Who would you pick?

[StogusMaximus]

It is election time...

Here are the candidates:

Candidate A – Associates with crooked politicians and consults with astrologists. He’s had two mistresses. He also chain smokes and drinks 8 to 10 martinis a day.

Candidate B – He was kicked out of office twice, sleeps until noon, used opium in college and drinks a quart of whiskey every evening.

Candidate C – He is a decorated war hero. He’s a vegetarian, doesn’t smoke, drinks an occasional beer and hasn’t had any extramarital affairs.






Which of these candidates would be your choice?

A is Franklin D. Roosevelt
B is Winston Churchill
C is Adolph Hitler

 

[Kristen]

Oh geez

 

[StogusMaximus]

My brother sent this to me. I thought it was interesting, but I don't know what it is trying to prove.

I picked C

 

[Mandy]

I picked c too.

 

[Kristen]

me too :o

 

[Redeemed1]

Perhaps it is showing that the wickedness of the heart cannot always be seen by the outward actions? dunno. just a shot.

 

[zero0w]

Probably C - well but I am not sure what politician really means here....

Anyway I expected some kind of psyche profile comes out of this test/pic. Maybe some people will think A will be a more "social-able" option.... Humm... I think we need a president with skills, wit, and principle.

 

[fieldmouse3]

Interesting

 

[Blackwing]

Hmmmmmmmm......

 

[buzz]

This suggests to me that you have to take a look at the whole person & not just judge on certain facts or immediate
information

 

[lucypevensie]

Yeah, and you have to ask yourself: "has this guy ever murdered anyone?" as is the case with C.- Hitler

 

[Warchant Warrior]

i picked b...honestly...cause i sleep till noon too

 

[Susan]

Who would you vote to be your pastor?
Candidate A smokes cigars, is barely out of his teenage years, and is usually in bad health.

Candidate B suffers from depression, has a longrunning dispute with a popular local prosperity teacher, and will someday be thrown out of his denomination.

Candidate C is a popular end-times lecturer in his day, will make his entire country rethink what religion actuallyis, and attempts to keep a good personal and organizational public reputation at any cost.







Voted?
If you had chosen Candidate A you would have chosen Charles Spurgeon, one of history's greatest preachers. Despite dying at the age of 45 (did I get that right? It was 45 or 48 I think) he led many to faith in our Lord Jesus Christ.

If you had chosen Candidate B, you would have chosen Martin Luther, who opposed Johann Tetzel's teaching that salvation could be bought, instead proclaiming that we are justified through faith alone. His teaching of this Biblical doctrine would lead many to a secure and true relationship with Christ.

If you had chosen Candidate C, I pity your church. You have just chosen Shoko Asahara as your pastor. This antichrist denied the faith of Christ and instead claimed that he was Christ . Of course, the worst terrorist attack in Japanese history didmake many people rethink religion-but reject it as the stock-in-trade of murderous madmen . The cult he began was rotten to the core. A somewhat respectable public image was maintained until 1995 by the policy of drugging or killing cult defectors and opponents. He is now on trial at Tokyo District Court for 20+ counts of murder.


My point of posting this is to illustrate that we should judge only when we have all of the facts that we can obtain. Focusing on only a few things and excluding the rest is a great way to be decieved.

 

[oncewaslost]

i was thinking b. honestly.

 

[supermagdalena]

Whoops...I just voted for Adolf Hitler Um, maybe this has a lesson?

 

[ThienAn]

I'd pick C, but only if you tell me why he doesn't do those things...

 

[Susan]

First of all this cult leader is an antichrist. By claiming that he was Christ, while he was at the same time committing every sin possible and through his claim denying the true Christ of the Bible.

Clear?
Another one. . .the cult kept its reputation (and lost it) through violence.

I'll post more later if you can more clearly elucidate what you wish to know. Or even if you don't.