McCain's Spiritual Guide: Destroy Islam

[Neil D]

It's one thing to be a senator and have the history of being tortured....but are you sure you want the same type of man in the most powerful seat in the world ?

Senator John McCain hailed as a spiritual adviser an Ohio megachurch pastor who has called upon Christians to wage a "war" against the "false religion" of Islam with the aim of destroying it.

On February 26, McCain appeared at a campaign rally in Cincinnati with the Reverend Rod Parsley of the World Harvest Church of Columbus, a supersize Pentecostal institution that features a 5,200-seat sanctuary, a television studio (where Parsley tapes a weekly show), and a 122,000-square-foot Ministry Activity Center. That day, a week before the Ohio primary, Parsley praised the Republican presidential front-runner as a "strong, true, consistent conservative." The endorsement was important for McCain, who at the time was trying to put an end to the lingering challenge from former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, a favorite among Christian evangelicals. A politically influential figure in Ohio, Parsley could also play a key role in McCain's effort to win this bellwether state in the general election. McCain, with Parsley by his side at the Cincinnati rally, called the evangelical minister a "spiritual guide."

The leader of a 12,000-member congregation, Parsley has written several books outlining his fundamentalist religious outlook, including the 2005 Silent No More. In this work, Parsley decries the "spiritual desperation" of the United States, and he blasts away at the usual suspects: activist judges, civil libertarians who advocate the separation of church and state, the homosexual "culture" ("homosexuals are anything but happy and carefree"), the "abortion industry," and the crass and profane entertainment industry. And Parsley targets another profound threat to the United States: the religion of Islam.

In a chapter titled "Islam: The Deception of Allah," Parsley warns there is a "war between Islam and Christian civilization." He continues:

I cannot tell you how important it is that we understand the true nature of Islam, that we see it for what it really is. In fact, I will tell you this: I do not believe our country can truly fulfill its divine purpose until we understand our historical conflict with Islam. I know that this statement sounds extreme, but I do not shrink from its implications. The fact is that America was founded, in part, with the intention of seeing this false religion destroyed, and I believe September 11, 2001, was a generational call to arms that we can no longer ignore.

Parsley is not shy about his desire to obliterate Islam. In Silent No More, he notes—approvingly—that Christopher Columbus shared the same goal: "It was to defeat Islam, among other dreams, that Christopher Columbus sailed to the New World in 1492…Columbus dreamed of defeating the armies of Islam with the armies of Europe made mighty by the wealth of the New World. It was this dream that, in part, began America." He urges his readers to realize that a confrontation between Christianity and Islam is unavoidable: "We find now we have no choice. The time has come." And he has bad news: "We may already be losing the battle. As I scan the world, I find that Islam is responsible for more pain, more bloodshed, and more devastation than nearly any other force on earth at this moment."

Parsley claims that Islam is an "anti-Christ religion" predicated on "deception." The Muslim prophet Muhammad, he writes, "received revelations from demons and not from the true God." And he emphasizes this point: "Allah was a demon spirit." Parsley does not differentiate between violent Islamic extremists and other followers of the religion:

There are some, of course, who will say that the violence I cite is the exception and not the rule. I beg to differ. I will counter, respectfully, that what some call "extremists" are instead mainstream believers who are drawing from the well at the very heart of Islam.

The spirit of Islam, he maintains, is one of hostility. He asserts that the religion "inspired" the 9/11 attacks. He bemoans the fact that in the years after 9/11, 34,000 Americans "have become Muslim" and that there are "some 1,209 mosques" in America. Islam, he declares, is a "faith that fully intends to conquer the world" through violence. The United States, he insists, "has historically understood herself as a bastion against Islam," but "history is crashing in upon us."

At the end of his chapter on Islam, Parsley asks, "Are we a Christian nation? I say yes." Without specifying what actions should be taken to eradicate the religion, he essentially calls for a new crusade.

Parsley, who refers to himself as a "Christocrat," is no stranger to controversy. In 2007, the grassroots organization he founded, the Center for Moral Clarity, called for prosecuting people who commit adultery. In January, he compared Planned Parenthood to Nazis. In the past Parsley's church has been accused of engaging in pro-Republican partisan activities in violation of its tax-exempt status.

Why would McCain court Parsley? He has long had trouble figuring out how to deal with Christian fundamentalists, an important bloc for the Republican Party. During his 2000 presidential bid, he referred to Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell as "agents of intolerance." But six years later, as he readied himself for another White House run, McCain repudiated that remark. More recently, his campaign hit a rough patch when he accepted the endorsement of the Reverend John Hagee, a Texas televangelist who has called the Catholic Church "the great whore" and a "false cult system." After the Catholic League protested and called on McCain to renounce Hagee's support, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee praised Hagee's spiritual leadership and support of Israel and said that "when [Hagee] endorses me, it does not mean that I embrace everything that he stands for or believes in." After being further criticized for his Hagee connection, McCain backed off slightly, saying, "I repudiate any comments that are made, including Pastor Hagee's, if they are anti-Catholic or offensive to Catholics." But McCain did not renounce Hagee's endorsement.

McCain's relationship with Parsley is politically significant. In 2004, Parsley's church was credited with driving Christian fundamentalist voters to the polls for George W. Bush. With Ohio expected to again be a decisive state in the presidential contest, Parsley's World Harvest Church and an affiliated entity called Reformation Ohio, which registers voters, could be important players within this battleground state. Considering that the Ohio Republican Party has been decimated by various political scandals and that a popular Democrat, Ted Strickland, is now the state's governor, McCain and the Republicans will need all the help they can get in the Buckeye State this fall. It's a real question: Can McCain win the presidency without Parsley?

The McCain campaign did not respond to a request for comment regarding Parsley and his anti-Islam writings. Parsley did not return a call seeking comment.

"The last thing I want to be is another screaming voice moving people to extremes and provoking them to folly in the name of patriotism," Parsley writes in Silent No More. Provoking people to holy war is another matter. About that, McCain so far is silent.

[olger]

I've heard of that Parsley fellar.

[Woody]

How many years was he a member is the key question.

[Neil D]

How many years was he a member is the key question.

Does it matter? Here is a spiritual advisor, advocating the destruction of a culture, a way of life, giving spirtual advice to a presidential canadate, and there is NO or very little media attention on this....

Talk about hypocracy of the media....

[fccool]

Neil,

This is not just Pentacostal view being pushed here, but almost a consensus of the entire Christian world, including many Adventist leaders. Just talk to your pastor on this subject and I think you will be surprised (I could be wrong) . I think it's a generation gap of the extreme fundamentalists that I'm noticing promulgating these views. No dancing, no jewelry, BUT yes to clubbing people who do not agree with us. SDA leaders are not immune to it. You should have heard the talk that was given by (I'm not going to name people, but let's say it's pretty up high in SDA ranks). He was defending Neo-Conservative approach of preemptive warfare from the pulpit, criticizing democrats for being idle on this issue of fighting radical Islam. That guy spoke much about physical warfare of the Christianity against Islam... and he was not speaking about a spiritual one. It is very sad, but this is a predominant view of the US Christendom today. It is very unpopular to go against it... anywhere. For me this view of "onward Christian soldiers, marching TO (not as) war" is as radical as radical Islam. I really thankful that there are even a couple of people in churches willing to stop and think before they start to swing fists.

[John317]

... SDA leaders are not immune to it. You should have heard the talk that was given by (I'm not going to name people, but let's say it's pretty up high in SDA ranks). He was defending Neo-Conservative approach of preemptive warfare from the pulpit, criticizing democrats for being idle on this issue of fighting radical Islam. That guy spoke much about physical warfare of the Christianity against Islam... and he was not speaking about a spiritual one....

There's a big difference between speaking as an American and Westerner, and speaking as an Adventist or Christian. When I speak as a US citizen on these matters, I am trying to explain why the President or why the nation as a whole takes certain actions.

I don't believe that these things ought to be taught from the pulpit. The only thing that SDAs ought to be hearing and preaching from our pulpits is the Bible and the gospel. We should not be talking about politics (except religious freedom) during church services. I would be opposed to a pastor or leader or anyone else using the pulpit to push a particular political or even social agenda, even if that agenda is one I agree with.

I have mixed feelings even about discussing political things on CA because it can take away from our unity in the really important things, which is the gospel and teaching people about Christ. I know that Ellen White did not favor SDAs arguing about politics and she wrote some very strong things about it.

As far as Islam is concerned, there are lots of good things going on between SDAs and Muslims in some areas of the world. I would hope they would only hear and see the teachings of Christ coming from SDA pulpits and SDA literature.

[fccool]

I am helping out with local Adventist radio station and we've received a CD prepped for broadcast lucratively titled "Truth about Islam". It basically blackballed Islam as being violent religion and took bunch of Quoran quotes out of the context. I hardly think that this would do any good for reasonable discussion between Muslims and Christians in our town. But in spite of my objections, the program was aired on regular bases. The program is very stereotypical. The beginning goes something like that : "While not all Muslims are terrorists, all of the terrorists are Muslims" ( should post the audio snippets because you should hear it to believe this stuff!). It is quite sad and will not add to any reasonable dialog. I think that this issue is beyond politics.

As far as separating Christianity from the "regular affairs of the state" I hardly can separate these. Not in a sense of enforcing beliefs, but as a person you can not separate what you do from what you believe. Otherwise you don't really believe it. I certainly think that church should be above politics and political hackery.

[Stan]

Interesting... there are folks who can teach the 'big 28' out of the Koran.. It only referrer to the 7 day Sabbath.

Some Muslims are to the Koran as Catholics are to the Bible

[John317]

I am helping out with local Adventist radio station and we've received a CD prepped for broadcast lucratively titled "Truth about Islam". It basically blackballed Islam as being violent religion and took bunch of Quoran quotes out of the context. I hardly think that this would do any good for reasonable discussion between Muslims and Christians in our town. But in spite of my objections, the program was aired on regular bases. The program is very stereotypical. The beginning goes something like that : "While not all Muslims are terrorists, all of the terrorists are Muslims" ( should post the audio snippets because you should hear it to believe this stuff!). It is quite sad and will not add to any reasonable dialog. I think that this issue is beyond politics.

I completely agree. It's terribly sad. I think it's a terrible mistake to put out such programming. The way I believe is that there are plenty of people in the government and in the military whose job it is to fight terrorism. The church shouldn't be in the business of doing that. We should be trying our best as a church to make peace and bring people together. What I say here on this thread about Muslims and terrorism and so on, I wouldn't say to Muslims who I am trying to point to Christ. I have my own opinions and convictions about Islam and the Koran on the basis of my observations and my study of the Qu'ran, but I wouldn't let my personal beliefs get between me and the individual Muslim who would be offended by my views. We don't always have to tell everything we think or believe.

Pretty soon I am going to be meeting with a Muslim teacher, and I can assure you I will not be telling him all of my opinions and beliefs. I am meeting with him in order to learn what he believes and what his interpretation is of the Qu'ran. I'm not there to tell him my beliefs. After we've met a few times, I will point out some similarities between the Qu'ran and the Bible and see what he thinks. The Qu'ran actually gives Muslims permission to seek out Christians to find out the truth about salvation through Christ, but most Muslims don't pay attention to those verses.

Quote:

As far as separating Christianity from the "regular affairs of the state" I hardly can separate these. Not in a sense of enforcing beliefs, but as a person you can not separate what you do from what you believe. Otherwise you don't really believe it. I certainly think that church should be above politics and political hackery.

I agree that the church ought to be above politics. However, as in the case of WW2, American SDAs are still Americans and therefore they were glad to serve as medics in the military. But don't forget, medics are trained to give medical aid to the enemy soldiers as much as they are to our own soldiers. I wouldn't carry a weapon in the military.

The only time I would use a weapon in a battle is if my position and the position of my buddies was being overrun by the enemy, and it was obvious that we would all be killed if I didn't. It would be only in self-defense.

[fccool]

John,

I don't criticize you as individual. I am young and I have PLENTY to learn from you. I have no idea what I would do if war breaks out in the middle of my town right now. I would like to believe that I would avoid violence to protect my family, but I simply don't know until I am thrown in the middle of this situation.

Either way, understanding that all of the people have various beliefs even within a communities of faith... is important in order to respect people as individuals and not based on the group they belong to. Terrorists are people too, and many times they are not painted as such... but as some nebulous entity that only capable of evil. These are people who experience fear, have capability to love, and do feel anger (probably more anger). I think dehumanizing the enemy is about the worst thing we can do, but it's one of the realities of boot camp. You have to believe that you are not shooting a human being to avoid the psychological consequences that come with that choice. I know there are exceptions, such as serial killers... but we do have phenomenon such as mercenaries too... killing for money.