Ted Cruz’s Dad: Pastors Must Teach Their Congregations to hold Government Accountable and stay true to the US Constitution [+video]

Recently, Pastor Rafael Cruz, the father of Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas), was a guest on The Joe Miller Show (KOAN 1080 AM, 95.1 FM) and shared his thoughts on the role that Christian pastors have and should be fulfilling. Specifically, Rev. Cruz maintained that pastors should teach their congregations to hold government accountable and stay true to the US Constitution.

Joe and Pastor Cruz also discussed current events including protection of traditional marriage and the nuclear family, the dangers of Common Core in our schools, and other developments across our nation. Pastor Cruz even offered a sneak peak and prayer request regarding the 2016 Presidential race. Listen to the interview here:

Rafael Cruz is a powerful example of the American Dream. Born in Cuba, Rafael lived and suffered under a cruel, oppressive dictator. He began fighting Batista’s regime as a teenager and was imprisoned and tortured. In 1957 Rafael was able to leave Cuba and arrived in Texas with nothing but the clothes on his back and one hundred dollars hidden on his person. He got a job as a dishwasher, worked his way through the University of Texas, while learning English. Later, he built a small business.

Rafael Cruz became active in conservative politics as a grassroots activist during the 1980 Presidential Campaign of Ronald Reagan. He is an ordained minister, sharing the Word of God in churches and pastors’ conferences throughout the United States. Pastor Cruz has a real gift of teaching and has been concentrating his talents on informing and educating pastors, church leaders, and the public about our civil duty to know, support, and defend US Constitutional rule of law.

When his son Ted was a child growing up in Houston, Rafael would tell him, “When we faced oppression in Cuba, I had a place to flee to. If we lose our freedom here, where do we go?” It was because of his father’s inspiration that Ted Cruz ran and has become a champion for freedom in the US Senate.

  • akprayingmom

    My dear friend, brother in CHRIST Rafael Cruz—A champion Patriot Warrior arming the LORD’s people for battle against the enemy. Thank you Rafael for your love and committent to our LORD first and us second. Praising GOD for the work He is doing through you and for our nation and the world. We are praying for divine protection, wisdom, direction, and provision for Ted Cruz in his run for the presidency in 2016.

    I am proud and honored to stand with Ted Cruz. I eagerly imagine Champion Patriot Warrior Ted Cruz as president and know that all things are possible and accomplished through CHRIST to those who are called for His purpose. I am proud to help the #CruzCrew #MakeDCListen in #ReignitingThePromiseOfAmerica

  • You cannot swear allegiance to the biblically seditious Constitution as
    the supreme law of the land and stay true to cherished biblical values.

    For evidence, see free online book “Bible Law vs. the United States
    Constitution: The Christian Perspective,” in which every Article and
    Amendment is examined by the Bible. Click on my name, then our website. Go to our Online books page and click on the top entry.

    Then find out how much you REALLY know about the Constitution as
    compared to the Bible. Take our 10-question Constitution Survey and
    receive a complimentary copy of the 85-page “Primer” of the 565-page “BL
    vs. USC.”

    • mikecnj

      what hyperbole U got, Ted.

      • Mike, thanks for responding.

        I would be pleased to entertain anything evidence you have that demonstrates what I’ve said constitutes hyperbole.

        • mikecnj

          Christ hasn’t alighted on the Mt. of Olives.
          Until then, we still live in this world.
          Our Constitution keeps the peace.
          I don’t need more evidence.
          I know you don’t.

          • Mike, you wrote my statement regarding the biblically seditious Constitution was hyperbole. It’s this accusation that I would like you to address.

          • mikecnj

            You’ve twice avoided addressing my original points.
            You, first, replied to my original post.
            The ball was in your court.
            Again, point one :
            Balance between God and ‘world’.
            Our Constitution provides both.
            Point two :
            Our Constitution has kept the peace for well over 200 years.
            Last chance.

          • I did respond, asking you to provide evidence of your claim, so we could begin a dialogue. That you merely claim what I said is hyperbole proves nothing. Let’s discuss your evidence for such a claim.

          • mikecnj

            No, Ted.
            You did not address my original points.
            This conversation is at an end.
            Have a nice day.

          • T. Edward Price

            mikecnj, try as I might, I am at a loss to understand any point you are trying to make. You claimed Pastor Weiland of hyperbole. I thought his comments were well stated, and not the the least bit hyperbolic.

          • mikecnj

            Please refer to my very first comment in this string to which the pastor “Reply”d.
            The word ‘hyperbole’ was used as a technique; a vain attempt to redirect the pastor to the original comment points at hand.
            ps: this is like trying to elaborate on the punch-line of a missed joke…quite boring.
            nighty-nite now…

    • RichJ

      Your 10 question survey is a stupid joke. The Church gave birth to America. It is dependent on Christians (the Church) to maintain it an keep it free. The framers intentionally and wisely did not allow Government to merge with Church – Think about the king of England and the Church of England. Institution of the Church must remain separate from institution of government. But Gov is not allowed to interfere with the practice of religion. The framers, almost all of them to a man warned us in various words that unless the Church maintained its vigilance and righteous activities that the Constitution would fail.
      People like you who don’t understand and call the Constitution seditious are part of the problem. You need to study the US history. I recommend Wall Builders.

      • Rich, thank you for responding.

        I’m very familiar with David Barton and Wallbuilders. In fact, I quote from Barton’s “Original Intent” in “BL vs. USC.”

        Hopefully, you’ll agree that there is only one standard by which everything (including the Constitution) must be ethically evaluated: Yahweh’s immutable morality as codified in His commandments, statutes, and judgments. When the Constitution is actually examined by this standard (instead of a bunch of dead politician’s cherry-picked quotations), it’s found to be anything but bibically compatible. In fact, there is hardly an Article or Amendment that’s not antithetical, if not seditious, to Yahweh’s sovereignty and morality.

        For evidence, see “BL vs. USC,” mentioned in my original post.

        “…3. Every problem America faces today can be traced back to the fact that the framers failed to expressly establish a government upon Yahweh’s immutable morality as codified in His commandments, statutes, and judgments. (Would infanticide and sodomy be tolerated, let alone financed by the government, if Yahweh’s perfect law and altogether righteous judgments were the law of the land? Would Islam be a looming threat to our peace and security if the First Amendment had been replaced with the First Commandment? Would Americans be in nearly as much debt if usury had been outlawed as a form of theft? Would crime be as rampant if “cruel and unusual punishment” had not been outlawed and criminals were instead punished with Yahweh’s altogether righteous judgments? Would we be on the fiscal cliff if we were taxed with a flat increase tax rather than a graduated income tax?)….”

        For more, see our Featured Blog Article “5 Reasons the Constitution is Our Cutting-Edge Issue.” Click on my name, then our website. This article will be found at the top of our home page.

        • RichJ

          I have read that (BL vs. USC) and is misses the point entirely, as does that “feast of ignorance” the 10 question test. Both are composed by someone who is profoundly ignorant or prejudiced.
          No, I do not agree with your assessment. The only theocracy I want is one that is run by Jesus for 1000 years from Jerusalem.
          The Constitution was clearly established to allow God through the Church to inspire people to maintain and protect their freedom of religion and to allow religious differences to be worked on a level playing field without any Government involvement.
          Just as the Church has become Laodicean in recent decades the era of Big Government regulations and morals have began to replace a population guided by the Holy Spirit.
          You knowledge and understanding of history is seriously lacking. In that you support Biblical morality you do well. But your ignorance of the US Constitution will tend to put you on the same side as Satan in matters of politics.

          • So. let me see if I have this correct. You DON’T believe that Yahweh’s morality is what determines whether or not something is ethically valid?

          • RichJ

            You wrote “Hopefully, you’ll agree that there is only one standard by which everything (including the Constitution) must be ethically evaluated: Yahweh’s immutable morality as codified in His commandments, statutes, and judgments…”
            “Yahweh’s immutable morality as codified….” is designed for individuals not Nations. Else you will have a king who is also the high priest rule over you. My response is because there is no one qualified I do not want a theocracy except for when Jesus rules for 1,000 years from Jerusalem. I’ll stick with a good ole Constitutional Republic designed to allow a moral and actively Christian population to rule themselves.
            Just as the test and the document did you too are mixing apples and oranges.

          • So let me see if I have this correct: Instead of governed by Yahweh’s perfect law and altogether righteous judgments (Psalm 19:7-11, including His biblical qualifications for civil leaders), you prefer to be governed by unregenerate men employing other finite men’s fickle laws.

          • RichJ

            Nope, you cannot even summarize what I wrote correctly.

          • Sorry, logic determines that IS the conclusion of what you wrote. There are only two choices for whose law governs: Yahweh’s or man’s. Since you reject Yahweh’s, you’ve by default chosen finite man’s fickle law.

          • RichJ

            Really? The US Constitution, as originally written does not interfere in anyone’s ability to live according to God’s laws all of them. Your logic is corrupt.

          • So, let’s see if I have this correct.You’ve now changed your position regarding government being based upon Yahweh’s law. That whatever government there is, it SHOULD BE established upon Yahweh’s triune moral law (His commandments, statutes, and judgments) and if not, it should be discarded, as heretical to Yahweh’s sovereignty.

  • mikecnj

    Our guaranteed freedom is :
    Freedom of Religion
    freedom TO worship.
    (think about it the next tome a fascist tries to conflate the two)

    • “…What about the First Amendment’s right to religion as provided in the Free Exercise Clause? Does man have a right to whatever religion and god he chooses? If so, how does this comport with the First Commandment?

      ‘I am Yahweh thy God…. Thou shalt have no other gods before me.’ (Exodus 20:2-3)

      ‘For thou shalt worship no other god: for Yahweh, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God.’ (Exodus 34:14)

      “Man may choose to follow a god other than Yahweh, but he does not have the right to do so. It logically follows: Should government then provide such a right? If it does, what’s this say about such a government?

      “If it’s your right to choose any god you prefer, you cannot be judged
      for doing so….

      “It’s not our sovereign right to choose our god but God’s sovereign right to choose us. Consequently, the alleged right to choose one’s god is itself a claim to divinity, tantamount to what was offered Adam and Eve in the Garden, “Ye shall be as gods!”

      “Christians need to rethink their love affair with First Amendment’s
      seditious “right” to religion. It was provided not by Yahweh, but by a
      group of Theistic Rationalists and Enlightenment Freemasons, whose
      ideological paradigm is polytheistic to its core….”

      For more, see blog article “Rights: Man’s Sacrilegious Claim to Divinity.” Click on my name, then our website. Go to our blog, see top article.

  • mikecnj

    it includes everyone — like it or not.
    THAT is the balance we have
    between God and world.
    You are avoiding the point, Ted.