This piece is a confirmation that the American idea really does work. Thanks for saying this, from someone whose religion is light years apart from Cal's.

This reads like a thinly veiled attempt to persuade real conservatives (not the Beltway variety like yourself) to vote for a white Obama in Mitt Romney.

Cal Thomas: "The Bible, the guidebook for evangelicals, teaches that there are two kingdoms." Where, I ask, does the Bible teach two kingdoms? And don't respond with "render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's;and unto God the things that are God's." That is a blatant misinterpretation of Matthew 22:21 and Mark 12:17. "In Mark 12:17, we find Yeshua’s oft-misused statement: 'Render to Caesar the that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.' Many people have interpreted this statement to mean that Yahweh and Caesar have separate jurisdictions, powers, and possessions. Is this true or is there another explanation for Yeshua’s statement?

"The term 'Caesar' is used today to represent government in general. However, at the time Yeshua made this statement, Julius Caesar was a real life and blood Roman dictator. Just what was it then that Yeshua was saying should be rendered to Caesar? Did the bodies, souls, and spirits of man belong to Caesar? Did reverence and obedience belong to Caesar? Did the people’s land and other possessions belong to Caesar? What about taxes? Romans 13:7 tells us to 'Render therefore to all their dues: tribute [tax, NASB] to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.' In Verse 6, Paul indicated that all of these things are due to God’s ministers or servants. Did Caesar qualify as one of the ministers of God described by Paul? No he did not, not according to Paul’s description of such ministers in Verses 3 and 4.

...the government described by Paul in Romans 13:1-7 is clearly a Christian government, based upon the moral laws of Yahweh. Therefore, the taxes Paul described as due to God’s ministers are biblical taxes. Are we then to believe that Jesus was suggesting that biblical taxes (the tithes) be paid to Caesar? The answer is 'yes, He was,' provided Caesar was one of His ministers, one of His representatives [as described in Romans 13:3-4].

"This brings us back to Jesus' answer to the Pharisees and Herodians, 'Render to Caesar the that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.' This statement begs answers to the following two questions: What belongs to Yahweh and what belongs to Caesar? The answer to the first question answers the second question. Yahweh reigns over and owns everything:

'The earth is YHWH’s, and the fulness thereof; the world, and they that dwell therein.' (Psalm 24:1)

"What does this leave for Caesar? Jesus' answer was merely another instance of Jesus trapping the Pharisees with their own words – in this instance, forcing them to choose their god, Yahweh or Caesar?" Excerpted from "Amendment 10: Counterfeited Powers" at http://www.missiontoisrael.org/biblelaw-constitutionalism-pt19.php.

Anyone (Mr. Thomas included) wanting a more contextually correct interpretation of Romans 13 than the usual heretical fare usually provided by most modern preachers, go to our contact button at missiontoisrael.org and let me know you would like a copy of "Christian Duty Under Corrupt Government: A Revolutionary Commentary on Romans 13:1-7" (see http://www.missiontoisrael.org/books-summary.php#anchor2)and I'll be pleased to send you a complimentary copy.

Wow Cal! I didn't think I would ever see it, but you got this completely wrong.

Of course Christians want their leaders to make Bible-based, Spirit-led, Christian decisions. How can an Atheist make a Spirit-led decision?! (spirit of anti-Christ maybe) What fellowship can darkness have with light?

Carter and Obama claim to be Christian, but obviously aren't. We know them by their fruits. They made/make un-Christian like decisions, not because they don't properly apply the convictions of their faith to their decisions, but because they are not truly Christians.

How could anyone vote for a Mormon? By virtue of their professed faith they are Dupes of the highest order. Mormonism is so easily and demonstrably false in it's doctrine and history, that only a fool would fall for it. Who wants a fool for President? We see how that's working right now!

I heartily agree with Cal.My wife are born again Christians, but that would not stop me from voting for a Mormon,if he had the same constitutional values that the founding fathers do.I would not however; vote for Romney as he clearly is not a true conservative when it comes to the constitution.Conversly, I would not want Mike Huckaby as the Republican candidate based solely on the fact that I believe he is a true Christian.I feel that someone like him would not be tough enough.There is a lot more than just a person`s religious beliefs that are important to the office of POTUS.The one religious affiliation that would rule someone out for me, is anyone of the Muslim belief.A Muslim is a Muslim first,last,and always;period.

Richard Ryan

Lamar,Missouri - Birthplace of Harry S Truman

Four words: It's the debt, stupid.

There may well be a moral dimension to that.

Cal has made a very succinct comment, that people who profess faith, IF they truly HAVE that faith, should reflect same in their entire character and life. They should LIVE it, not just CLAIM it...that is the mark of a truly faith-borne being.

As for Mr. Thomas stating that there are two kingdoms...he is Biblically accurate, for the Scriptures tell us clearly that the earth was "given over to Satan (sin)" for a span of time until Christ's return.

In her book "The Hiding Place", Corrie TenBoom relates a time when her family were hiding with other Christians, hiding from the Nazis, and one of "their own" (or so it seemed to everyone) turned them in. Corrie ran to her father and exclaimed, "But Papa, he SAID he is a Christian!!" Her father replied, "Corrie my love, you can put a mouse into a cookie jar but that will not make him a cookie."

In other words, as the Bible says, "Ye shall know them by their fruits." Jesus Christ Himself declared that MANY will come saying, "Lord, Lord" and He will say to them, "Depart from Me; I never knew you."

All this to say, it really doesn't matter what comes out of a man or woman's mouth if their lives do not reflect it being lived out daily in every portion of their daily lifetimes.

So I can understand Cal Thomas saying he'd vote for an atheist who wants to protect and lead America on her founding and original Constitutional principles...over someone who hollers that they're full of faith, then misleads, corrupts, and lies to us all. For, if that atheist does what Cal stated, whether he has any faith or not, he WILL be leading us in a Godly direction...after all, isn't it HIS principles that formed the basis for all of OUR COUNTRY's???

Cal I am right there with you, have always been. Jesus himself recognized render unto Ceaser what is Ceasers, render unto God what is Gods, primative tribes have a chief and shaman, the original separation of church and state. Religon belongs in ones personal and private life, in ones church or synagog and not in ones politics. The most dangerous and the most evil phenomenon on earth is the religio-political force of Islam.

Religon is other worldly, politics is this worldly, the former is the individuals inner developement, the latter our collective means of living together. I would vote for a wiccan if the wiccan had conservative political values.

In fact the only religon I would never vote for in politics is Islam, which happens to be the only religon that forces itself onto politics. I want the liberty of Tom Jefferson and George Washington in my collective communal life, not the tyranny of Islam.

Even though it many times seems religon to be the purview of conservatives while atheism seems the purveiw of liberals, the reality is maturity is the purveiw of conservatives, while immaturity is the purveiw of liberals. Further, and in reality, there are religous and nonreligous in both the conservative and liberal camps.

I realize many Americans have not puzzeled this out. For me I would simply paraphrase Jesus himself, render unto the secular that which is secular, and unto religon that which is is religons.

PS, Obama is a false Christian and a closet Islamic. The Jerimiah Wright Church he attended and was part of preached hate and unforgiveness, while the message of Jesus was love and forgiveness. Forgiveness was the heart of the message of Jesus Christ. Further, part of Baracs childhood breeding was his indoctrination into Islam by step daddy Soetorro,from Baracs 6 through 10 years. His policies as President are Islam friendly and Isreali unfriendly. I believe more in what I see one do, than I believe in what I hear one say. Thank you.

PDK, please read my post above for an alternative interpretation to the "render to Caesar" passage. Your position on this passage and the two-kingdom theology of others is spiritual dualism.

I appreciate Cal Thomas' comments on this issue. The Lord Jesus' comment on "render unto Ceasar the things which are Ceasar's and unto God the things which are God's" must be understood in the context of what he used to show the realm of responsibility of each. He asked for a coin and then inquired whose image was on it. Governments are established by God to bring some order to human relationships. This was established in Genesis Nine when Noah and his sons were given the responsibility to kill wanton killers. The Imperial Roman Empire was established by force and the Roman Legions maintained a semblance of peace in the area controlled by them. Human government is a means by which God rewards those who do well and punishes evildoers. That men abuse the lawful purposes of government is sadly evident in earth's history. But to deny our responsibility to cooperate with any government as long as we are not required to violate God's overarching Laws is to wrest the Scripture out of it's context. Strength is given to protect and provide for the weak and the helpless, not to oppress. Authorities are God's ministers and will give account for the use and or abuse of that confered power. As a Christian who seeks to be one not in name only, I pay taxes to those who collect them, what they do with them after I give them is their responsibility.