Ron Paul’s death-penalty-for-gays pastor interviews Monumental co-producer

Remember Philip Kayser? He is the Omaha, NE pastor that endorsed Ron Paul in the Iowa GOP primary who teaches that U.S. civil law should reflect the Old Testament book of Leviticus. In December, 2011, I wrote about his views on the death penalty for adulterers, disobedient children, gays, etc., which led to at least two national stories about Kayser’s endorsement. Very soon after those stories appeared, Kayser’s endorsement was pulled from Ron Paul’s website.

In book on the death penalty, Kayser wrote:

Difficulty in implementing Biblical law does not make non-Biblical penology just. But even on Bahnsen’s strictest interpretation of the death penalties, the results would not be as dire as people often predict. For example, while many homosexuals would be executed on Bahnsen’s interpretation, it would not be nearly as many as critics try to imply, because homosexuals would likely keep silent about their lifestyle…

Other Levitical sins (adultery, idolatry, disobedient children, etc.) are addressed in his book, which I examined briefly here.

Rev. Kayser here interviews Marshall Foster, now famous as a guest and co-producer of Kirk Cameron’s movie Monumental, about the biblical foundations of liberty, something that sounds a lot like Cameron’s movie. Cameron is offering material from Foster for sale on the Monumental website.

Marshall Foster Interview from Biblical Blueprints on Vimeo.

Biblical Blueprints is the ministry of Rev. Kayser. In 2011, Marshall Foster was the special guest and keynote speaker of the Providential History Festival, held yearly in Nebraska. The Providential History Festival is underwritten by Kayser’s Dominion Covenant Church and Christian reconstruction groups like the Chalcedon Foundation.

Mr. Foster may not agree with Rev. Kayser on the death penalty (I have seen nothing on that) but he is enough in sync that he appears to support Kayser’s approach to history. Kirk Cameron said at the end of his movie that he wants monumental to be a movement. With Mr. Foster involved, I think it is fair to ask what the movement is about.

Print Friendly

  • http://ProgressiveOasis.com Progressive Oasis

    Figures. I am still sponsoring a demonstration ever Sunday outside the UNO Thompson Alumni Center.

  • Pingback: Ron Paul touted endorsement of Omaha pastor who defends death penalty for gays, delinquent children

  • http://ProgressiveOasis.com Progressive Oasis

    I also have a petition to get get them out of the UNO Thompson Alumni Center, please sigh and share. http://www.change.org/petitions/no-more-dominion-covenant-church-at-uno-thompson-alumni-center

  • Pingback: Kirk Cameron’s Monumental Kill Gays Question | O-blog-dee-o-blog-da

  • Lynn David

    http://www.worldhistoryinstitute.com/about/dr-marshall-foster/

    Dr. Marshall Foster is the president of the World History Institute, which is dedicated to uncovering the unchanging truths and lessons of history that have liberated nations around the globe. For three decades, Marshall has taught these truths, along with their Judeo-Christian roots, through many venues from best-selling books and dynamic seminars to documentaries, radio programs, and historic tours.

    He oversees the education of more than 10,000 students and families each year on historic training tours. Marshall Foster holds Bachelor of Science in Economics and Doctorate of Divinity degrees. He is the co-host of a new weekly radio show on the gold coast of Florida, The Story of Liberty, which is exploding in popularity.

    This is the sole entry under the tag history in the website’s blog:

    http://www.worldhistoryinstitute.com/2010/11/18/how-approach-your-role-history/

  • steven kasiko

    No one has aright to decide for some one his life style or sexual choice people should be taught to respect other peoples choice. We want equal human rights for all

  • Richard Willmer

    Kayser’s comment about ‘homosexuals keeping quiet’ is a telling one, and perhaps shows what he really wants: restrictions on freedom of expression, with those restrictions being broken on ‘pain of death’. When people like me accuse the likes of Kayser of embracing ‘Nazi’ concepts, we are absolutely right to do so.

    Jurisprudentially, it’s also very odd: if he believes that consensual same-sex relations are a (capital) crime, then whether they are ‘kept secret’ is irrelevant. After all, if someone murders a person, that is murder – whether done ‘discreetly’ or not.

    As well as being thoroughly nasty, these people have absolutely no logic. No real surprises there perhaps …

  • Richard Willmer

    On the matter of what constitutes ‘biblical law’, there is much that can be said …

    For starters: the tiny ‘snippet’ of the Bible Kayser uses to justify to state-sponsored murder of gay people was probably written in about 560 B.C. (it comes in the second, newer, part of the Book of Leviticus, the purpose of which was to try to maintain, using some quite draconian ideas, Jewish cultural identity during the exile in Babylon). Christians should, when understanding the Bible, embrace the ‘bigger picture’, the paradigm for which is set out in the events we Catholic (and many other) Christians will be celebrating over the next week-and-a-half.

  • Patrocles

    “Ron Paul’s death-penalty-for-gays-pastor interveiws Monumental co-producer”

    That’s what people call “guilt by contact”, isn’t it? Paul – Kayser – Foster – Cameron. Strangely, a sin that Jesus did NOT mention in the sermon on the mount!

  • Richard Willmer

    The point is made in Warren’s final paragraph:

    ” Mr. Foster may not agree with Rev. Kayser on the death penalty (I have seen nothing on that) but he is enough in sync that he appears to support Kayser’s approach to history. Kirk Cameron said at the end of his movie that he wants monumental to be a movement. With Mr. Foster involved, I think it is fair to ask what the movement is about. ”

    It is arguably a very fair point, especially given the underwriting of the Providential Christian Festival by reconstructionist groups, including Kayser’s own ‘church’.

  • ken

    I think it is a mis-representation to refer to him as the “death-penalty-for-gays” pastor. He is a whack-job who supports the death penalty for a lot more than just gays.

  • Richard Willmer

    This blog has as one of its focuses the issue of public policy towards sexual minorities. While it appears to be the case that Kayser is somewhat ‘trigger happy’ over a range of issues, I wouldn’t agree that calling him a ‘death-penalty-for-gays’ pastor is misrepresentation within the paradigm of this blog. (Mind you, I might take issue with calling him a ‘pastor’ – ‘paster’ might be more appropriate!)

  • Richard Willmer

    (An aside: in the polls, Mitt Romney currently runs President Obama closest. Next comes Ron Paul. While I’m sure that I could find many things on which people like myself would not see ‘eye-to-eye’ with Rep. Paul, I, and others in the ‘chattering classes’ over here, do recognize that he has a political philosophy that is arguably consistent with the highly decentralized US political system. That, despite his relative lack of funds, he is doing comparatively so well in the polls suggests to me a measure of ‘political intelligence’ on the part of the US electorate that should not go unnoticed. Of course, I also ‘warm’ to his scepticism about the use of military might to attempt to solve complex diplomatic problems, as well as his opposition to the [Federal] death penalty.)

  • Patrocles

    From what I’ve learned here, I was astonished to find out that Jefferson was not a “deist” in the strict sense: He didn’t believe, as most European deists, that God had retreated after the creation and left the field for humans.

    He had obviously problems with the story of Jesus, but he had not as much problems with the Old-testament-concept of God. As far as I see, he believed in fact in “God’s purposes and plans in historical events”.

    And that’s just the central idea of Mr. Foster’s “Providential History Festival”. As long as Mr. Foster doesn’t equalize God’s dominion with a clerical dominion of the one or other “sect” – and I don’t see that – Jefferson might have supported the festival.

    (N.B.: It’s not my religion. I have much more trust in an unworldly Jesus and much less trust in a world-ruling God than Jefferson.)

    • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/warrenthrockmorton Warren

      Pat – No Jefferson had plenty of problems with the Old Testament. He thought Jesus corrected the deism of the Jews, he thought the Jewish religion was deficient and cruel at times.

      Here is the other thing even historians fail to consider at times, Jefferson was a human with human inconsistencies. His religious views were informed by the Enlightenment and to many today left him holding some views which seem quite inconsistent.

  • Michael Payne

    So, people should be able to what they want as long as it is their choice? Naked in WALMART? Orgie in the checkout line? (voluntary of course, don’t want to force others). Marriage between 60 year old and 6 year old? Six men, three women, a cow, dog, and a whale marry and want legal representation. History is FILLED with what men are capable of doing. However, if there is no God, then Hitler was fitter than the people he killed, and did nothing wrong. Using mouthwash and killing millions of germs and using gas chambers and killing millions of people are no different without objective truth. Democracy, will only result in a Tyranny of the Majority (thus the name mobocracy) and the minority will be persecuted. The reality is that every law is an imposition of morality on other people. The reason you are OK with many laws on the books, is that they match your faith. America’s legal system was built on “common law” principles taken right out of Exodus 20 and the rest of the old testament. Why is incest wrong? The OT. If you don’t cite that, you have nothing but what seems right to you. Your faith determines your facts, that is why sodomy was illegal for over 300 years in this nation. Religion is culture externalized, so when you observe a culture, you see the beliefs manifest in the economics, education, architecture, laws, music, even attire. A culture that is perverse will show it. As a result, every religion must be hostile to every other religion or it commits suicide. If humanism gains the ascendency, and becomes more consistent, it will spell great persecution of Christians. The COEXIST symbol people put on their bumpers is hillirious, as what is being aserted is: You folks that call yourselfs religious, put aside your beliefs and take on the mantle of humanism. While I believe Islam is a idolotrous false religion, If you read some of their more inteligent writers, their problem with he west is the forcing of our humanistic worldview on their culture, by the sword, I might add. “You will be a democracy!!! for your own good”. Remember, early Christians were not persecuted for believing in Jesus, they were persecuted for being atheists. Crazy people that would not bow to Caesar. Even when the Romans could not raise a sufficient army because the Christians would not join it, they were persecuted for the fruit of their faith, not joining Caesar. If Christians would have bowed down to the assertion that Caesar had divine right of rule, then all would have been well, and Christians would have been among the most faithful of Caesars subjects. The ascendency of Christianity will spell persecution for perverts and the ascendency of paganism in its many forms, will spell persecution of Christians… at least those that keep the faith. For those that keep the title, but acquiesce the faith, all will be well with Caesar. Now, if you keep the veneer of Christianity, and are willing to burn incense to Caesar, no problemo, as you have taken on the religion of the pagans, while keeping the name Christian. That is no Christianity, if the pagans define your worldview, and not the Word of God. We will have a law order, as anarchy is only transitional, and usually leads to statism. The question is which law order? God is immutable

  • Richard Willmer

    @ Michael Payne

    I think I understand what you are saying … I think!

    ‘Law order’ (of some kind) is both necessary for society to function, and, as you suggest, inevitable. Yet salvation (of either individuals or humanity as a whole) does not come through ‘the Law’, so any attempt on our part to impose some (allegedly) ‘Christian version’ of ‘law order’ is ‘counter-salvific’, as it represents a classic case of ‘barking up the wrong tree’.

    Specifically on the matter of what you term ‘sodomy’ (and it is a term I would challenge in this context, since the story of Sodom and Gomorrah is not, as I see it, about consensual same-sex activity per se, still less about same-sex partnerships): the current legal position of non-criminalization / legalization of consensual same-sex relations in many ‘western’ (and other) societies is the product of careful consideration. For example, here in the UK, (partial) decriminalization in 1967, and subsequent legalization measures in 1999 and 2004, were introduced in order to promote fairness towards those who, for whatever reason, are gay. They were not ‘anything goes’ measures, so suggesting that they have anything to do ‘orgies at the checkout’ or six-year-olds being forced to marry 60-year-olds is rather … well, with the greatest respect, stupid.

    (It may interest people to know that, in both 1999 and 2004, alongside the measures to legalize fully same-sex relations between consenting adults, there were measures that clarified and ‘tightened’ the laws on sexual/physical abuse of both children and animals – establishing firmly in law the fundamental principle of ‘informed consent’.)

  • Richard Willmer

    On the rather comical notion of ‘orgies at the checkout’: this can be covered perfectly satisfactorily under public order legislation! No need at all to bash gays in order to prevent such curious goings-on!!! :-)

  • ken

    Michael Payne says:

    April 24, 2012 at 11:00 pm

    Your “logic” is a bit frayed. The idea that if one doesn’t believe in a god that means he must Hitler was right is nonsense. Further, it has been my experience that people talking about “The Truth” are never objective.

    If US (or UK) laws are based on the OldTestament , why isn’t it okay for parents to kill their children if they talk back? Why are women not only allowed to vote, but actually hold leadership positions? Those aren’t allowed by the christian bible.

  • Richard Willmer

    @ ken

    I hear you …

    Our understanding of ‘the Truth’ is always relative and proximate … and it was so for the writers of the O.T..

    (If we ‘knew it all’, God would be redundant!)