Four Dumb Reasons for Not Voting for Ted Cruz (Part 1)

The Republican Party now has the first opportunity it has had since Ronald Reagan, of nominating a true conservative as its Presidential candidate. Should Senator Ted Cruz win the Republican nomination, Americans, in the general election, will have an actual choice between a limited government, constitutional conservative in Ted Cruz and a pro-big government liberal in Hillary Clinton, the presumptive Democratic Party nominee. Those under the age of 40 have never even had the choice to vote for an actual conservative as President of the United States. The reason being is that, since the Reagan years, the Republican Party has typically chosen democrat-lite candidates as its nominee. Should this present opportunity pass, one wonders if the opportunity to nominate an actual conservative for President will ever present itself again.1


Yet, despite this unprecedented opportunity before them, the Republican Party is on the precipice of throwing it all away by instead opting to embrace the vision of Donald Trump, a lifelong Democrat and someone who only began speaking the conservative lingo around 2011, coincidentally when he began to become public about his presidential aspirations.2 Should Cruz become the nominee, most of the major polling data indicates that Cruz will trounce Hillary in the general election.3 Both establishment Republicans and Democrats well understand this. That is why the name of their game now is to preempt a Cruz Presidency by denying Cruz the Republican nomination at any cost.


This is sad enough. However, what is even sadder to observe is how some “conservatives” have become “useful idiots” for the left by disseminating on the internet and social media bizarre theories about Cruz in an attempt to dissuade their fellow conservatives from voting for him. The term “useful idiots” was originally used by Marxists in reference to those who could be used to propagate the ideology of Marxism and yet would be dispensed with at later, opportune time after they had served their purpose in helping start the Marxist revolution. When I first began to be exposed to some of these strange notions, I initially thought that they were so far afield that it would be inappropriate to even dignify them by commenting upon them. However, recently I have received several inquiries asking me if these theories are accurate. Obviously then, they are gaining traction in the minds of many. Four such theories come to mind. What I hope to briefly demonstrate in this mini-series is that these theories are built on the flimsiest of evidence and thus constitute insufficient grounds in the minds of any rational thinker for rejecting the Presidential candidacy of Ted Cruz. If people end up not voting for Cruz, then it should be on the basis of substance rather than based upon these silly theories.


Heretic Kenneth Copeland Endorsed Cruz

Kenneth Copeland

Kenneth Copeland. Photo Source: Wikipedia

The first theory is that the Cruz candidacy is somehow suspect since he has received the endorsement and support of unorthodox Christian teachers, such as Kenneth Copeland.4 Here is my response. In politics, the name of the game is to get as many people to vote for you as possible. If you do not, then you cannot win and thus you have no opportunity to implement your policies. This is why candidates seek the endorsement of all Americans regardless of where they fall on the theological spectrum. This is also why Donald Trump can also be seen on video both receiving the support and prayers of various unorthodox teachers such as Paula White and even Kenneth Copeland.5


Obviously, all candidates must reach out to all Americans, regardless of their theological persuasion, if they are to have any hope of winning any election. For example, as far as my personal theology is concerned, I am a young earth, pretribulational, premillennial, dispensational, and free grace in my theological perspective. According to the aforementioned criticism of Cruz, I could only garner votes from my own theological camp were I ever to run for public office. If that is the restriction placed upon me, then I probably could not get myself elected even to the office of dog catcher. This is really a silly criticism when you actually take a few moments to think about it.


The issue is not has Copeland endorsed Cruz but rather whether Cruz has become a disciple of the errant theology of Copeland. To my mind Barack Obama should have been disqualified from becoming President of the United States since he was not just endorsed by Liberation Theologian, the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, but Obama was also Wright’s personal disciple. Let’s not forget that Obama was a member of Wright’s church for two decades before he became President. However, we see no similar relationship between Copeland and Ted Cruz. Although Cruz received an endorsement from Copeland, there is no evidence of a spiritual discipling and mentoring relationship between Kenneth Copeland and Ted Cruz.


Cruz’ Father is a Dominionist
Rafael Cruz-Photo by Michael Vadon

Pastor Rafael Cruz. Image by Michael Vandon; Source: Wikipedia

The second theory is that a Cruz candidacy should be rejected on the grounds that Ted Cruz’ father, Pastor Rafael Cruz, is an adherent of Dominion Theology, which is the idea that the church should take over the world and politically usher in the kingdom of God now while the King, Jesus Christ, is absent. According to this view, at some later point, Christ the King will then return and find the world in apple pie order thanks to the Dominionist activities of His church, the Bride of Christ.6 At this juncture Cruz’ critics typically point to a YouTube clip of the elder Cruz, a Pentecostal preacher, proclaiming that the church should have an influence upon the areas of the arts, entertainment, media, sports, education, business, and government.7 Cruz’ critics maintain that such rhetoric is code speak for “Seven Mountains Theology” common in Dominion Theology circles.


I am somewhat torn on whether the elder Cruz really is a Dominion Theologian since he seems to say different things depending upon what kind of evangelical audience he is preaching to. On the one hand, merely promoting the need for Christians to be “salt and light” in a fallen world by entering areas typically dominated by unbelievers does not in and of itself make someone an advocate of Dominion Theology. I have been preaching the need for Christian cultural engagement for years and I am no Dominion Theologian. I am the opposite. I am a premillennialist who anticipates the presence of the kingdom on the earth only through the personal return of the King, Jesus Christ. In the interim, we as believers merely occupy until He comes (Luke 19:13; KJV). The late Francis Schaeffer also taught the same truths as Rafael Cruz teaches regarding the need to have a Christian influence in all areas of our fallen world. Schaeffer’s theology could hardly be categorized as Dominionist. Not long ago, I even personally heard Rafael Cruz speak to a gathering of men at West Houston Bible Church.8 Although Rafael did address the need for Christians to become engaged in society, I detected no Dominion Theology in his presentation. However, on the other hand, Raphael Cruz definitely does sound like a Dominion Theologian when he preaches to an audience that leans more in the direction of Pentecostalism and Prosperity Gospel.9


I think I am somewhat qualified to discuss Dominion Theology. Not only have I presented two academic papers on the subject to my peers at the Pre-Tribulational Research Study Group,10 but I have also recently completed a 43 part article series on the dangers of kingdom now theology.11 Even if Raphael Cruz is a Dominionist, I do not believe that this should play much of a factor in one’s decision to vote against Ted Cruz. From what I can tell, Dominion Theology seems to have a negligible, if any, negative influence on Ted Cruz. The reason I say this is because Dominionists, at least of the Reconstructionist type, tend to be very anti-Israel in their political persuasion and philosophy. They are also typically adherents to Replacement Theology, which is the idea that the church has permanently taken over Israel’s place in the outworking of God’s program and that all of Israel’s promises have been transferred to the church. Therefore, Dominionists attach no spiritual or prophetic significance to the modern state of Israel. Some Dominionists are even outright hostile to Israel’s mere presence in the Middle East. In fact, Thomas Ice reports that Dominionist “Gary North has boasted that he has a book already in his computer for when ‘Israel gets pushed into the sea, or converted to Christ.'”12


Does such a doctrine sound like that which guides Ted Cruz’ political philosophy? Hardly! It was Ted Cruz who walked off of the stage while speaking at a Christian event when he discerned that the audience was not supportive of and even hostile to the state of Israel.13 It was also Ted Cruz who recently “called on the United States to withdraw its membership from the United Nations Human Rights Commission over its vote…to condemn Israel for the 2014 conflict with Palestinians. The commission voted 41-1 on the resolution…with five abstentions, to condemn Israel for targeting civilians.”14 These hardly sound like the political activities of someone who has drunken deeply from the well of Dominion Theology.


Incidentally, from my perspective, Donald Trump’s position on Israel is far more troubling to consider given his recent concession that he will approach the Middle East conflict between Israel and the “Palestinians” from a position of neutrality rather than from a pro-Israel point of view.15 In addition, it should also be noted that Trump has been slow to condemn some of his supporters who are widely known to have white supremacist and anti-Jewish ties. In a recent blog article, Joel Rosenberg observes:

Last month, David Duke, a white supremacist who was once Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan, announced he was supporting Trump, and urged his followers to do all they could to help Trump get elected. “Voting against Donald Trump at this point is really treason to your heritage,” Duke said on the David Duke Radio Program Wednesday. “I do support his candidacy, and I support voting for him as a strategic action. I hope he does everything we hope he will do.”

Trump was asked three times on CNN to “unequivocally condemn David Duke and say that you don’t want his vote or that of other white supremacists?” and three times he refused to do so…

Last week, 62% of the messages Trump re-Tweeted were from white supremacists. “Is Trump riling up the white nationalists by lending them his 5-million-follower megaphone whenever they praise him?” asked one reporter. “Or are racists, who love Trump for his anti-immigration polemics, just more likely than others to send [him]…the kind of praise he likes to retweet?”16

Ted Cruz - Image by Gage Skidmore

Ted Cruz – Image by Gage Skidmore

All of this to say, that if the voters want to reject Cruz, and also perhaps our last chance of ever electing a constitutional conservative to the Presidency, then let it be for substantive reasons. Please do not reject him based upon specious theories ultimately emanating from the left and mindlessly regurgitated by “useful idiots” on the right. Senator Ted Cruz deserves careful consideration by all American voters in this important Presidential election cycle since the man is not unorthodox despite Kenneth Copeland’s personal endorsement of his candidacy and he does not seem to be heavily influenced by Dominionism to the point where this aberrant theology has negatively influenced his foreign policy position regarding Israel. In our next installment, we will explore yet another argument used against Cruz. That is, the alleged connection between Ted Cruz’ wife Heidi to Goldman Sachs, the Council on Foreign Relations, and the North American Union.


(To Be Continued…)



  1. []
  2. []
  3. []
  4. []
  5. []
  6. For an analysis of Dominion Theology, see H. Wayne House and Thomas Ice, Dominion Theology: Blessing or Curse? (Portland, OR: Multnomah, 1988). []
  7. []
  8. []
  9. []
  10.; []
  11. []
  12. Personal letter from Gary North to Peter Lalonde, April 30, 1987 on file; cited in Thomas Ice, “Answering Those Who Oppose Israel,” online:, accessed 21 October 2015, 1. []
  13. []
  14. []
  15. []
  16. See Rosenberg’s article for supporting links. []


  1. You know, a lot of us under 50 (I’m 42) haven’t been able to vote for an actual conservative for POTUS because my first election was 1992 and that was the RINO vs the Dem vs whatever Perot actually was. I was 10 when Reagan was re-elected in 1984….

    Anyway, this election sure is separating the wheat from the chaff and showing who are, I would assume, actual Bible believing Christians, and who are the ones who have the scales over their eyes and falling for the mass delusion that is Trump, Clinton, and Sanders.

  2. Anonymous says:

    As a born-again, pre-Trib, Christian, and a devoted Ted Cruz supporter, I found this article to be very helpful! It really disturbs me, that Trump, and most of his fans, are just that: “Fans”, and are just tagging-along on the Trump-train, because it is suddenly fashionable. These are the very ones, claiming to be Republicans (low-info), that say “If Trump isn’t nominated, they will not vote at all”. We need every true patriot, who understands the dire straits we face, if a Democrat is elected POTUS! Keep up the good work and spread this message loud and clear!

  3. Great article, Andy. I think you have given those who accuse Cruz of being a Dominionist a well-reasoned answer.


  1. […] […]

Leave a reply and please keep it professional:)