anti-christs, politics, and christians

First off, I didn't mean any swipe at you and I'm sorry if somehow you got that impression. It was a genuine question but it might all have been poorly worded.

And yes, I know that you are one of those awaiting the Rapture and while I believe absolutely in Christ's return, I also think that you go way overboard on this like many Christians, in focusing too much on that return. Which is the gist of what I was trying to say: that Christians have a long history of crying wolf about the end of the world and the anti-Christ. Yet they were all for GWB who apparently knew enough to say all the things dear to evangelical hearts so that when there was truly a problem, they raised no hue and cry.

Yes, it does annoy me. It annoys me for the sake of the world generally, who has leaders imposed on it, via American elections. Your elections don't just impact you. When Jesus said "the poor you will always have with you" I believe he was stating a fact, not a path to follow to keep the poor poor. The anticipation of the end times ought not to become so foremost in our minds that we neglect to be our brothers' keepers.

This is why I believe Christians shouldn't be involved in politics. They/we (and I include all Christians, not just American Christians) don't have a great history of backing what is right which in turn reflects on Christianity and Christians as a whole.

I give as my example for my concern the Jews in Jesus' time who also were so focused on the end of the world, and what they thought the messiah would be or should be, that he entered unnoticed, in a stable, with no place to lay his head.

And I beg to differ that my post was primarily political. If it seems so, it is only because Americans involve God in their politics. If America was a nation where the subject of a candidate's faith didn't come up, or if America was a banana republic who had no impact on the rest of the world, it wouldn't matter.

I also don't agree that the anti-christ must be universally adored. GWB was not hated by the rest of the world until he took the world into his wars with largely the blessing of the evangelical community in the US. For example the quote describing the anti-Christ as "who is like unto the beast and who is able to make war with him" isn't necessarily about adoration. It is about fear. It is about being powerless in the face of a power who has the ability to do exactly what it wants to do and to hell with you.

Pax Romana was not about a peaceful Rome, but about a Rome so powerful no one could stand up to it, a Rome who in many ways brought law and order (their form of law and order) to the world. There's very little about ancient Rome and its dealings with countries it occupied that can't be said about the US and Rome was a form of an anti-christ state. Rome was not loved.

As far as "The AC is going to be someone universally adored, someone riding in on false pretenses of peace, someone who people will literally worship - and not all of them will have to be forced to do that."

Are you thinking of the prophecy in Daniel, where the anti-christ is said to "magnify himself in his own heart" and "by peace shall destroy many?"

Because in terms of an anti-christ, peace does not mean peace in the sense of turning the other cheek. That verse refers to the Roman policy of overwhelming force so that no one is able to fight back. That is what it means by peace destroying many. Again, rather like US foreign policy. Peace doesn't mean peace in the sense of the peaceful, when it comes at the point of a gun. Further in Daniel there is a verse that says that this anti-christ will 'divide the land for gain.' Another way of saying, American interests are paramount, not actual matters of unjust regimes. I only use the US as an example because it is *the* world power. Again, pretty much GWB's entire foreign policy.

My point is not to blacken the name of GWB but to point out the inconsistencies in how too many American Christians view their political leaders. GWB is not the anti-christ. As far as I know, no one claimed he was either. But there are folks who would have those suspicions of Obama when so far, there is far less to go on. And THAT is what I don't understand. A year or two or three from now, if Obama doesn't make a drastic change to how the US operates in the world, and pursues the idea of an imperial America, I may well have a list for him to equal a list for GWB.

The names, the individuals don't matter. That isn't the point. The point is - for me - and it is upsetting to me as a Christian - Christian involvement in politics, when it could as easily have been GWB the Anti-Christ, as Obama the Anti-Christ. It's the reasoning or lack of it that scares me silly. In our previous discussion about socialism and capitalism, you made the point that Americans don't trust their government. If you don't, why should the rest of the world be thrilled over the idea of an exported American democracy whom its own citizens don't trust to act in its citizens' best interests?

Kings in ancient times often wanted to be worshipped. Like Nebuchadnezzar for example, with his statues of himself that Daniel refused to bow down to. But I don't see that the fact that people obey a despot means a despot is loved. I think it starts with little things, like basic freedoms being taken away in the name of saving the world for democracy American-style, and before you know it, Big Brother is watching your every move and the church is applauding because you ought not to mind Big Brother watching you if you don't have anything to hide.

I don't see where the anti-christ therefore has to be loved.

As far as Obama is concerned, does being a likable guy who seems to realize that the world does not wish to conform to American standards make him a bad guy? GWB alienated every bit of good will in the world that he could have used for something good. As Christians, are we only to trust leaders who can't play well with others in order to avoid accidently praising a potential anti-Christ?

My personal way to deal with that is to absent myself from politics when it comes to things like voting because I know people can be easily, easily fooled. Obama could be the anti-christ. GWB could also have been the anti-Christ. How stupid wouldn't the church have looked then at the judgement seat of the Most High explaining how they'd bought a bill of goods?

Therefore, in times which I agree are troubled, I value caution and wait-and-see and don't advocate anyone politically. These are however, not the first troubled times mankind has known.

You'll have to give me examples of Obama being worshipped. I don't know of anything I've heard or read that indicates anything more than plays-well-with-others.

The only thing I've seen, as a non-American, wrt how the rest of the world sees Obama is that he has one endearing quality that supersedes all others: he is not GWB. The world really suffered for eight years under a man who was either a fool or misguided so badly that one circles right back around to fool.

That is all it is. Obama feels to "us" - if I may take the liberty of speaking for the non-American world - like a normal person. As if he's aware that the US can't continue to act unilaterally. So people are prepared to give him a chance while still remaining as wary of America and American foreign policy as always. Obama is well-travelled, he has a world view that isn't buried in America. He is more of a world citizen as opposed to the "Ugly American Abroad" personality that GWB presented.

So "the world" broadly speaking, can relate to him in a way that they have never been able to relate to Americans who are too American. They are willing to give him a break - nothing more. The world generally doesn't trust America and it will take more than having a nice president to get the world to change its mind. It's more along the lines of "he seems like a nice guy but we'll wait and see."

Have I explained better? I certainly am not trying to be snide or swipe at anyone. What I want is the American church to sit up and pay attention to what it's doing, and what it is doing to itself in supporting or voicing support for anyone at all politically. If Christians are 'brothers and sisters' then that relationship should supersede nationality and Christians who are not Americans are put off by the mingling of politics, secular notions of freedom instead of the freedom that Christ gives us. It's alienating. And I don't think that is right at all.

I'd be happier to have used a Canadian example in order to avoid being called anti-American but Canada is not on the world stage. A Canadian anti-christ would be really really .... strange. Who would listen? What army would back it up?