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance: for ye serve the Lord Christ.
)But he that doeth wrong shall receive for the wrong which he hath done: and there is no respect of persons.
)Masters, give unto your servants that which is just and equal; knowing that ye also have a Master in heaven." - Colossians 3:22-4:1

The short letter to Philemon contains an appeal from Paul to receive back his servant, Onesimus; who departed on bad terms, met Paul while in prison, became a believer, and hoped to return to service.

"For perhaps he therefore departed for a season, that thou shouldest receive him for ever;
)Not now as a servant, but above a servant, a brother beloved, specially to me, but how much more unto thee, both in the flesh, and in the Lord?
)If thou count me therefore a partner, receive him as myself. If he hath wronged thee, or oweth thee ought, put that on mine account" - Philemon 1:15-18 (10-19 for full context)

Frederick Douglass, the runaway slave whose articulate writings and speeches helped inform Lincoln and many others of the plight of slaves in the South; confronted the hypocrisy of professed believers in the North and South, knew the difference between what the Bible says and what was done among them. There were also those who sought to treat the slaves they legally held as Biblically as they could, but were also constrained by laws and economic expedience to have them work their land, or lose both to those who cruelly worked them more profitably.

William Wilberforce sacrificed his health and nearly 50 yrs. of his life to successfully end the slave trade and practice in the British Empire. The movie, "Amazing Grace", is a great summary of his life's work and the role that Biblical Faith had in forming his convictions to do the right thing, against all odds.

I know that's a long answer to a short question, TJV, but I hope that helps!

Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have the exact measure of the injustice and wrong which will be imposed on them. - Frederick Douglass

GoodSamaritan's picture

Duolos (δοῦλος)

Each use of doulos has to be examined individually to see if "slave" or "servant" is a better fit, and sometimes there is not enough context to make a good decision. Whether a person was a servant or slave is important to us today, because in our culture there is a huge difference between the two positions. However, that was not an issue when the Greek NT was written because when the word doulos was used, the people had a more instinctive grip on the situation of the one being called a doulos and the technicalities of the position were not nearly as important.

Here is a reprint of the resolution to the debate on duolos between the authors of the English Standard Version:

A particular difficulty is presented when words in biblical Hebrew and Greek refer to ancient practices and institutions that do not correspond directly to those in the modern world. Such is the case in the translation of ‘ebed (Hebrew) and doulos (Greek), terms which are often rendered “slave.” These terms, however, actually cover a range of relationships that require a range of renderings—either “slave,” “bondservant,” or “servant”—depending on the context. Further, the word “slave” currently carries associations with the often brutal and dehumanizing institution of slavery in nineteenth-century America. For this reason, the ESV translation of the words ‘ebed and doulos has been undertaken with particular attention to their meaning in each specific context. Thus in Old Testament times, one might enter slavery either voluntarily (e.g., to escape poverty or to pay off a debt) or involuntarily (e.g., by birth, by being captured in battle, or by judicial sentence). Protection for all in servitude in ancient Israel was provided by the Mosaic Law. In New Testament times, a doulos is often best described as a “bondservant”—that is, as someone bound to serve his master for a specific (usually lengthy) period of time, but also as someone who might nevertheless own property, achieve social advancement, and even be released or purchase his freedom. The ESV usage thus seeks to express the nuance of meaning in each context. Where absolute ownership by a master is in view (as in Romans 6), “slave” is used; where a more limited form of servitude is in view, “bondservant” is used (as in 1 Corinthians 7:21-24); where the context indicates a wide range of freedom (as in John 4:51), “servant” is preferred. Footnotes are generally provided to identify the Hebrew or Greek and the range of meaning that these terms may carry in each case.

Ron Paul - Honorary Founding Father

Sorry, but you've labored too hard to make no sense here

And why should we care what some scholars said in a translation that nobody much cared to read?

Good Samaritan, maybe that means something to some academic bible-college elite, but I still don't know why you believe it adds anything to help define better what I sited already, so I'll pass on any more analysis of it than this.

Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have the exact measure of the injustice and wrong which will be imposed on them. - Frederick Douglass

GoodSamaritan's picture

Sorry if you had trouble understanding what I wrote

but perhaps you could try providing a refutation through a deeper analysis of the word duolos as opposed to dismissing an explanation because it doesn't fit the paradigm of a version written nearly 400 years ago, that did not benefit from the last 100+ years of scholarly research into ancient Greek and Hebrew.

The KJV of 1611 was not inspired by the Holy Spirit and is certainly not above textual criticism. It was a revision of the 1568 Bishop’s Bible, which was a revision of Matthew’s Bible of 1537, which was essentially the completion and revision of Tyndale's work of 1534. The ESV is vastly superior to the KJV in the translation of Greek and Hebrew verb tenses, among other benefits, such as the elimination of archaic English - including words no longer in use or that have changed meaning over the preceding four centuries.

Ron Paul - Honorary Founding Father

Had no problem understanding, just didn't see why needed

The issue raised by TJV was, "explain away the slavery bit". You went to try and expound why we needed to understand the Greek word to really get the nuances between them. All I did was show that there was no lack of understanding the differences between them, then and now.

Slavery wasn't the scourge that it was, and is, because the AV/KJV translators failed to express the meaning of "duolos" as you insist it ought to be observed. It was, and is, because the plain English was ignored, or selectively emphasized, so that some professed believers treated as animals, or worse, men and women made in God's image and likeness; for whom Christ died and rose again.

There are a variety of ways that servants contract with masters for the services they render, but none of that was obscured by the plain English, or history, I cited. Of course, you may make of your, "vastly superior", translation assessment what you will, but with so few listening, why should I bother to reply more than this?

The original good Samaritan came along to serve what the scholar and priest ignored, when one of their own kinsman was in crucial need. Maybe you feel like your reply deserves more respect than I've given you, but since there was no need of correction cited, I'll take the thanks I received from TJV123 as an indication which of us served the needed answer, and which was making more of scholars than proved helpful.

Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have the exact measure of the injustice and wrong which will be imposed on them. - Frederick Douglass

GoodSamaritan's picture

My first response focused on Paul's objective

in order to make a point that slavery as usually understood, at least by Americans, was not an institution approved by God as so many claim. It appeared to me that the question was asking for a defense to a position that the Bible does not hold.

I appreciate your approach to answering the question, and perhaps that was more in line with the intended purpose. The sticking point I had with your answer, and the reason for my reply, was a technical one since you seemed to indicate that duolos as used in Scripture had nothing to do with the type of slavery that TJV was most likely referring to. You and I might understand differences between types of slavery in various cultures, but too many times I've been confronted by questions arising from an assumption that all slavery in the Bible was the same as slavery in 19th century America and therefore provides a simplistic reason (excuse) for rejecting the Gospel out-of-hand.

Ron Paul - Honorary Founding Father

Your first and second replys were more about Ancient Greek

Sorry to be underwhelmed by them both, but when anyone tries to impress others with that kind of approach to answering a question, things rightfully shut down.

Slavery is always involuntary, and only differs in degrees of cruelty. Servants may have various options based on their contracts, but are always voluntary to some degree. They may become free.
"Art thou called being a servant? care not for it: but if thou mayest be made free, use it rather.
)For he that is called in the Lord, being a servant, is the Lord's freeman: likewise also he that is called, being free, is Christ's servant.
)Ye are bought with a price; be not ye the servants of men." -1 Corinthians 7:21-23

The only verse in the KJV to mention slaves refers to, "the merchants of the earth", who, "shall weep and mourn over her (Babylon); for no man buyeth their merchandise any more:
)The merchandise of gold, and silver, and precious stones, and of pearls, and fine linen, and purple, and silk, and scarlet, and all thine wood, and all manner vessels of ivory, and all manner vessels of most precious wood, and of brass, and iron, and marble,
)And cinnamon, and odours, and ointments, and frankincense, and wine, and oil, and fine flour, and wheat, and beasts, and sheep, and horses, and chariots, and slaves, and souls of men." - Revelation 18:11-13

Modern scholars routinely pump out translations that dilute the authority of scripture for the sake of meeting copyright requirements so that they can sell bibles that few bother reading, much less heeding. Say what you will about what you think is, "vastly superior", or inferior, but "the common people" still hear, "him gladly" in the AV/KJV, despite the marketing ploys that promote all modern translations.

I know that you prefer the ESV, but did you know that the NIV, which currently sells the most, removes 64,576 words from the KJV! That's over an 8 percent deficit carved out of God's word, never to be found by the average NIV reader. That's not even counting the "translating" of words and phases that God would NEVER say! I'll take the record that is still cherished and used among believers today as the record which God preserved, even if some abused it to perverse ends by neglect of heeding faithfully.

Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have the exact measure of the injustice and wrong which will be imposed on them. - Frederick Douglass

GoodSamaritan's picture

My first response had nothing to do with ancient Greek

I spoke of Paul, Peter, and Jesus in my first response. It's more likely that you read my responses out of order.

No one was trying to impress. Your reply concerning slavery was simply misleading so I provided additional information.

Slavery is not always involuntary. It was common practice in ancient Israel to voluntarily enter into slavery as a means to repay debt. After the debt was paid, the slave was freed. Or, the slave was set free in the Year of Jubilee.

I prefer using the most accurate translations for modern English, usually the ESV or NASB. The NIV isn't even worthy of being called a translation so why bring it up?

Again, the KJV is a translation of a translation of a translation of a translation, etc. It was not inspired by the Holy Spirit and is not above textual criticism. The English language has changed considerably in four centuries. It's still a good translation. However, it contains hundreds of archaic words few understand and some words that have completely changed meaning. There is no sense in forcing people to learn early English, which is growing more archaic by the day, just so they can understand God's message to them when more accurate translations in modern English are freely available.

Ron Paul - Honorary Founding Father

You've got a private interpretation of slavery

Jubilee does not deal with slaves or slave-holdings, but a fixed, contractual end of service and return to prior family/property arrangements.

"And ye shall hallow the fiftieth year, and proclaim liberty throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof: it shall be a jubile unto you; and ye shall return every man unto his possession, and ye shall return every man unto his family.
)A jubile shall that fiftieth year be unto you: ye shall not sow, neither reap that which groweth of itself in it, nor gather the grapes in it of thy vine undressed." - Leviticus 25:10-11

Brethren never enslaved one another, Old or New Testaments; no not once! Even when Joseph's brothers sold him to the "Midianites merchantmen", who then sold him to Potiphar; Joseph didn't become a slave, but he, "found grace in his sight, and he served him: and he made him overseer over his house, and all that he had he put into his hand." The brother's evil intention was that he would become a slave who wouldn't survive or escape their presumption of cruel mistreatment, so they played him for dead to their father, Jacob. God preserved and prospered him as a servant who rose in favor to suffer very few limitations; was then favored even during his lengthy, unjust imprisonment; and finally honored with authority at the right hand of Pharaoh to deliver his people, and Egypt, from a great famine that one day fell upon them both as he correctly interpreted the dream concerning. The whole time, Joseph was a servant, not a slave. Or have I missed something here?

Let me know when that whole ESV/NASB translation accuracy-thing catches on. When you can show me why anything I wrote about slaves and servants is misleading or misapplying scripture, I'm ready to listen. So far, in both Old or New Testaments, it seems more faithful to stay where I am.

I only sighted the whole NIV false-fire because of the way I watched it climb to where it is in sales numbers. Currently the NIV sells above others because it was highly promoted by those who want modern dumbed-down-English and scholarly-license to edit out words and whole verses, to further limit the impact God's word ought to have in us, and on us; while making a quick pile of money for themselves. For all of your accuracy claims about the ESV or NASB toward, "THE original Greek and Hebrew", I've yet to find ANY substance that I believe God, or faithful folks, are much interested in agreeing with!

For instance, both of your false standards omit seven words from Galatians 3:1, that are plainly meant to be there as they are faithfully recorded in the KJV? Try and find a single NASB that even footnotes their omission. I've been checking for decades and still haven't found one mention yet. That is also true about the notes in both John MacArthur's and Charles Stanley's NASB Study Bibles I checked last year. It's as if those seven words were never there!

Clue, those seven word are also, word for word, in Galatians 5:7. I believe the reason for their omission is self-evident to those neither, "bewitched", nor, "hindered"!

Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have the exact measure of the injustice and wrong which will be imposed on them. - Frederick Douglass

GoodSamaritan's picture

Read Leviticus 25:39-40 in the Authorized KJV

"And if thy brother that dwelleth by thee be waxen poor, and be sold unto thee; thou shalt not compel him to serve as a bondservant: but as an hired servant, and as a sojourner, he shall be with thee, and shall serve thee unto the year of jubile:"

1) A fellow Hebrew has been sold, or sold himself, to another Hebrew due to poverty - the inability to meet obligations.

Note that this is a *sale* and not a hiring.

2) This person who has been sold into servitude is to be treated *as* a hired servant.

Note that being treated *as* a hired servant does not change the fact that the person was sold into service - bought - not hired. This command concerns how the slave was to be treated. It does not change the fact that a Hebrew was sold to another Hebrew. The private interpretation is yours.

I don't really understand your problem with using translations in modern English that make the Bible more accessible to far more people who simply won't bother to struggle with early English. I'd hate to think that you'd rather see people hindered in being reached for Christ than accept the fact that languages come and go and thus the constant need for new translations as centuries pass. If the Lord tarries another 2,000 years, both early and modern English will no doubt be ashes on the dust heap of history. Will people in that distant future, who likely won't speak anything that remotely sounds like English, just be out of luck as far as reading the Bible?

Galations 3:1

"You foolish Galatians, who has bewitched you, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified?" NASB

"O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? It was before your eyes that Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified." ESV

"O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you?" KJV

"O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you?" AKJV

"O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you that you should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed among you as crucified?" NKJV

There is a difference between the NU and Received Texts, but unless one doesn't understand what it means to be "bewitched" in this context, it's rather obvious that the issue here is disobedience. Satan "bewitched" Eve in the same sense and the result was disobedience. How does this difference in text rend the Gospel? You make it sound as if there was a conspiracy. If the omission in some translations was deliberate (contrary to context), then those words would also have been struck from Galatians 5:7. They weren't.

Although I sometimes use the ESV and NASB for reference, my own Bible is a NKJV. But I suppose you have issues with that as well.

Ron Paul - Honorary Founding Father

Thankyou very much for your

Thankyou very much for your thoughtful response.

Glad you were helped

Here's John Newton's testimony, that became the song, Amazing Grace!

Researching my reply to you, I found good stuff like this:

Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have the exact measure of the injustice and wrong which will be imposed on them. - Frederick Douglass

GoodSamaritan's picture

Slavery, from the Greek word duolos

Paul was neither approving nor condemning slavery, a very common practice in the ancient world. And it's not clear from the text which type of slavery was in view: voluntary or involuntary, temporary or permanent. He (and Peter elsewhere) transformed the established rules from a question of merely how to govern family and slaves into a question of how masters should imitate the love of Christ towards those in their care, and how wives, children, and slaves should turn from being passive objects in a world that devalued them to defining their roles in terms of service to Christ and active partners with God in His plan to bring unity to a race divided by gender, age, and economics.

I'll add that Jesus made clear to his disciples that they should not seek to be the greatest in His kingdom, but that in order to become the greatest they would have to be the slave of everyone else.

"And they came to Capernaum. And when [Jesus] was in the house he asked them, 'What were you discussing on the way?' But they kept silent, for on the way they had argued with one another about who was the greatest. And he sat down and called the twelve. And he said to them, 'If anyone would be first, he must be last of all and servant of all.'" Mark 9:33-35

Ron Paul - Honorary Founding Father

It isn't just every Christian's job...

It is the job of all moral persons.

I'm sorry but...

I find no passages from the mouth of Christ stating to go tear down "evil governments". While the message of Liberty is in the gospel, Christ actually tells us to mount a "grassroots" campaign and let the people change the government. Your can stomp your feet all your want about holding your reps to keeping this a "Christian nation" but it's not gonna work. To make us a more Christian nation, go do as Christ commanded (btw his only real commandment) MAKE MORE CHRISTIANS!

Stop trying to rely on the courthouse to do your job for you. "highways and hedges to spread the gospel" not "court houses and legislator to rule in my name".

Make more Christians and you will not need laws trying to force people into them.

Don't forget about the other great men of the Bible

While we should imitate Christ, there are many other great men you should imitate. Moses, Daniel, David, just to name a few.

The Bible is not the gospel alone, don't forget about the lessons in the rest of the book. Every single great man in the Bible disobeyed unjust Government, including Christ.

Many of the Truth in the Bible is not what people said, it was their actions, and many times, what they did NOT say. Ill have to find it, but a good example is the description of the judgement of a nation. It says things like "children become disrespectful and arrogant, the elderly are not respected", and even goes into political elections saying people choose their leaders based on appearance rather than principles.

So the opposite of the passage is really what we need to imitate.

GoodSamaritan's picture

It depends on what you mean by "tear down"

Christ said, "Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good." Romans 12:21

Christians are to overcome evil. There is no qualifier in that verse about whether or not the evil is originated by government. We are not to commit evil in the process, and we are not to allow it to succeed. We are, instead, commanded to "overcome" evil, which is to say, defeat it.

Bringing the Gospel to people, with the hope and promise that God will save some, is an indirect way of defeating government evil with good. It is not the only way.

Ron Paul - Honorary Founding Father

Paul 3V0L's picture

Amen to that!

Amen to that!

Wrong

I go to church to hear the word of GOD, not the political leanings of my pastor. If my Pastor wanted to have a meeting at his home, park, or home of a member and lead a debate on the 2A, Liberty, or any other political position is would happily attend. But the house of God is for God's business. When you start putting politics behind the pulpit you get horrible effects like "Patriots Service" or "Armed Services Day" with message of bombs and guns coming from the PRINCE OF PEACE.

My Pastor is very politically active, but he doesn't use the house of God to do so.

Any church that allows it's leader to promote political beliefs behind the pulpit should have their tax-exempt status removed.

Who told you you were naked?

and why is that fig leaf, tax-exempt status, covering you in the first place?

When Christians were seduced into believing themselves required to become 501c3 creatures of the state for tax-exemption and other state purposes and privileges, what they called "church" after that was no longer under the headship of Christ, but in reality, merely a state corporation in sheep's clothing. There can be only One preeminent!

"For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
)And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
)And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.

Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have the exact measure of the injustice and wrong which will be imposed on them. - Frederick Douglass

These things are Gods

These things are Gods business

Liberty = Responsibility

Try Proverbs 23:23 brother..

The Bible says to "buy the truth, and sell it not". There is a BIG difference between being "political" as you say, and hearing the truth preached from the pulpit.

I left a church where the pastor was "political", to attend a church where my pastor is NOT afraid to teach and preach the FULL word of GOD. That includes taking a stand against EVIL of all kinds.

I've learned from my pastor that government is GOD-ordained, and that we are to support GODLY government. The problem is that most Christians are being taught, by their IRS-sanctioned pastors, that "politics" (as you put it) don't belong in the pulpit. I couldn't agree with that statement more! Politics is divisive, wicked, full of lies and treachery and DOES NOT belong in the pulpit.

But what my pastor preaches come right from the word of God. You ought to listen to him sometimes - have you? His name is Chuck Baldwin, and I proud to call him MY pastor. I suggest you listen to this message, "Dare to be a Daniel" and tell me where Pastor Chuck is wrong - how it's not Biblical. This is just one of many messages that Chuck has the GUTS to preach, where most pastors will NEVER go.

http://libertyfellowshipmt.com/News/tabid/56/ID/1092/Dare-To...

Restore the Foundations - "If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do?"

501-C3 churches

any church that has tax-exempt status, should take another look at itself and ask itself why it sucumbs to the state which keeps it from preaching the WHOLE councel of God!

These 501-C3 churches are NOT doing it God's way!

Remember.... there is a piece of cheese in every mouse trap!

" In Thee O Lord do I put my trust " ~ Psalm 31:1~

I agree...

but if you are registered as one, you must be treated equally under the law like ALL OTHER NON-PROFITS. You don't get special "religious" exemptions to POLITICIZE because you have "church" on your sign.

Equal Liberty.