Warren Throckmorton

According to Politico, Ben Carson’s business manager Armstrong Williams told CNN’s Alisyn Camerota this morning that Carson’s rejection of the possibility of a Muslim president was “not an issue of religion, it is an issue of one’s belief system, of how they will govern.” 
Someone needs to tell Carson that religions and beliefs systems have a lot in common. Whatever one calls one’s belief system, the Constitution forbids a religious test. Carson is making this unnecessarily difficult.
Carson said there are tenets of Islam which sanction the killing of gays and Jews. Does he not realize what Leviticus says? Is he unaware that some Christian movements have advocated hatred toward Jews?
Carson and his handlers are stereotyping Muslims and displaying group-serving bias regarding Christianity.  One knows the diversity of a social group to which one belongs much better than to an out group. Carson has lumped all Muslims into his stereotyped view of Islam while ignoring similar elements within his own religion.
 

So Ben Carson said he wouldn’t support a Muslim for President and Islam is inconsistent with the Constitution. Watch:

Then he said he might vote for a Muslim for Congress.
This was such an easy question that I am surprised Carson botched it up.  Even if you personally would not vote for a Muslim, the Constitution prohibits a religious test so it doesn’t matter what Ben Carson’s opinion is. All I can figure is he wanted to bounce with anti-Muslim sentiment.
The issue of a Muslim (Mahometan) president came up during the North Carolina Debates over ratification of the Constitution in 1788 (to read it all keep clicking the next image). The defenders of the Constitution indicated that religious liberty would not prevent a Muslim from running. Being elected however, is another matter, and according to one delegate would require a major change in public sentiment.
Speaker James Iredell, appointed to the Supreme Court by George Washington in 1790, answered worries that a pagan or Mahometan might gain office:

But it is objected that the people of America may, perhaps, choose representatives who have no religion at all, and that pagans and Mahometans may be admitted into offices. But how is it possible to exclude any set of men, without taking away that principle of religious freedom which we ourselves so warmly contend for? This is the foundation on which persecution has been raised in every part of the world. The people in power were always right, and every body else wrong. If you admit the least difference, the door to persecution is opened. Nor would it answer the purpose, for the worst part of the excluded sects would comply with the test, and the best men only be kept out of our counsels. But it is never to be supposed that the people of America will trust their dearest rights to persons who have no religion at all, or a religion materially different from their own. It would be happy for mankind if religion was permitted to take its own course, and maintain itself by the excellence of its own doctrines. The divine Author of our religion never wished for its support by worldly authority. Has he not said that the gates of hell shall not prevail against it? It made much greater progress for itself, than when supported by the greatest authority upon earth.

He added later:

It is apprehended that Jews, Mahometans, pagans, &c., may be elected to high offices under the government of the United States. Those who are Mahometans, or any others who are not professors of the Christian religion, can never be elected to the office of President, or other high office, but in one of two cases. First, if the people of America lay aside the Christian religion altogether, it may happen. Should this unfortunately take place, the people will choose such men as think as they do themselves. Another case is, if any persons of such descriptions should, notwithstanding their religion, acquire the confidence and esteem of the people of America by their good conduct and practice of virtue, they may be chosen. I leave it to gentlemen’s candor to judge what probability there is of the people’s choosing men of different sentiments from themselves.

Iredell saw that the Constitution does not require Christianity to be the national religion. A president of a non-majority religion might be elected if voters become less Christian or because an individual of a minority religion displays trustworthy character.
In any case, Iredell made it clear that Christianity ought not depend on the support of Constitution or any other worldly authority.
Carson’s later came out and said he didn’t oppose a Muslim running for office if the candidate rejected Sharia law.
The next question to ask Carson is if the Constitution is flawed since it forbids a religious test.

Doing some reputation managing of their own, Reputation Management Consults and/or Gospel for Asia requested that my post on their partnership be removed by Patheos due to a claim that I violated their copyright by using images from reports given to GFA.  The request came in such a manner that it is not clear exactly who issued the take down notice, but I believe it was RMC. I have posted many GFA images without problem so I suspect RMC was behind it.
Patheos took the post down while I reviewed the complaint, along with Patheos management. We agreed that the images were fair use but have decided not to press the matter at this time. Instead, readers can review the post reposted below. It is important to note that the facts were not contested. Apparently, the images provided more information than these groups wanted out.
…………………………
(original 8/31/15 post)
In June 2014, a group of former Gospel for Asia staff members sent a letter to GFA’s board alleging a pattern of unbiblical practices involving top leaders, including founder and CEO K.P. Yohannan. Over time, more staff left GFA and joined the GFA Diaspora group (over 100 now).
As the Diaspora group grew, GFA leaders developed several responses. One strategy was an attempt to disseminate positive information about GFA throughout social media. Another was to hire a company to manipulate Google search results by creating many redundant websites with positive information about GFA. To do this, GFA hired Reputation Management Consultants to create the websites. According to an internal document (see below) the fee set aside for this effort was $70,000 (go to the last line item).

According to former staff, the “Reputation mgmt” line item of $70k was required to pay Reputation Management Consultants for seven months. RMC describes itself as follows:

RMC has innovated new strategies and techniques that repair existing damages, clear your reputation, and safeguards against new attacks, all while doubling as an effective online PR campaign.

Links to the February and March reports to GFA from RMC are here and at the end of the article. It appears that RMC created a bunch of websites with positive stories about GFA to influence the results of Google searches.

The goal of the campaign was to “push down” negative information so that it appears “after position 30 in major search engines.”

In addition to an “aggressive linking campaign,” RMC created 18 new websites to promote GFA.

Most of these links go to websites with very little activity beginning in November or December of 2014 and ending in April of this year.
It is possible that the campaign ended early with less than $70 being spent. According to the reports below, RMC planned to take the campaign into April.
As an aside, if anyone reading this wants to give me $70k to create websites and buy domains, I am ready to go. I suspect anyone who has opened accounts or run a blog is amazed that so much money was paid for free social media accounts and sparsely populating a few blogs.
Given the austerity encouraged by GFA’s CEO K.P. Yohannan, it is surprising to see him use donor money to push down negative articles about himself. Perhaps I shouldn’t be surprised; GFA and Believers’ Church in India are suing Google and Facebook in India over what they claim is false information disseminated on those sites.
If pushing down negatives is what GFA is about, then they need to rehire RMC. This article about K.P. Yohannan’s ring is in the top ten on Google.
In his book Touching Godliness, K.P. Yohannan wrote:

Those in authority should never fight for themselves.  We need to simply leave it to the Lord to defend us.  He will do a much better job in His time and His way than we ever could.  In fact, when a leader fights to establish his authority, he actually loses his ability to lead. (p. 189). 

The Lord and RMC.
Reputation Management Consultants February report to GFA
Reputation Management Consultants March report to GFA
After this post was published, a reader reminded me of this passage from page 77 of K.P. Yohannan’s book Road to Reality.

Just think of the $70,ooo savings if GFA and Rev. Yohannan would address the Diaspora’s concerns rather than try to push down these issues. In fact, a re-read of Road to Reality in light of the fact that “the field” had to take a $19.8 million loan so that GFA could afford Wills Point might be in order for GFA’s decision makers.

Happy Constitution Day!

In recognition of the day, I am reprinting a popular post (July 2013) debunking David Barton’s contention that the Constitution quotes the Bible.

In recent days, Barton asserted that the founders believed God’s law was higher than the Constitution. The quote from theologian Timothy Dwight provides a powerful counter to Barton’s claim.

David Barton’s Biblical Constitution

In his speeches to churches, David Barton asserts that there are Bible verses throughout the Constitution. On past occasions, he has said that the Constitution quotes the Bible verbatim. In his recent appearance before Crossroads Church in Oklahoma City, OK, Barton said people today don’t recognize these verses in the Constitution because they are ignorant about the Bible. He begins his discussion of the Bible and the Constitution at about 12 minutes into the following sermon:

Barton said:

It’s significant that if you know the Bible and if you read the Constitution, you see Bible verses throughout the Constitution. You see Bible verse after Bible verse that is noted in the Constitution. Now today, we have a lot of people who say, no, no, the Constitution is a secular arena, the Constitution is a secular document. When somebody tells me the Constitution’s a godless document, that simply tells me, they wouldn’t know a Bible verse if they saw one; if it bit them on the ankle they wouldn’t know what a Bible verse was. See what happened is the Constitution is filled with Bible verses, Bible references, Bible phrases, and Bible terminology cause back then, they didn’t see any reason to tell you it came out of the Bible because back then everybody knew that. They didn’t put it, but we’re so biblically illiterate today, we don’t recognize that. 

Timothy Dwight must have been biblically illiterate. Dwight was a prominent Congregationalist minister and the president of Yale from 1795 to 1817. On July 23, 1812, Dwight preached a sermon before his students and faculty where he lamented the low spiritual status of the day. The occasion was a public fast called by the Connecticut governor in opposition to the War of 1812. Saying the nation had three reasons to fear the future, Dwight had strong words to say about the Constitution.

The second of these reasons is, the sinful character of our nation. Notwithstanding the prevalence of Religion, which I have described, the irreligion, and the wickedness, of our land are such, as to furnish a most painful and melancholy prospect to a serious mind. We formed our Constitution without any acknowledgment of God ; without any recognition of his mercies to us, as a people, of his government, or even of his existence. The Convention, by which it was formed, never asked, even once, his direction, or his blessing upon their labours. Thus we commenced our national existence under the present system, without God. I wish I could say, that a disposition to render him the reverence, due to his great Name, and the gratitude, demanded by his innumerable mercies, had been more public, visible, uniform, and fervent.

Dwight was adverse to heresy and was considered to be a champion of orthodoxy.  He defended the Apostolic writings as inspired when the Unitarians and others rejected them. Dwight did not see Bible verse after Bible verse in the Constitution. Should we say he was biblically illiterate?
See below for the verses Barton claims to quoted in the Constitution:

 
Related Post:
David Barton’s Biblical Constitution: What if the Constitution did quote the Bible? 

Read the Constitution.

Recently, I posted audio of Gospel for Asia founder and CEO K.P. Yohannan promising staff that GFA would not take out a loan in order to build the new Wills Point, TX headquarters and living compound. Eventually, Believers’ Church in India (K.P. Yohannan was managing trustee at the time and he is also the Metropolitan Bishop and spiritual leader of the church) gave GFA in the U.S. $19.8 million toward the project. The church had to borrow money to make this donation. Furthermore, I asserted that an $11.5 million loan was taken in 2014 with the money used for the project.
Today, I post evidence for the 2014 loan. Below are images from the 46 page Deed of Trust.

 
 
GFA borrowed $11.5 million.

 
GFA May Have Kept Some Information Back
The agreement was based on the use of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) and pledges that all material statements are correct. This pledge may be in conflict with the audited financial statement for 2013 which failed to disclose that GFA made related party transactions to Believers’ Church, Love India Ministry and Last Hour Ministry.
Furthermore, the bank (City Bank) was not informed that $19.8 million toward the building project came from a loan taken in India by a related party (Believers’ Church). Speaking as a non-accountant, this seems to be a significant and material omission. City Bank did not know that an entity related to GFA had taken a loan in order to provide GFA with funds. If City Bank took the audit at face value, they would have considered that $19.8 million to be a gift with no relationship to GFA anywhere in the world. City Bank might have reconsidered if they knew that an affiliate of GFA (and recipient of millions in U.S. donations) had to take a loan in order to keep the construction project going.
The Bland Garvey 12/31/13 audit was completed in June 2014 and the Deed of Trust signed in July 2014. It is difficult, if not impossible, to imagine City Bank, an FDIC-regulated institution, making a $11.5 million loan in July 2014 without relying on the Bland Garvey audit report on the 12/31/13 GFA financial statements. That audit report included the misinformation on the source and nature of the $19.8 million previously raised and spent on the project.