Welcome to ASFN Fan Forums! We're glad to have you here. Please feel free to browse the forum. We'd like to invite you to join our community; doing so will enable you to view additional forums and post with our other members.
Registered Members don't see these ads. Register now it's free!
WASHINGTON _ Florida evangelist Bill Keller says he was making a spiritual -- not political -- statement when he warned the 2.4 million subscribers to his Internet prayer ministry that ``if you vote for Mitt Romney, you are voting for Satan!''
But the Washington-based advocacy group Americans United for Separation of Church and State says the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) should revoke the 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status of Bill Keller Ministries, nonetheless.
Keller, 49, who has a call-in show on a Tampa television station and a Web site called Liveprayer.com, on May 11 sent out a ``daily devotional'' that called Romney ``an unabashed and proud member of the Mormon cult founded by a murdering polygamist pedophile named Joseph Smith nearly 200 years ago.
'' If the former Massachusetts governor wins the GOP nomination and the presidency, Keller's message added, it will ``ultimately lead millions of souls to the eternal flames of hell.''
In a letter to the IRS on Thursday, Americans United called Keller's message a violation of the ban on partisan politicking by tax-exempt religious groups.
Registered Members don't see these ads. Register now it's free!
You know what's ironic about this? In the 1980s the Mormon Church was threatened with losing its tax exempt status on the basis of their rampant discrimination of african-americans in their own church!
Plus, proving yet again, to the evangelicals there is only one true religion: theirs. Gotta love the dogma.
Isn't it enteraining to watch these people eat their own? Priceless.
You know what's ironic about this? In the 1980s the Mormon Church was threatened with losing its tax exempt status on the basis of their rampant discrimination of african-americans in their own church!
Plus, proving yet again, to the evangelicals there is only one true religion: theirs. Gotta love the dogma.
Isn't it enteraining to watch these people eat their own? Priceless.
Ya mean like how the far left is "eating" people like Reid and others who voted for the Iraq funding bill??
How stupid is this guy? All he has to do is not name the candidate and he's fine. He could describe him, and he'd be able to slip past -- but the IRS has to at least warn and fine him.
__________________
oderint dum metuant (Latin for 'let them hate, so long as they fear').
Well, in truth I'm actually not a total hawk, but I'm not a dove either -- I'm more like an angry pigeon flying over the political arena after a really big meal. -Abba Gav
Last week there was a local story of a guy who was drunk and lost control of his car hitting the side of a church. It caused some damage and they interviewed the priest, his concern was that the driver would get leniency from one of them "liberal judges" put in place by our "liberal state government".
Think this guy doesn't preach his politics at the pew?
We've had several complaints about churchs pushing for conservative candidates and even calling people out in front of their congregation for a bumper sticker or not signing a petition.
Nothing will happen concerning thier tax status. When you have an administration who pushes politics into religion (gay marriage for example), they have no interest in enforcing a separation of church and state. None.
Plus, proving yet again, to the evangelicals there is only one true religion: theirs. Gotta love the dogma.
This is a true statement and, as an Evangelical, I don't have a problem with it. I don't know why Keller -- or any other preacher -- feels the need to inject their sermons with politics, though. There is not a statement of faith that includes a political agenda. I, as an Evangelical, am offended by other Evangelicals who use their pulpits to send political messages.
This is a true statement and, as an Evangelical, I don't have a problem with it.I
While you seem pretty moderate therein lies the seed of the problem that germinates with the more activist/radical Evangelicals.
From what I can see religion is a zero sum proposition to Evangelicals, ie I am right, therefore you [non Evangelical] must be wrong.
Speaking as not believer ... Is there not a possibility that religion, faith etc is more personal and that what might be right for you is wrong for somebody else. Is it not possible that what is wrong for you might be right for them.
Seems to me it is more than conceivable that a supreme being might want alternative or possibly tailored to the person or different groups. Thinking that your sect [not you specifically] is the absolute only one that has the truth is just a tad excessive.
While you seem pretty moderate therein lies the seed of the problem that germinates with the more activist/radical Evangelicals.
From what I can see religion is a zero sum proposition to Evangelicals, ie I am right, therefore you [non Evangelical] must be wrong.
Speaking as not believer ... Is there not a possibility that religion, faith etc is more personal and that what might be right for you is wrong for somebody else. Is it not possible that what is wrong for you might be right for them.
Seems to me it is more than conceivable that a supreme being might want alternative or possibly tailored to the person or different groups. Thinking that your sect [not you specifically] is the absolute only one that has the truth is just a tad excessive.
I suspect you don't understand Evangelical history. It is based on propositional truths, the first of which the canonized 66 books of the Bible are the Word of God. All proceeding propositional truths flow out of the first. There is no room for philosophical argumentation in that, no allowances for making assumptions of God's purpose for his creation.
But that shouldn't even be the issue. The question is not one of dogmatic beliefs but one of charitable civility, or lack thereof. I believe I can hold to the tenents of my faith and coexist -- very peacefully -- among those that don't. Obviously, at some point my faith is going to inform my political opinions, but in no way do I think by advancing my political opinions am I upholding my faith. It doesn't work in reverse that way. Jesus of the Bible was ultimately apolitical, so I am too. I practice good citizenship as best as possible, but ultimately I consider myself first a citizen in God's kingdom, and as such am held to higher standards: love, kindness, gentleness, goodness, charity ... etc. etc. etc.
Other Evangelicals are coming around to this. Slowly, but it's inevitable.
Other Evangelicals are coming around to this. Slowly, but it's inevitable.
I really, really hope you are right even though I find such a restrictive belief to be hard to understand.
However, I appreciate the explanation as now I understand little more and that is always a good thing.
It's sad to say but I have come to feel that the more radical, activist Evangelicals are a threat to our society. They are not as content to let others go their own way as you are.
It's sad to say but I have come to feel that the more radical, activist Evangelicals are a threat to our society. They are not as content to let others go their own way as you are.
There's an old saying in old-timey circles: You can't blame pagans for acting like pagans.
Now, I'm sure that's offensive on one level to pagans, and even more so to non-Christians/non-pagans, but it's really meant to drive home a point to believers. You cannot expect someone who does not hold to the Christian faith to behave -- or even attempt to behave -- like a Christian. We believe the change is spiritual, not fleshly, and to attempt otherwise is to corrupt the very message of Jesus.
That attitude is still there, but it got corrupted quite a bit with the Southern Baptist Convention getting overtaken by political activists and other figureheads making allegiances to Reagan. The SBC is quite a bit more together now and less political, and those old Reagan alliances are dying a horrible death due to lack of influence within their core group. You really started to see this in '97, when big-timers like Cal Thomas fled from that group entirely. Cal is every bit as conservative as he has always been, but he usually saves his more bitter vitriol for those who attempt to politicize the Christian Gospel message.
While you seem pretty moderate therein lies the seed of the problem that germinates with the more activist/radical Evangelicals.
From what I can see religion is a zero sum proposition to Evangelicals, ie I am right, therefore you [non Evangelical] must be wrong.
Speaking as not believer ... Is there not a possibility that religion, faith etc is more personal and that what might be right for you is wrong for somebody else. Is it not possible that what is wrong for you might be right for them.
Seems to me it is more than conceivable that a supreme being might want alternative or possibly tailored to the person or different groups. Thinking that your sect [not you specifically] is the absolute only one that has the truth is just a tad excessive.
The funny thing is.....and this is going to set off an explosion....
but, God chooses. Not us.
[noIgoandhide]
__________________
The greatest lies are told before a marriage, after a hunt and during an election - Count Bismark
Cosmic Defender Champion!
Linear Mode
