The following blog and video was put on a Reformed Baptist web site.
http://www.dennyburk.com/im-marco-rubio-and-i-approve-this-message/#comments
Perhaps it should not surprise me, but Denny Burk who usually is quite good when it comes to Reformed issues, after watching the video on Marco Rubio thinks is a genuine believer. Despite the fact that Rubio says he believes all the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church.
What is even stranger to me is that in the comment section Denny Burk says he is on the side of RC Sproul when it comes to ECT. Why then can’t he see his inconsistency?
What do you think?
Tom

I watched the video and then read ALL of the comments thereafter. And, my conclusion is that there is a whole bunch of people who are very confused about what Scripture teaches re: salvation. Most sound "Evanjellical" (aka: semi-Pelagian), one was a Roman Catholic and one stood out as sound; Reformed. Whether Rubio is actually regenerate I cannot discern since I do not know the man and have never communicated with him. But the weight surely is against him regardless of how 'orthodox' he appears to undiscerning people. Oh, and I won't be voting for him regardless of his 'faith'.

Pilgrim
I agree the evidence seems to be against him; though I don't know the man.
As you know, I live in Canada, so I could not vote for him even if I wanted to.
I will say however, that it appears to me that who is the best candidate for the job isn't very clear at all.
Even though, some of the sentiments that Donald Trump has, I share. To be frank, he comes accross as someone I couldn't trust.
Most people I have heard talk about him think of him as a joke, who seems to be garnering a lot of support.

Tom

The left (Dems and RINOs) would have people believe Trump is a buffoon, a joke, a wild haired, bombastic man who can't be trusted. They are the ones who are owned by the political elite who are extremely well funded. THAT is what I wouldn't trust. Trump scares the willies out of them because he cannot and will not be controlled by them. That is something I like. Follow the money trail and it will usually lead you to the source of someone's opinion. Trump does not appear to be ruled by these elites. He may seem rude as he speaks his mind but the real question should be asked: "Is he right?"

We live in a world ruled by deceitful people who will not relinquish their control no matter how this power is obtained. This sort of thing might be expected from Democrats but it is worse when it is done by the RINOs [Republicans In Name Only] for they are the party that claims to adhere to a platform which is most closely aligned with the US Constitution yet, their behavior betrays them as not being truly Republican. This is a most dangerous party. Sort of like Churches which claim to embrace orthodoxy but then redefined terms so that it is difficult to discern how far off they really are.

I like Senator Cruz in the primary. I also like Governor Huckabee. But if Trump wins the nomination (which I suspect could be the outcome unless the "establishment" manages a brokered convention), I will support him in the general election.

I like the fact Trump comes off as a strong man, who will not be swayed. America needs strong leadership. However, I have watched him on a few occasions and he actually said he knew his Bible and proceeded to quote something from memory.
I can't remember the supposed Bible quote, however the quote did not sound like anything I have read before and I read an article written on that issue by a Reformed pastor and he said the same thing.
Understand here, when I vote for someone I do so on the basis of who is the most qualified, not because they are a Christian.
However, if someone claims to be a Christian and even quotes a Bible verse and the evidence makes one doubt their claim. I think that is very telling.
Another thing, although I am very leery about accepting these Muslim immigrants; Trump appears to be going even further than this to the point of going against American policy for religious freedom and going against Muslim Americans. I think this is dangerous, because although it is already happening in Canada and the US, it will make it even harder on Christians.
Understand here, I think Trump and other politicians should be going to so called “Moderate Muslims” to get them to speak out louder against radical Islam. However, that is a lot different than he seems to be saying.
By the way, the sentiments I talked about concerning Trump being a joke were from Reformed Christians in both Canada and the USA. In most of these the word “joke” was not used, however they made themselves clear of what they meant.
Tom

Actually, from what I have read, Trump's suggestion to stop all Muslims from entering the country is within US immigration policy which has never been challenged as unconstitutional. Further, his desire to roundup all illegal aliens and ship them out of the country is not some novel idea that he dreamed up. It has been done before, e.g., Eisenhower did it when he was President. "Moderate Muslims" is a nice term, Tom, but I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever, that if/when the more radical (consistent) Muslims begin to wage war against Canada/US to implement Sharia Law, the Moderate Muslims will choose to join the jihad as it is one of the fundamental commands of Islam. READ YOUR HISTORY and you will see or be reminded how the Muslims dominated much of Europe through mass murder, rape and torture, see e.g., Why We Are Afraid, A 1400 Year Secret. Oh, and why don't you ask Greece, Sweden, France, etc., how their Leftist policies on allowing Muslims into their country is working out for them?

Now, as for Trump's religious views. I'm not sure where he plants his feet? When we heard him speak here (overflowing crowd, even with limited tickets given out) a Greek Orthodox priest gave part of the introductory remarks in Trump's behalf. In his short speech, he made it very clear that Trump was a strong pro-Life advocate, etc. Trump himself said he was very strong on protecting Second Amendment rights and other constitutional rights. He's certainly no angel from heaven, but he is most definitely one of the most conservative candidates of all who are running for President. There is more pejorative rhetoric and opposition coming from the Republican Party than there is from the Democratic Party. He is an ANTI-ESTABLISHMENT Republican which has had a death grip on the GOP for years and destroyed what it once stood for. It's hard to tell the difference between most Republican politicians and Democrat politicians when you look at their voting records.

Personally, I wouldn't be concerned about Trump. You have Justin Trudeau as Prime Minister who is carrying on the family tradition of destroying anything good in Canada. He has already brought in the first group of Syrian refugees and more are coming. Again, at least the majority of Americans are armed and can protect themselves against foreign oppression and/or as the Second Amendment states, against domestic tyranny from our own government. You guys are helpless and that was the plan of the Leftists all along. Remember, the countries with the strongest gun control laws have the highest percentage of murders and violence using guns. The US is way down on the list worldwide.

About what you said regarding Trump going against American Policy, take a look at this file (.doc) if you will and tell me where he is doing this. Presidents have previously used this law to prevent immigrants from coming into the country. Jimmy Carter was one, for example, who kept Iranians from entering the country during the time of the "Iran Crisis" in the late 70s.

Just to be clear, I was not talking about Muslim immigrants entering the country. In fact I said I am leery about that issue.
If what I read about immigrants is true, there is not one Muslim country that is excepting Muslims.

Pilgrim
I used the term "moderate Muslims" mainly because that is the term bandied about. I actually think you are correct that these so called "moderate Muslims" will probably join the jihad. Personally, if I am reading all the information I have read about most Muslims is correct. Is the difference between radical Islam and moderate Islam, is they have the same ultimate goal to take over the world for Allah. However, their philosophy in doing that is different; radical Islam by terror and Moderate Islam by populating other countries and getting in to government to proclaim sharia law.

Another thing, I think is worth mentioning is the Koran allows Muslims to lie to "infidels" if it is for the cause of Allah.
So, with that in mind "moderate Islam” is probably more dangerous.

Just found out that Franklin Graham agrees with Trump. Somehow I don't think his dad would.

Tom

Not only that, but out current administration and State Department are practicing religious discrimination as they are prohibiting Christian refugees from Syria and Iran from immigrating into the country. For some reason we do not hear that, and most of the current candidates are not savvy enough to bring that out.

I like both Cruz and Rubio. Sure, Rubio hasn't broken away from Catholicism, but I dare say he is more knowledgeable about Christianity than most everyone on the stage.

Trump is a charlatan, and I wouldn't trust him. He has no religious background, and only says what he thinks his listeners want to hear. He supported the Democrats until a few years ago, and I haven't seen any response from him on why he has changed except for self-promotion. He said recently we needed more supreme court judges like his sister, who is a flaming liberal on the court who supports abortion rights and the homosexual agenda.

Although I think the conservative movement is basically dead, Trump would only put the finishing stab wound to it.

That's more than strange because he is a strong pro-lifer.

Oh, re: Rubio... He stood with Obama and the Liberals on the matter of Amnesty for millions of illegal aliens, who are draining the coffers dry with all the handouts while American citizens go without and many can't get the same 'benefits' given to them.

You can call me a birther if you want to, but neither Rubio or Cruz are qualified to be president. Neither are "natural-born" citizens. Rubio, although born in Miami has Cuban parents. Cruz, born in Canada, had only one parent who at the time of his birth was an American citizen. I would call them naturalized, but not natural-born. Another way to be naturalized is to be born in a foreign country to foreign born parents and go through the naturalization process and pay the fees. Natural born means born on America soil ( or an American military base or an American embassy) to American citizens.

Consider Deut. 17:14-15 14 ¶ When thou art come unto the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, and shalt possess it, and shalt dwell therein, and shalt say, I will set a king over me, like as all the nations that are about me; 15 Thou shalt in any wise set him king over thee, whom the LORD thy God shall choose: one from among thy brethren shalt thou set king over thee: thou mayest not set a stranger over thee, which is not thy brother.

I realize times have certainly changed since the Constitution was written, but I personally don't believe the founding fathers intent was to have naturalized rather than natural born citizens be president.

Hmmmmm, methinks the following will clarify the issue:

http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_citi.html

14th amendment was ratified in 1868.

You might want to listen to this, all of it if possible otherwise, at least from 38:00 on. Mark Levin on Rubio

You see, Marco Rubio is one of my senators. The other one is Bill Nelson, a Democrat. Rubio used to talk pretty tough on immigration. In fact, he got elected (in the race against former governor Charlie Crist) on an anti-immigration platform. This is the one reason he got elected. He could have never beaten Crist otherwise. Enter Gang of 8. Rubio lied. I would never trust him again.

All of this goes back to my original point, which is my personal opinion, by the way. The 14th amendment, etc, may give Rubio and Cruz the right to run, but I Personally, don't think this was the intent of the writers of the Constitution because they based their system of laws on the Bible. Deut.17:14-15. Strangers among us.

1. I don't know what the original intent of the framers of the U.S. Constitution was in regard to this particular issue. There may be something one could find in the Federalist Papers or some other personal documents written by them that might substantiate your view.

2. Methinks that the majority of the framers of the U.S. Constitution were not Christians according to a biblical definition. However, it would appear that some/many held to Judeo-Christian ethics. But I doubt the majority were biblically literate nor had much interest in what the Bible taught (exceptions noted and allowed).

3. Exegetically, I cannot see where Deut. 17:14,15 is relevant to the matter of who is qualified to be President of the United States, nor more generally, who should be considered a citizen of the United States. One would have to prove that the passage is paradigmatic and universally binding and that would have to apply to every country in the world without exclusion.

I am going to assume that what we could agree on is that SCOTUS (Supreme Court of the United States) has made some horrible judgments in its history, some of which I strongly believe are contrary to the U.S. Constitution and many certainly antithetical to God's moral law. Because we are the blood-bought children of God it is HIS law to which we unfeignedly obey and most gladly regardless of what any man rules in a court of law or what any government enacts as law. God alone is LORD of the conscience.

This is a very interesting thought. I would have to ponder this further.
Certainly I am a birther by and large, as well.
I disagree with Pilgrim that the country was founder on Christian principles..it certainly was. Many were not Christian, but Unitarian...that said, Unitarians in the late 1700's were more Christian than most Christians are today!

I must be having a "DUH" moment here but it seems like what you and Pilgrim said were essentially in agreement. Did I miss something?

I am not American, however I have done some homework on Don Trump and although many of the things he says is true. We should be tough when we need to be and we also want the President to be tough. Yet, I have been reading a lot of what Trump has said and to be frank, he speaks out of both sides of his mouth.
He insults his opponents based on their looks and this is not hard to prove, just look at the Republican candidate debate.
I have every reason to believe that he is a liberal disguised as a conservative.
Tom

1. When it comes to politics, most people suffer from cerebral myopia.

2. Remember, it is election time and whatever 'dirt/mud' the opposition can drudge up, it will be slung.

3. The ones most targeted by the mud slinging are those who are at the top of the polls. Notice, there far less attacks on those who have little to no possibility of winning elections.

4. Most of the attacks are half truths at best. The attackers are no different than the ones they are attacking. What I mean by that is politicians are masters of deceit and liars. They rarely answer questions directly and when they do, they put a 'spin' on it with the intent to avoid the truth. Most of the recent attacks on Trump have been about what he said or did in 2006 or some earlier date, which is totally antithetical to what the man now says. The questions that should be asked are:
- Are they true?
- Has Trump made an about face and is now opposed to what he used to be in favor of?

5. Donald Trump is certainly no 'saint' by any stretch of the imagination. But I must say that even the worst of the Republican candidates is more conservative than the two Democratic candidates. And, by far, more conservative than Trudeau and most any other Canadian Premier that has ever been elected. That does NOT mean that I give any of these people a pass. It all comes down to voting for the one who is least evil.

6. DISCLAIMER: I am NOT a firm supporter of Donald Trump nor any of the candidates currently running for office, whether it be for President, Senator or Representative.

7. Lastly, re: voters... Most people vote according to what they perceive will benefit themselves, i.e., "what's in it for me?" The mentality they have is a direct violation of the 10th Commandment. They see what the "rich" have and think that the rich should be divested of their wealth and given to them. For example, a massive amount of the young believe that the government should pay for their college tuition. But rarely do they consider where this money will come from, never mind WHY should anyone pay for their education? The answer is a 'no-brainer'; HIGHER TAXES on everyone is the typical solution to all government sponsored social programs. And higher taxes mean wages are worth less, goods and commodities cost more, etc., etc., ad nauseam. Communism resides in the hearts of the majority of people.

Please read the Mayflower Compact. Certainly it can be considered a "founding" document.