Point being (and believe me, I had no reason to speak about Carson theologically, only politically), Carson would be asked about these matters should he receive the Rep. nomination. The press would have a field day with him. They would leave him either defending obtuse positions in everyone’s eyes but SDAers (what % of the electorate are they again?), or denying or distancing himself from aspects of his faith. This is about politics. I raised the issue because of politics and electability.
You have your positions all staked out to your great contentment. I disagree with them, but so what, at least in this context.
Carson is unelectable, and it’s mainly because of the SDA positions on Sunday worship, Catholicism, and the Apocalypse itself. BTW, I personally agree with the SDA position on the latter two (which is why I, too, am unelectable to any national office).
Isn’t it interesting our dicussion on this matter, considering we have an Islamic adherent in the White House, and nobody except Conservatives really care?
I don’t think Carson is presidential material, but I do take offense when folks toss out the “CULT” card. The SDA Church is so far from being a cult, that using it in connection to the church destroys the word for future use.
“Oh this group was reported to be doing all sorts of bad things only a cult would, but I remember them calling Adventists a cult too and I know them and they aren’t. I guess this group may not be either.” That’s what’s taking place here.
Our views on religion should not make us unelectable. Kennedy was a Catholic, and it never mattered. Nixon was a Quaker. I don’t think he brought his Quaker beliefs to work. Obama is the only guy I know of who did bring his “religion” in, (and I do consider this to be a cult), and it is Islam.
Christian based religions are not going to cause problems. Adventists blend into a community and don’t cause problems. That’s what other church’s members do.