God's mouthpiece?
Sheesh. Bill Keller sure does like to cast judgment on others, and now it seems he likes to talk bad about people when they aren’t exactly in position to defend themselves. The extreme nutcase, convicted felon, founder of the Live Prayer website, and self appointed guardian of entry into the Pearly Gates of Heaven (apparently, God must have relieved St. Peter of his duties), now has the moral authority to judge the recently deceased.
Sadly, Michael (Jackson) grew up in the Jehovah’s Witnesses cult. This is the cult born out of the depraved mind of Charles Taze Russell and denies the very deity of Christ. You can go to Google and type in “cults Jehovah’s Witnesses” and it will give you many websites to document their false theology.
As Kristofer Lorelli pointed out earlier, Keller is a member of the ARTL along with Steve Deace, and was behind one of the Anti-Mormon campaigns during the 2007 primaries.
June 29th, 2009 at 8:57 am
Hooray religious right! Perhaps I should send him my bio and let him tell me if I’m going to hell too. I’m sure that could all be fixed with a simple donation to his cause.
June 29th, 2009 at 8:58 am
The fact is, we don’t KNOW how Michael has been judged, and it is sinful for us to presume such judgement. Keller is presuming for himself the very power of God Almighty, which sounds an awful lot like the sin of Adam and Eve.
When Christ commanded, “judge not, lest you be judged,” he wasn’t saying that we shouldn’t call sin, sin. He was preaching indifference to sin, moral relativism, or a squishy, feel good acceptence of everyone and everything. He was specifically speaking of the judgment each of us will face when we meet our Maker. NOONE knows what lies in the hearts of men (even our own), but God. And NOONE should dare to assume for himself the judgement which belongs to God alone.
Heller may be trying to expose a “lie from hell” that is the notion of universal salvation, but in passing particular judgment on Michael Jackson, he is engaging in another “lie from hell.” We know from Scripture that there are indeed (many) people in hell. But we also know from Scripture that we do not know who those people are.
June 29th, 2009 at 9:06 am
nate,
I hope it goes without saying that Keller does not speak for the religious right or all Christians. He certainly isn’t speaking for Christ here.
June 29th, 2009 at 9:07 am
correction to #2,
“He was *NOT* preaching indifference to sin……”
Yikes. That was bad typo.
June 29th, 2009 at 9:22 am
I guess you all know by now that the Supreme Court reversed the firefighter decision by the Sotomayor court.
Neither Keller nor Deace nor anyone else I know of know the heart and mind of God so much as to make a determination of what the Eternal fate of Michael Jackson (or anyone else) will be.
June 29th, 2009 at 9:22 am
It is a concern when anyone calls someones religion a Cult. How is to decide what is and is not a cult.
Now I believe that Christ is a special person in that he was born of Woman but fathered (by what ever means/by the power of the holy ghost) Heavenly Father, thus making Jesus Christ and Adam the only two beings to not have mortal fathers. Both born as immortals, where Adam lost his immortal status by eating the fruit of God and Evil. Christ lost his immortality voluntarily as a Sacrifice for all of us (As the only Person to live a perfect life). This put Christ into position to forgive sin and present those who he has forgive to our heavenly Father.
As for Peter, he is one of the greatest Prophets/Apostles ever to live and he sealed his testimony of Jesus Christ with his own blood as other Prophets have sealed their Testimony with their blood. Peter is in good company of great Saints.
June 29th, 2009 at 9:23 am
BTW: Court rules for white firefighters over promotions (See Drudge report).
June 29th, 2009 at 9:31 am
If Huckabee wants to win outside of heavy evangelical areas he needs to condemn people like Keller and Deace as not representative of Christianity or even Evangelical Christianity.
It’s no wonder moderates are turned off by the “religious right” people like Keller are not only accepted in as part of the religious right, but welcomed into it.
For every voter Keller gets to the polls to vote against whoever represents the devil, he loses 3 or 4 moderates to the other side.
Not just Huckabee but all members of the religious right need to step out and regularly condemn Keller and his ilk.
June 29th, 2009 at 10:04 am
Reply to DSkinner
Sometimes its just better to ignore such idiots rather than give them a forum. While I am not an evangelical Christian (being LDS), I am neither going to waist my time on this individual nor am I willing to broad brush all evangelical Christians and Condemn them.
As for Huckabee, he is political dead until he does something about his Mormon bigotry. He can win in Heavy evangelical regions only to fall flat on his face in other areas of the country [especially out west] (both in Primary and General Election).
June 29th, 2009 at 10:10 am
I agree the right thing to do is condemn this kind of polemic rhetoric. Serious politics has no business getting involved in doctrinal disputes.
That said, while I wish Huckabee would strongly condemn this kind of speech, I doubt he will. He may lose 3 or 4 moderates for vote he picks up, but that goes both ways. We would likely lose 3 or 4 Protestant voters for every moderate he would pick up by denouncing Keller or Deace’s Bible thumping.
June 29th, 2009 at 10:56 am
I make typos all the time, but I’ve seen ‘waste’ spelled ‘waist’ a lot lately.
What many people don’t realize about the LDS population out west in states other than Utah. The last time I saw this information published the LDS church was the 2nd largest church in 9 other western states, not counting Utah and Idaho, of course, in which they are first. The Roman Catholic church is the only one bigger than they are. in all nine of those states. So what? Well, the thing is that even though we may only have 3% to 10% in those states, the vast majority of them are Republican. And of the Republicans, those who are not LDS really like their LDS neighbors. They take up for them…they vote for them all the time…they elect them as school board members, country and state offices, mayors, etc…you get the picture. They are used to being around the LDS people, and guess what. The vast majority of them do not like to have someone associated with bigotry against the LDS church. Because, even though they themselves may not be LDS, they have lots and lots of friends that are. So when it comes to winning a Republican primary in California, or other western state, a candidate has to keep himself/herself completely separated from anything anti-Mormon. They won’t put up with it. Here’s what many miss: Its not how many Mormon voters there are in Nevada, or Arizona, or Washington, etc…its how many are perfectly comfortable with electing LDS people and who will actually defend the LDS at the ballot box against bigoted candidates, or for thos who associate with them.
June 29th, 2009 at 10:56 am
Huckabee won’t condem it. He’s participaed in the very same type of religious hate speech in his calling as a preacher. He refuses to release his comments to the anti-mormon convention he was keynote speaker at several years ago. It was held in Salt Lake City, of all places!
Silence speaks volumes.
June 29th, 2009 at 10:57 am
*sigh*
It is people like this that give Evangelicalism a bad name. He plays right into the stereotypes less charitable people have for them.
June 29th, 2009 at 11:01 am
Knickers:“Huckabee won’t condem it.”
Never say “never”, Knickers. Huck just might surprise you. And then where will you be?
Never underestimate the ability of anyone to do the right thing.
June 29th, 2009 at 11:04 am
Keller (above):
I just went on google and typed in “cults Baptists” and it gave me many websites to document their “false” theology.
Funny thing, that.
June 29th, 2009 at 11:14 am
marK Says: I just went on google and typed in “cults Baptists” and it gave me many websites to document their “false” theology. Funny thing, that.
Sort of like Statistics, you can get Google to tell you about anything you want to hear! Good one.
June 29th, 2009 at 11:34 am
I don’t understand why it’s up to Huckabee to condemn or correct a preacher everytime one of them says something dumb.
Does that mean that Romney is tarred by association every time a prominent businessman gets in trouble?
June 29th, 2009 at 11:35 am
#12 Knickers – well if you are really interested here are some excerpts from his speech in SLC.
http://www2.arkansasonline.com/news/1998/jun/08/huckabee-us-gave-religion/
June 29th, 2009 at 11:42 am
MWS Says: I don’t understand why it’s up to Huckabee to condemn or correct a preacher everytime one of them says something dumb.
I agree 100%, besides Huckabee has enough to over come for his own misdeeds.
MWS Says: Does that mean that Romney is tarred by association every time a prominent businessman gets in trouble?
And again I agree 100%.
June 29th, 2009 at 11:48 am
18 – I Can’t disagree much with the exerpts from his speech. Too bad it was made as a part of an organization that was passing out this material:
“Mormonism Unmasked” by R. Philip Roberts, who examines the beliefs of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
It seems as if they were, in fact, singling out the LDS church as their major punching bag for the conference. Maybe he’s like to renounce the act of passing that book out? I won’t hold my breath.
June 29th, 2009 at 12:03 pm
#17.MWS:
Good Point. I suspect what Knickers was trying to say is when people like Keller endorsed Huckabee, he needs to say “Thanks, but no thanks”.
It wasn’t just the overt LDS-bashing that got Huckabee on the Mormons’ bad side last year. If anything, it was Huckabee’s covert bigotry that ticked off the Mormons far more than his “innocent” Christ/Satan-brothers question. He made the mistake of condoning a lot of the stuff that went on.
He allowed the most vile stuff to be posted on his official website where it remained for weeks on end. He did nothing to rein in any supporter engaged in it. He refused to distance himself from people like Keller who endorsed him. Nor did he call on the carpet a single campaign worker of his that spread it.
So the LDS are watching Huckabee like a hawk right now, and (as IlliniDude pointed out) so are their friends and neighbors, particularly in the West. If Huckabee wants to be President, he is going to have to separate himself from people like this sooner or later.
I really don’t see a need for him to do anything about it just yet. He can keep hosting his TV show and making comments about the political scene without having to worry about it. However, if he ever does decide to drop his TV gig and make another run for the White House, he is going to have to deal with it; the sooner, the better.
June 29th, 2009 at 12:12 pm
17
“I don’t understand why it’s up to Huckabee to condemn or correct a preacher everytime one of them says something dumb.”
It becomes up to him when the preacher starts endorsing him. If Huckabee’s a guest preacher in a church on sunday of a pastor, and then that pastor says things like this, it is his responsibility to reject the support of that person.
He doesn’t need to police everything he says, but just like Hillary actively distanced herself from those who wouldn’t vote for a black man, and Obama actively distanced himself from those who wouldn’t vote for a women, Huckabee should be proactive in rejecting the support of those who seek to demean and distort the religions of others.
June 29th, 2009 at 12:24 pm
Pawlenty to Obama: Stop spending
Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, a Republican, had strong words for the president’s approach to health care reform.
http://www.cnn.com/video/?/video/politics/2009/06/28/sotu.intv.pawlenty.cnn
Pawlenty on Sanford, GOP
Republican Gov. Tim Pawlenty weighs in on the recent scandals that have plagued his party and the party’s future.
http://www.cnn.com/video/?/video/politics/2009/06/28/sotu.intv.pawlenty.2.cnn
David Frum on Conservative Chaos: The Sanford Scandal & The “Limbaugh Problem”
http://www.pjtv.com/video/Pajamas_TV/David_Frum_on_Conservative_Chaos%3A_The_Sanford_Scandal_%26_The_%22Limbaugh_Problem%22/2072/
June 29th, 2009 at 1:43 pm
Come on! You guys don’t remember Huckabee’s gracious answer about whether he would accept the support of the log cabine republicans do you?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XLois8cnf0Q
Huckabee won’t condemn the “support” of anyone. Might this be a political mistake? Sure. But in the case of his answer to the question on log cabin republicans, it was very smart. I think it only becames huckabees responsibility to deny someones support if Huckabee has arranged for their endorsement and then they say idiotic things that hurt people. If huckabee doesn’t accept their endorsement and just doesn’t say anything, than it’s not his responsibility to say anything.
Here’s an example of getting carried away with all of this stuff. John McCain was endorsed by John Hagee a prominent pastor from Texas. After it came out that he had said things like the holocaust was necessary or something like that, than the media tried to play it off like Hagee was anti-jewish. Which is absolutely rediculous. Jewish people have held banquets in honor of John Hagee, because he has done so much to advance the cause of the jewish people in their right to be in Israel. He has great relationships with the Jewish people and works with them hand in hand on many things. Yet, John McCain bowed down to the media rather than sticking up for John Hagee. It made me mad. Because the media spin was unfounded.
http://www.cufi.org/site/PageServer
June 29th, 2009 at 2:49 pm
Oh come on, Keller would never say anything like this, and we all know this plays no part in Iowa politics! Ha, imagine, some people really claim to believe that.
June 29th, 2009 at 5:23 pm
This thread points to the problems a lot of us have with Huckabee. It’s hard to vote for a guy who has never met you and knows nothing about you, yet would assert with conviction that you are going to go to Hell because of where you choose to attend church every week. That was the reason we were so hacked off when he made the “Don’t Mormons believe that Jesus and Satan were brothers?” remark. Since Mormons believe that all other beings are the spiritual progeny of God the Father and our Goddess Mother, it’s technically correct, but deliberately distorts our gospel, and in a fundamentally unChristian way. I have serious disagreements with the Jehovah’s Witnesses on Theology, Soteriology, and Eschatology……but I would never say about them what Keller said.
June 29th, 2009 at 5:39 pm
Dave,
“This thread points to the problems a lot of us have with Huckabee. It’s hard to vote for a guy who has never met you and knows nothing about you, yet would assert with conviction that you are going to go to Hell because of where you choose to attend church every week”
Except Huckabee never said that. Read the FPP. The guy’s name is Keller.
June 29th, 2009 at 5:44 pm
If a doctrine doesn’t match with Biblical doctrine, it is a cult, Biblically speaking. It’s very easy to delineate, folks.
Of course you can make up your own definition of a cult, but Biblical heresy is Biblical heresy. If you don’t believe the Bible, then I’m not talking to you.
June 29th, 2009 at 5:48 pm
If you don’t believe the Bible, then I’m not talking to you.
This came out sounding wrong…what I actually meant is that my argument is not for non-believers.
June 29th, 2009 at 6:44 pm
#17/ MWS…I don’t think Huckabee is responsible for this Keller loony.
But your statement, “Does that mean that Romney is tarred by association every time a prominent businessman gets in trouble?” brought back a memory from the primaries. I remember laughing at this statement of Huck from one of his political ads in Michigan:
“Because I think most people want their next president to remind them of the guy they work with, not the guy who laid them off”
This was great stuff. Everybody knew Huck was talking about Romney, but since Huck didn’t mention Romney specifically, it wasn’t “negative advertising” per Huck. No policy discussion. No mentioning of track records. Just clean, efficient character assassination.
So with his “Christian Leader” ads and grassroots “keep out the Mormon” campaign in Iowa, Huck got away with the religion card while also at the same time making Romney “guilty by association” for everything the heartless, greedy, and selfish business people do.
This was great politics if lousy statesmanship. And Huck got away with it for the most part.
So in answer to your question, well, Huck scored points playing on the same fears and prejudices that Keller is while ALSO making Romney guilty by association as a businessman.
The Rombots are steamed up about this and won’t forgive Huck until he comes clean, but it’s all water under the bridge now. Huck’s not about to ruin a good strategy by “coming clean” and Romney had better figure out how to deal with being compared to Gordon Gecko or he is probably toast in 2012. Even if Huck doesn’t try that line again, the DEMs certainly will.
June 29th, 2009 at 7:21 pm
#27.WiseGuy:
In my younger days, I used to love to Bible bash. I have since learned that every church has things that are Biblically problematic. I did NOT say Biblically incorrect. I said Bibically problematic.
There are hundreds, probably thousands of sects that claim adherence to the Bible. Each of them interpret the same passages of scripture differently. So why should your interpretation is any better than someone else’s?
June 29th, 2009 at 9:27 pm
marK,
Of course I agree that we shouldn’t divide over non-essentials. There are many different denominations each which over/under-emphasize different doctrines and that’s fine. But there are non-negotiables — core doctrines which every prominent Protestant evangelical (from Billy Graham to Rick Warren to your local community pastor) would agree on because they are so clearly laid out in scripture that they cannot be misinterpreted (like the Trinity, man’s depravity, heaven/hell, salvation through faith, etc).
June 30th, 2009 at 3:32 am
#31
Wanna bet?
You name one doctrine that you are convinced that the Holy Book in unequivocal about, and I bet I can cite more than one scripture that can be interrupted to contradict that doctrine.
Take the Trinity for example. There are plenty of scriptures that state that there is only one God and that Jesus and the Father are one. There are also plenty of other scriptures that show that God the Father, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost are three separate and distinct individuals, not just one being. Which is right?
The Council of Nicea in the Fourth century said the first view is the correct one, but is it? The council were just some churchmen who got together to argue out the nature of God. They claimed no revelation, only scholarly knowledge. What is so different between they and those councils of churchmen in our day that claim homosexuality is acceptable to God? They are (and were) just men wrestling with the scriptures. Scary thought, isn’t it?
Man’s Depravity. Try reading Psalms 8 for starters. Then consider that if Man is depraved, and Christ is the Son of Man, than that means that Christ is the Son of Depravity. If Christ is God, then that cannot be. Therefore Man cannot be depraved.
Heaven/Hell. Paul stated he knew a man caught up to “third heaven” and that there were three glories for the resurrected. Christ spoke of many mansions. So is there just one heaven, three heavens, or many heavens?
And as for Hell, would a loving, caring, just God draw a line and state that all those on this side will have eternal bliss, and all those on that side of the line will suffer eternal torment? “John I see you stole three cookies from the cookie jar when you were young. Too bad. If you had only stolen two, you would be eligible for Heaven, but that one extra cookie added together with all your other sins put you over the line. You are hereby consigned to Hell to suffer eternal torment forever. You shouldn’t have taken that extra cookie.”
Salvation through faith. That’s an easy one. There are many places that only mention being saved by faith. But there are a number of places that only mention works being involved. And James states you have to have both. Oh, and let’s not forget that Paul says in the Book of Romans that confessing Christ with your mouth will save you. Does he even mention faith in that reference? I don’t think so.
Do you see how easy it is to interpret the same passages differently? I didn’t even have to look those references up. I can assure you that every one of these doctrines can be found in one church or the other. There are even some “Christian” Churches that interpret the Bible to claim Christ isn’t the only way to salvation.
So how can you be absolutely sure your interpretation is the correct one?
June 30th, 2009 at 2:52 pm
#32:
On the Trinity, of course there are 3 distinct persons, yet one God. Three-in-one. That is the definition of Trinity. Scripture is in harmony on this one, from Genesis to Revelation.
By depraved, I mean “all have sinned and fallen short of God’s glory” (Romans 3). Of course Jesus is the only exception since Jesus is God but clothed in humanity (highlighting the importance of Christmas and the virgin birth). Scripture is in harmony on this and there are many verses that say that Jesus was without sin. But in another sense you are right because Jesus “became sin for us” in that He took all our sin upon Himself…
“The heavens” has many definitions: 1) the sky, 2) outer space, 3) place where God dwells. The third heaven probably means the 3rd option. Many mansions doesn’t mean many heavens. The fact that there is an afterlife heaven/hell is well established in Scripture but the details of what heaven will be like is open to interpretation.
Regarding hell, scripture is very clear about hell. Hell is simply the place which is totally devoid of God. And since God is good and God is love and God is peace, hell is a place where there is no good or love or peace whatsoever. God cannot tolerate sin, since God is absolutely perfect and just. That’s why anything sinful cannot be in God’s presence (by definition of absolute justice) and by definition must go to a place where God is absent (hell). But God is love — that’s why He sent Jesus to take the punishment for everyone’s sin so that nobody has to go to hell. Jesus talked more about hell than any other person in the Bible because He doesn’t want anyone to go there. If one rejects Jesus, then one rejects the only bridge to heaven and it is that person’s decision to go to hell. Don’t blame God — one has to trample over Jesus’ dead body to go to hell.
Regarding salvation by faith, it is clear that faith in Christ leads to salvation (John 3:16, Ephesians 2:8-9). Of course if one really “believes”, a natural outproduct is good works, but it is not good works that leads to salvation. A person cannot be saved by being good or moral, because a person’s “goodness” falls far short of God’s standard of perfection. James teaches that one can determine if one truly has faith/trust in God by the actions manifested in one’s life. But this is in harmony with the basic Scriptural doctrine of salvation through faith.
Some churches do deviate from these Biblical doctrines, I agree. But these basic doctrines are well grounded in Scripture. One can try to take a verse and twist it out of context, but then it wouldn’t fit the remaining multitude of verses which are in harmony with the doctrinal points above.
June 30th, 2009 at 4:45 pm
WiseGuy,
I am not really wanting to get into a theological discussion no matter how much I enjoy them. (I would far rather discuss religion than politics any day. Trust me on this.) However, this is simply not the time nor the place.
My point still stands. I don’t have to “twist” any scripture to disprove just about any doctrine you can come up with. Sincere men have been wrestling with the scriptures for thousands of years trying to understand the mind and the will of God. The bottom line is just that, in the final analysis, they are just men — normal, finite, fallible men. Look at the myriads and myriads of Churches, each claiming to have God’s true Gospel, yet they cannot even agree upon such basic topics as modes of baptism and even if baptism is necessary for salvation.
So to state that the definition of a cult is a church that disagrees with your particular interpretation of the Bible is IMO skating on thin ice, very thin ice indeed.
November 19th, 2009 at 12:42 pm
[...] Oliver highlighted the vicious anti-Mormon bigotry this Huckabee-aligned group has engaged in. In September of this year, Matt Lewis from Politics Daily further highlighted their campaign [...]
November 21st, 2009 at 2:57 pm
[...] link to Tommy’s article which is here, says nothing about anti-Mormon bigotry, in fact it talks about a statement by pastor Bill Killer [...]
November 22nd, 2009 at 5:35 pm
[...] link to Tommy’s article which is here, says nothing about anti-Mormon bigotry, in fact it talks about a statement by pastor Bill Killer [...]