I've been seeing (as I do every election year), you must vote in a "
Christian" or "Godly Person"
Here's the problem. Matt. 24:24 "
For
there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew
great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall
deceive the very elect."
Signs and wonders can be anything from false miracles (magic tricks) to just being moral. In a culture like to day, it seems that if someone stays with the same wife for more two years, that IS a wonder. By this verse alone, the antichrists or THE Antichrist will be moral, at least on the surface.
Here's another scripture that seems to beg attention:
Rev. 22:11 "He
that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let
him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous
still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still."
This verse, in context, indicates that the time is about to happen, so just let people be the way they are going to be. Earlier in the New Testament, we are supposed to be just preaching the gospel and loving one another. (John 13:34)
In the New Testament, as Jesus went about preaching to the masses, usually kept speaking of peaceful change. The only force he used, was in the temple, (Luke 19:45) but take note, he didn't insist on government intervention. He did it himself. This is not to say you should go into church that's selling books and tapes in the lobby and tear everything up. You don't know if they are selling it just at cost (it could be a church that doesn't have the funding to give it away), and Jesus knew exactly what was going to happen as a result of his "outburst". (Luke 47).
He did once tell the disciples to have a sword, but soon after when one of them cut off the high priest's servant's ear, Jesus said "Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword" (Matt. 26:51-52). For the most part, Jesus spoke of doing good to others, love your enemy, etc, etc. You can read all that in the beatitudes (Matt. 5-12)
A free government while allowing for immorality, also allows the church to thrive, as forcing people to moral only hides the real spiritual state of the country and causing more people to be "Christians" on the surface only. The church becomes complacent and stops doing it's work, which causes people to re-evaluate religion at all.
What you see today has been going on for a long time, we are just seeing it now surface as people start to suffer moral burnout. If you try to be moral just to look good or follow law (as in trying to please others) it becomes burdensome. If you try to please God, knowing that his grace abounds, the pressure is off and it become easier to be moral as you work at your own pace to improve for God's sake.
So now, going by real morality rather than perceived morality and lip service, and completely avoiding the economics issue, the four main (as in the most known) candidates are:
Ron Paul:
He's probably the only real known Christian out of the four as he lives his beliefs. This includes giving his services as an obstetrician for free to those who needed it, Treating patients that were considered taboo, like mixed race couples, never inciting violence (and when his supporter were itching for to start trouble, he always managed to talk them down), and his humility.
He never really wanted to run for politics and ran after being pressured by friends, and he ran for Senate. This guy, who was supposedly unelectable, won 12 times in the senate. Then he ran two times as a potential presidential nominee. But if you hadn't noticed, he never attributed his success on himself, aside from making the decision. He always attribute it to the fact that a lot of people want to be free and they are doing all of the work.
If you have been paying attention, what he does, he does it as if doing it for the Lord. He ended up getting 2 million votes in the primary - and that's even WITH the
RNC cheating.
The problem? You would have to write him in. If you are "lucky" (in a metaphorical sense) that there's enough Ron Paul supporters to sign a petition that allows the write in votes to be counted that he might be counted.. Only eight in states write-ins are counted. He's also seems to be wanting to take a break. At least, he hints at it here:
http://youtu.be/vSGNE07LHXIInterestingly enough, his main issue wasn't abortion, or gay marriage but limiting the Government and expanding personal liberty:
http://youtu.be/46q2iZ1K_78 possibly because he knows that only the Church can more efficiently spread morality than the Government can.
Mitt Romney: He is a Mormon who was an active leader in his church but when it comes to morals, it's hard to pinpoint on Romney. When in Massachusetts, he was very much - eh - socially tolerant. Massachusetts was the first to make Gay Marriage officially legal and he was very pro-choice. I don't have a problem with thinking one way than another, but not only does he pretend that it never happened, when asked about it, he puts quite a spin on it (a.k.a. lying).
Then there is the corruption that has been happening with the RNC. He was asked about this and completely denied even knowing that it was happening. You would think the future president of the US might try to keep up a little with the news - then again, supposedly he's busy campaigning. So, where's the denouncement of the RNC's actions? There is none. Perhaps there are Mormons who are Christians, but I don't think Romney is one of them. I could be wrong, but I haven't seen any "fruit" from his faith (Matt. 17:16)
Obama: I do believe in being fair,so I'm going to say this outright. Obama is as Muslim as Romney is a Christian. Technically, according to the Qua ran, he's a Muslim through genetics, but really, besides some lip service, he's really not. He was mostly raised by his stepfather who was a self proclaimed communist, and his mother was a progressive. If anything, he was influenced more by his stepfather, since being a communist, was also an atheist.
Interestingly enough, he has stayed with his wife since 1992 and so far, that we know of, he hasn't strayed. So much for basing elections on Morals.
Now here's the interesting thing. He hasn't changed the abortion laws (much) and even though he has said that he won't go after "potheads" where it has been legalized in the US. he has the highest marijuana drug bust of all the presidents since the whole "drug war". While he as said something about Gay Marriage, no changes to the Federal Law. He's actually more moral in actions than Romney was in Massachusetts. But we all know that Obama isn't a Christian. He has the form of Godliness but denies it's power (2 Timothy 3:5)
Gary Johnson:
He may or may not be a Christian but certainly acts like one. First and foremost he's humble enough to admit to his mistakes when he realizes it. He is perceived as being pro-choice, however, he will push to stop funding for
Planned Parenthood as the Federal Government shouldn't be funding any health care whatsoever anyway.
The free market would put the last nail in that coffin. Have you considered why planned parenthood has been pushing for more government funds? It's because they can't survive on their own. Abortions will be relegated to hospitals where most doctors are still pro-life and it will only be performed under dire circumstances ( as in life or death).
He believes in letting the private sector take care of people rather than the Government and eliminate most of the acronyms or at least limit their power. The Church then can do it's job without being shut down because they supposedly violated a "law" made by an unelected entity. He also has been married to only one wife and never strayed (that we know of). Unfortunately, the Wiki doesn't have much personal info on him. That said, I can say, that we have more info on him than we did Obama when he was elected. We still don't have enough info.
And the most important thing that some Christians are looking at, and you can find it here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Gary_Johnson#Israel
He thinks that Israel is an important ally and that they should remain a sovereign nation.
The downside: The republicans are doing to him what they did to Ron Paul:
http://bit.ly/Pa25Dq although it does appears that the tables are turned in Washington State. Chances are, Gary Johnson will lose the states who's judges are easily bought off. He also has no qualms about humanitarian efforts, although I still think the private sector (as in missionaries from churches) are better suited for the job. He has less reservations about going to war and using drones, but at least he believes that the war should be declared by congress. It does seem that Gary Johnson is what the republicans were during the Regan years. Ron Paul is more of a libertarian than a republican.
To be honest, I don't think it matters who wins the election this year, unless by some miracle that Gary Johnson wins or Ron Paul just happens to have enough write in votes. Yeah, Obama is a bad president, but Romney has had the exact same record in Massachusetts. He's only appears different now that he's trying to flatter the "conservatives". I doubt that he would change much on domestic issues (but I thought that about Bush Jr and then he passed the patriot act), but he will increase war spending in which he believes that it will boost the economy (Keynesian Economics). As everyone already knows the economy started it's collapse while Bush was still in office - still fighting a war on terror in the Middle East that was supposed to help the economy.
This is why I have been trying to get people to do their research and possibly vote for a third party. Okay, I've been a bit too aggressive, but I do have an all or nothing personality and knowing that this might be our last chance to change the country had made me feel a little desperate... and desperate people do stupid things, like alienate everyone they know by trying to "make them" see what they see. I forgotten my most important rule: You can't MAKE anyone do ANYTHING.
So, I have backed off ... some... but it's hard as I see people so fear Obama's second term that they would vote for Hitler himself, just so Obama doesn't get a second term. If you are one of those people, don't think you wouldn't. Hitler was also the lesser of two evils as he ran against the communist party in Germany and never really indicated that he would put them in massive work camps, only that the Jews were cause of all of their problems. History proved that as correct as the Nazis killed less people than the communist did. Voting for the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil.
If none of the candidates above are considered viable choices for you,then there are plenty to check out here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_political_parties_in_the_United_States
Then after you've made your decision, or maybe while you are making that decision, start stocking up on food, not only for yourself, but for at least one more family. That way, you can share God's grace with a neighbor when everything starts to collapse. Actually, If I'm wrong (and believe me, I hope that I am) stocking up on extras still can be used to help someone in need - which is what we are supposed to be doing in the first place.
