A Question of Theology

A great many of the issues America faces today may seem economic or political, but they are in fact moral and theological issues.

The American government’s response to our current economic woes, as well as the themes of “change” epitomized by this most current election cycle (government usurpation of healthcare, wealth redistribution, etc.), are resulting in America accelerating head on into the depths of Socialism.

No honest electoral mob would consent to Socialism if they were not enticed first to break the 10th Commandment and covet what is not theirs.

What rapidly follows is a breaking of the 7th Commandment through confiscatory entitlement programs under the force of government.

Breaking the 1st Commandment brings up this pack of sins as government replaces God as a source of providence.

Ludwig von Mises and other economic and political philosophers are clear that you can’t have Socialism without totalitarianism.

The reason Socialism requires totalitarianism is that Socialism, by definition, will always unfairly burden the population.

Also, it has been shown historically to always fail in what it attempts to deliver.

Hence no clear thinking individual would tolerate the state coercion required by Socialism for a moment if they were not forced to submit to it.

There would be constant rebellion to Socialism unless you had totalitarianism.

To increase the socialist composition of American government necessitates a proportional increase in totalitarianism.

Any rise in totalitarianism comes with a corresponding decline in freedom. Where does one say “Enough!” as we slide across the spectrum from freedom to slavery?

Make no doubt about it, the loss of freedom in America today and the source of decay from which, God forbid, America’s demise would result, is due to a failure in the pulpit. America’s troublesome political and economic condition is merely a symptom. This begs these questions, especially relevant on a Sunday morning:


- Where are the pastors of America today teaching the theological fundamental of the 10 Commandments and convicting their congregations with their individual culpability as these sins are played out in the public and political square?


- Who would deny that sin is increasingly finding itself codified into law and government policy and who will take responsibility for permitting this?


- Where are the pastors today teaching their congregations that America’s founding principles are in fact Christian principles? Are they unaware of this connection and are they educated enough to teach it?


- Where are the pastors today teaching their congregations that they have a responsibility both as Christians as well as American citizens (who are the ultimate authority in our American form of government, not our representatives) to be knowledgeable of, and to unashamedly stand up for, American principles?


- Where are the pastors today teaching their congregations that Christian charity is based upon love, and by definition can only arise from individual acts, not legislated or delegated to government?


- Where are the pastors today ranking the threats faced today by both America and the Body of Christ and prioritizing which message they chose to deliver from their pulpit on Sunday?


- Do I even need to mention the 6th Commandment, as we have become a society which calls the murder of the unborn “choice,” as though someone were choosing liposuction?


I ask you all to prayerfully consider what I have said and would welcome any discussion of it. I have also attached some relevant commentary (c.f.: below).

For more on this issue see: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?pageId=81027


Michael J. Del Rosso

To My Brethren Who Voted For Barack Obama

To those Christians, particularly those in ministry leadership roles who support Barack Obama and the Democratic Party platform, I have one word- REPENT!!!

You may feel it presumptuous of me to make such a declarative statement, and may have a number of reasons why you believe your decision is the right one, but my response to you, in love and from a biblical perspective, is that your decision is wrong.

This year’s election presents an interesting dilemma in that Barack Obama appears to present a morally superior persona as compared to the persona of John McCain. In the spring of this year I outlined McCain’s moral failures and why I believed he was not the best choice among Republicans in the fight. If we base our decision on specific individual moral characteristics or failings, other than a constant propensity for not telling the truth, which looms large, Obama appears to come out ahead. Of course we do not know very much about Barack Obama’s private life and what is sought is guarded under the cover of utmost secrecy. We cannot gain access to his medical records, his high school, college, or law school tests results or transcripts. But this is really not my case for this appeal.

The grounds upon which I base my assessment are broader, and deal with ideology and doctrine from the point of view of a believing Christian rather than with personal traits.

It is my belief, that 90% of the woes of America can be encapsulated in two separate but related issues: black bitterness on the one hand and white guilt on the other. These two core attitudes, sadly, are deeply embedded in the souls of hundreds of millions of Americans and lie at the very heart of almost every political issue confronting us today.

From a biblical standpoint both of these traits are considered sin and both hinder the ability to clearly see God’s truth. Bitterness, like a cancer, infects and defiles the whole person and eventually its poison spreads to everyone around that person. Once bitterness takes root it blinds one to the Godly virtues of forgiveness and love. It is clearly expressed in God’s Word that when we do not forgive, He does not forgive us. The double minded man should expect nothing from God. Believing Christians, who harbor unforgiveness, are admonished that their prayers will remain unanswered and unfruitful. It is sad that so many of the predominantly black churches that emphasize the “faith” doctrine are so often bound in unforgiveness. As an example, I cite the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. The very churches that preach; “if God be for us, who can be against us,” and that should know better, are the very churches that to this day hold President Bush almost solely responsible for the tragedy that was Katrina. Which is it? Is God for us, or is President Bush bigger than God and able to sneak one in on Him?

Black bitterness is one of two prominant factors affecting the present election. John McCain is a Republican who voted with President Bush 90% of the time and therefore, by default, all of the often irrational hatred directed at President Bush is transferred to Senator McCain. The second factor commanding a prominant position in this political race is white guilt. For those living under white guilt a Barack Obama presidency, the first black person to become president, represents the shedding of hundreds of years of guilt and shame carried by whites as a result of the institution of slavery, racism and segregation. I pray that you are can see the harm that both of these positions present. If you are gripped by either of these harmful attributes, I urge you to REPENT!!

I have friends black & white who think that because of what some ignorant and/or evil white person or group of white people did hundreds of years ago they “owe it” to black people to make amends. Really? Where is this found in scripture? Where in the Bible is it written that you or I are responsible for another’s actions? Is that not what Jesus came and died for?

I am in the insurance business. If my son or daughter is over 13 years old, do you know that I am not responsible for their actions? What does common law know that the body of Christ has forgotten? While the Bible states that God will judge sin to future generations, it does not state that it will hold those in that future generation responsible for the actions of those in prior generations. Each generation is given the opportunity to overcome by its own actions the sins of the past. But those actions are about dealing with today’s issues and not yesterday’s.

Every race on earth has been enslaved and has enslaved others at some point. Did you hear that? Let me repeat, every race on earth has enslaved or been enslaved at some point in history. I met a black sister several months ago that published a book making the case that black people are under a curse because we are related to the Egyptians who were the first to enslave the Jews. She believes that we will not be released from this curse until we make amends for that prior transgression. Does that mean that because of the past bad behavior of my ancestors, that I must accommodate every Jewish person I meet? I don’t think so. I have a better idea. I say that as we forgive, we are forgiven.

The best thing can do at this juncture in history to help erase the stigma of racism is to stop dwelling on it. Judge each person according to that person’s character (hmm, where have I heard that before?), and treat them as Jesus would. Do not accommodate, black people, Native Americans or anyone else for that matter as if they are spoiled children. It helps no one. In fact, it simply hurts them more.

I now want to speak directly to the theologians in this audience. There is a doctrine that has taken hold in and out of the body of Christ of late which stems directly from black bitterness and white guilt. The doctrine is known as “Economic Justice” or “Social Justice.” I declare that this doctrine is straight from hell. It is, as Paul called it, “another gospel” and it must be rejected. In a nutshell the Social Justice doctrine exalts man over God.

In the aftermath of Katrina a prominent black pastor wrote an article proclaiming that Kanye West was right in attacking President Bush. I challenged the black pastor on his opinion and he attacked me by expressing that I was “one of those” conservative Christians who only cared about the moral issues and not social justice. He expressed that it was obvious that I never read Matthew 25 and its admonition to help the poor. In response, I re-read the passage and wrote the pastor the following letter:

“Dear Pastor…,

I thank you for directing me to re-read Matthew 25:31-46. I must say, in reading however that I saw nowhere that “whatsoever Caesar does in my name, or whatsoever George W. Bush and Congress do in my name.” I did read, however where it says, “whatsoever you do in my name there is your reward.”

My friends, this social gospel and its attempt to place responsibility for others on government or classes of people is anti-Christ. It seeks to absolve us as individuals from our responsibility and shifts the responsibility to the masses. Where is the reward in that? It is in fact more akin to what Ananias & Sapphira (Acts 5) attempted for which they were severely punished. It is also a gospel of works. Is it no wonder that when you compare the charitable giving of the Democratic candidates to that of the Republican candidates you find that the Democrats rarely give of their own wealth, unless it is to a social cause that furthers the elevation of man as god? Women’s rights, environmental rights, animal rights, political action committees, etc. I say repent from this false doctrine. Give all you can and more, as individuals, to other individuals, and reject the notion that government needs to do more. Listen closely!! The more individuals do, the less government needs to do. This is God’s way, and it is heresy to teach otherwise. I challenge anyone to prove me in error.

Today want to set forth a new Emancipation Proclamation. It is imperative and long overdue that we move past this point of bondage. I want to set white people free from guilt for what their ancestors did or did not do. I also set my black brothers and sisters free from the bitterness that keeps us bound. Let us enter a new day, “leaving those things behind and pressing on” toward a new day. (Phil 3:13)

I leave you with this question:

Is the true test that America has arrived, as to racial concerns, that we can elect a black man or woman as president, or is it instead that we can reject that person found wanting without consideration of race?