Jump to content
  • Welcome Guest

    For an ad free experience on Online Baptist, Please login or register for free

Why are Christians voting for Donald Trump?


Recommended Posts

  • Members

God will give America the President she deserves.  He'll either raise a man up or let old satan do it.  Ted Cruz is the only one with a testimony of salvation and who is not afraid to talk bible on the campaign trail.  

As some of you have said, my mind also echos the sentiment that only Trump can defeat Hillary, but God can defeat Hillary too if Christians back the Christian running for POTUS!

So, as for me, my support is for the Christian, Cruz, but it sure is fun watching Trump's campaign.  Surrounding himself with all manner of christians, maybe he can get saved, hopefully sooner than later.  Have y'all prayed for his salvation?  I've been praying for Obama's conversion for years as well.

I do not believe the scriptures teach that we're to vote for the lessor of two evils, to vote for lost people.  We're to come out from them, not to yoke with them.  If we apply the principal's of separation to government politics then a Christian can only vote for a Christian or stay home.  We are told to occupy until He comes, not leave the governing of society to the heathen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

How Christian is Ted Cruz? Have you seen the main Christians he's aligned with? His stance as a Dominionist raises questions. Dominionism, which Ted and his dad follow is not in line with Scripture.

 

A WORKING DEFINITION of DOMINIONISM (Sarah Leslie)

The belief that we (mankind) have a mandate to build the “kingdom of God” on earth, restoring paradise, by progressively and supernaturally transforming ourselves and all societal institutions, through subduing and ruling the earth by whatever means possible, including using technology, science and psycho-social engineering; and then and only then will a “Christ” manifest his presence on earth.

Al Dager in his book VENGEANCE IS OURS: The Church In Dominion (Sword 1990) lists two further definitions of Dominionism:

A basic premise of dominion theology is that when Adam sinned, not only did man lose dominion over the earth, but God also lost control of the earth to Satan. Since that time, some say, God has been on the outside looking in, searching for a “covenant people” who will be His “extension” or “expression” in the earth to take dominion back from Satan. According to the dominionist interpretation, this is the meaning of the Great Commission.

Some teach that this is to be accomplished through certain “overcomers” who, by yielding themselves to the authority of latter-day apostles and prophets, will take control of the kingdoms of this world. These kingdoms are defined as the various social institutions, such as the “kingdom” of education, the “kingdom” of science, the “kingdom” of the arts, and so on. Most especially there is the “kingdom” of politics and government. (Dager, p. 44)

THE DOMINION MANDATE

Dominion theology is predicated upon three basic beliefs:

1) Satan usurped man’s dominion over the earth through the temptation of Adam and Eve;

2) The Church is God’s instrument to take dominion back from Satan;

3) Jesus cannot or will not return until the Church has taken dominion by gaining control of the earth’s government and social institutions. (Dager, p. 87)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
4 hours ago, John Young said:

I'm pretty sure Trump will do well with the democrat voters in the overall election. I think the only reason Hillary is doing so well is because she is going up against a socialist whom many democrats won't vote for and on the flip side Bernie seems to be doing well only because many democrats don't want Hillary. There was a token third democrat candidate, O' something or another that may have had a chance but the media ignored him to the point of censor.

I'm not surprised most people in both parties will vote for him. The only thing I was really surprised with was how well he did with "men of God" early on and even now. I thought Cruz or Huckabee would do much better with them even though they would do much worse with democrats then Trump would.

I would argue that Cruz and Rubio are constitutionally qualified but its not really a point I care to argue.

I replied to your other post early this morning but I see it's not here so I don't know what happened to that.

Anyway, Trump is gathering some of what was called the "Reagan Democrats" into his fold which could really hurt Hillary, especially if Democrat voter turnout remains low.

From what I've read and heard many were disillusioned with Huckabee due to part of his record as Arkansas governor and his less than Christian or conservative positions he's espoused previously. Cruz, which has been discussed elsewhere, has turned off some Christians who don't believe he's qualified (either constitutionally and/or experience-wise), some can't overlook his Dominionist views, some disilike his argumentative nature, some have pointed out many lies from Cruz and his campaign as reasons they don't support him.

Even with all that, Cruz has a sizable percentage of Christians who do support him.

One of the problems is over the past several election cycles it's been drilled into voters they should vote for who they think can win regardless of whether they agree with or like the candidate. This was the tactic used to try and get Christian support for McCain and Romney in the last two presidential elections. Now this is backfiring on the establishment as many voters believe Trump has the best chance of winning over any of the other candidates. That's why the Republican establishment and their supporters have been trying to declare Trump can't win the general election (even after being proven wrong when they initially said Trump wouldn't win anything in the primaries).

Most Christians don't cast their vote based upon much time spent in prayer and fasting seeking the Lord's leading. Most Christians either vote however they feel like it or they decide which candidate they like and then ask God to back their choice. It's little wonder we have had such a string of bad presidents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators
2 hours ago, John81 said:

How Christian is Ted Cruz? Have you seen the main Christians he's aligned with? His stance as a Dominionist raises questions. Dominionism, which Ted and his dad follow is not in line with Scripture.

 

A WORKING DEFINITION of DOMINIONISM (Sarah Leslie)

The belief that we (mankind) have a mandate to build the “kingdom of God” on earth, restoring paradise, by progressively and supernaturally transforming ourselves and all societal institutions, through subduing and ruling the earth by whatever means possible, including using technology, science and psycho-social engineering; and then and only then will a “Christ” manifest his presence on earth.

Al Dager in his book VENGEANCE IS OURS: The Church In Dominion (Sword 1990) lists two further definitions of Dominionism:

A basic premise of dominion theology is that when Adam sinned, not only did man lose dominion over the earth, but God also lost control of the earth to Satan. Since that time, some say, God has been on the outside looking in, searching for a “covenant people” who will be His “extension” or “expression” in the earth to take dominion back from Satan. According to the dominionist interpretation, this is the meaning of the Great Commission.

Some teach that this is to be accomplished through certain “overcomers” who, by yielding themselves to the authority of latter-day apostles and prophets, will take control of the kingdoms of this world. These kingdoms are defined as the various social institutions, such as the “kingdom” of education, the “kingdom” of science, the “kingdom” of the arts, and so on. Most especially there is the “kingdom” of politics and government. (Dager, p. 44)

THE DOMINION MANDATE

Dominion theology is predicated upon three basic beliefs:

1) Satan usurped man’s dominion over the earth through the temptation of Adam and Eve;

2) The Church is God’s instrument to take dominion back from Satan;

3) Jesus cannot or will not return until the Church has taken dominion by gaining control of the earth’s government and social institutions. (Dager, p. 87)

 

And this is exactly part of my earlier point I made: Too often, "Christians" who run for president are either outright false Christians, (Mormon Romney, SDA Carson, Catholic Kennedy), or they are dominionist in their doctrine, (Pat Robinson, Cruz), which is very dangerous. Most TRUE Christians who are of the leadership type are already preachers and missionaries and can't be bothered to cease in the work of God to step down for the presidency. And a TRUE believer would never be considered for such an office anyways. Not today. So really, even an atheist who holds to the constitution is better than cultists and dominionists, at least in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

Ted is not in the dominion movement. His father is in part. Ted is a Southern Baptist, with a clear testimony of salvation, and a clear record of supporting the Constitution as the guiding document of the federal government. Were he dominionist, he would insinuate the Old Testament law into his statements and his practices. He does not. The dominionist argument is being pushed by folks who follow Trump. You know, that great Christian who was the first casino owner to install a strip club in his casino. And who cheated on his first wife,divorced her and married the mistress  - on whom he in turn cheated and divorced, marrying THAT mistress...who is his current wife, foreign born and that daughter of a communist 
(as well as being a former porn model). So take things like this with a grain of salt.

Oh, and he is eligible. He is a natural born citizen via his mother. Dual citizenship was not a problem with our founders (as they ALL were not born US citizens). The problem came in when the citizen did not reside under US jurisdiction long enough (hence the requirement to reside in the US for 14 years), and if the father wasn't a resident for at least 2 years (re: the 1790 law that clarified what a natural born citizen is...and which Geo. Wn, signed, thereby proving that, yes, indeed, the founders would have accepted Ted as natural born).

Cruz has proven by his actions over the years to be true to the Constitution. Check out TX vs. Medellin...he took on the Dubya administration, the world court, and other countries at the Supreme Court level and won a victory for state sovereignty. He authored Heller, which decision by SCOTUS upheld the 2A. He won at the TX supreme court level a victory for religious liberty regarding the posting of the 10 commandments - and he voluntarily took that to SCOTUS (no other winning solicitor has taken a victory to SCOTUS) - and won, setting a religious liberty precedent at the SCOTUS level. And even his detractors in TX will admit that he has kept his word in the Senate (Dewhurst, his progressive opponent in the Senate race, even came out recently and said that, no matter what one thinks of Cruz, he is all about the Constitution [just FYI - a dominionist would not be...]).

Rubio is a Catholic who has not voted in accordance with the Constitution much of the time he's voted, and if you've been listening to him lately, he is all too willing to get just as vulgar as Trump. Cruz is a born-again Christian who has supported the Constitution - as someone in public service should - as the supreme document to be followed.

Ted Cruz for POTUS! :clap:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

The way these Republican candidates have been acting of late I wouldn't vote for any of them for dog catcher let alone president. They sound like a bunch of adolescents on Facebook or Twitter going back and forth with personal insults, sexual innuendos and petty jabbering.

Maybe they have awakened the reality TV show viewers and that's why so many are voting in the Republican primaries.

The Republicans are offering a lot of ammo for the Democrats to make political ads against them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
7 minutes ago, John81 said:

The way these Republican candidates have been acting of late I wouldn't vote for any of them for dog catcher let alone president. They sound like a bunch of adolescents on Facebook or Twitter going back and forth with personal insults, sexual innuendos and petty jabbering.

John Kasich seems to have composed himself fairly well. At least the few times I have noticed him anyway.

Edited by John Young
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Just now, John Young said:

John Kasich seems to have composed himself fairly well. At least the few times I have noticed him anyway.

Most often, yes. He's stated he's making an attempt to appear to be the adult in a room full of children. Unfortunately, he's too liberal to even consider.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Ohio Governor John Kasich told John Dickerson, “I believe in traditional marriage, but the Supreme Court has ruled, it’s the law of the land, and we’ll abide by it.”

He implored people to just “take a deep breath,” and said there are plenty of other issues conservatives should be more focused on, like jobs, national defense, and “healing the division between races.”

Dickerson told him he sounds like he’s trying to avoid the question, but Kasich insisted, “I do believe in traditional marriage, but the court has ruled, and it’s time to move on.”

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/kasich-on-gay-marriage-the-court-has-ruled-and-its-time-to-move-on/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Unfortunately at this time, Trump is the only chance the country has to correct the downward spiral of the Obama-nation currently in office IMO.

Any other republican regardless of who, stands no chance to defeat Hillary in November.

If Hillary gets in, kiss your freedom to serve Christ goodbye along with every other freedom you still enjoy.

Whatever peeves us about Trump has to take a back seat at this point in history. Make no mistake, this country and our way of life cannot survive Hillary or Sanders not after that obamanation has already turned right to wrong and up to down and has inflicted serious damage setting us on a path to self destruction.

Would Cruz be a more Godly example and leader, probably but that ain't the point folks. Cruz has no chance against Hillary or even sanders.

Trump has awakened over 50% of the voting eligible public. These are people who have rarely if ever voted simply because they hate and distrust all politicians.

If Trump isn't given the nod, then that huge, overwhelming voter base will simply go back to sleep and Hillary will win...mark my words

 

 

Edited by wretched
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
1 hour ago, Invicta said:

I dont understand US politics, but it seems to me that Trump is unstable and could lead the world into war, and I think we would lose it.

The same was said of Reagan, Clinton, Bush, Obama. What presidents actually end up doing is often much different than the hype.

As it currently stands, Europe (including England) is losing the war already and Muslims are already proclaiming victory and celebrating. America is only a matter of years, or at best decades away from the same. At some point there will need to be what many will consider drastic changes in order for Europe and/or America to survive. Otherwise, both will be lose.

Who will fill the role of Charles Martel, if at all, is unknown at this time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Martel was of a Catholic Family and they were conned by the Papacy who showed the Carolingens forged documents such as the Donation of Constantine and various forged decretals, to claim that Peter had the Bishops of Rome as his successors and Constantine named them the successors to him. These gullible princes believed him and gave power to the Bishop of Rome.  That was the beginning of papal agrandissement.  True he turned the Islamic tide, but mostly as far as I can see as far as I can see,his wars were against other dukes of his own family.  Then they built up papal power .Islam or Inquisition?  The Bogomils had that choice and decide to live under the Turks, who allowed them to practice their faith, at least for a while.

His son was Pepin le Bref (The short)   Pepin in modern French is pip or seed. So we could call him Little Pip .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...