• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

how does devout christians justify voting Democrat?

Caretaker

Newbie
Jun 7, 2013
541
113
✟25,632.00
Faith
Anabaptist
Marital Status
Married
I guess that's not what I think of when I think of a theocracy. What your describing sounds like more of an anarchist type of position. Not all libertarians are anarchists, and I am certainly not an anarchist. I believe that government does have an important role to serve in providing basic infrastructure and in protecting life, liberty, and property. A situation in which there is not government, I believe, would inevitably become a power struggle, which would result in the powerful oppressing the weak, and would eventually become tyrannical. In other words, we would have exactly the opposite of the problem that Randians are concerned about (a government which robs from the powerful to give to the less powerful). As much as it would be nice to see God's laws prevailing without a human government, I think that that is unreasonable until God restores all things. Until then, we have to settle for minimal human government, which provides basic infrastructure, sets basic ground rules for how we treat each other, and enforces laws necessary to ensure that we are not depriving one another of life, liberty, and the enjoyment of our property. In the meantime, citizens (Christian citizens, anyway) have a responsibility (not one to be enforced by government) to live compassionately, civilly, and generously. This is what separates my view of libertarianism from the Randians.

Hmmm ..... so, basically, you're agreeing with the ancient Israelites who were not happy with judges, and wanted to be like the people of other nations? And God warned them of the consequences to which they were rushing, and they did not take heed.

Reminds me of the Italian poem, "The People"

"The people" is a beast of muddy brain
That knows not its own force, and therefore stands
Loaded with wood and stone; the powerless hands
Of a mere child guide it with bit and rein;

One kick would be enough to break the chain;
But the beast fears, and what the child demands,
It does; nor its own terror understands,
Confused and stupefied by bugbears vain.

Most wonderful! with its own hands it ties
And gags itself-gives itself death and war
For pence doled out by kings from its own store.

Its own are all things between earth and heaven;
But this it knows not; and if one arise
To tell this truth, it kills him unforgiven.

by Tomasso Campanella, as translated from the Italian poem,
"The People," by John Addington Symonds

In short, following God is not anarchy.
 
Upvote 0

Kersh

Well-Known Member
Jan 23, 2016
804
386
48
Michigan
✟39,645.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Hmmm ..... so, basically, you're agreeing with the ancient Israelites who were not happy with judges, and wanted to be like the people of other nations? And God warned them of the consequences to which they were rushing, and they did not take heed.

Reminds me of the Italian poem, "The People"

"The people" is a beast of muddy brain
That knows not its own force, and therefore stands
Loaded with wood and stone; the powerless hands
Of a mere child guide it with bit and rein;

One kick would be enough to break the chain;
But the beast fears, and what the child demands,
It does; nor its own terror understands,
Confused and stupefied by bugbears vain.

Most wonderful! with its own hands it ties
And gags itself-gives itself death and war
For pence doled out by kings from its own store.

Its own are all things between earth and heaven;
But this it knows not; and if one arise
To tell this truth, it kills him unforgiven.

by Tomasso Campanella, as translated from the Italian poem,
"The People," by John Addington Symonds

In short, following God is not anarchy.

Israel, during the time of the judges was a very different context than the US in 2016. Israel had a specific role, that is, to provide the context from which the savior would come. We're no longer awaiting a savior, because he's already come. Instead, we are wheat among tares, awaiting His return. Israel was expected to be a nation devoted to God. We are citizens of heaven on mission in a foreign nation. We cannot expect that nation to live as one dedicated to God, because it is not. So, if we had no government at all, we would not be a nation with God as our only King. We would be living in anarchy. But, I do believe that liberty is the context in which we, as missionaries are best able to accomplish our task; liberty for sinners to sin and for believers to pursue righteousness.
 
Upvote 0

RDKirk

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner
Site Supporter
Mar 3, 2013
42,059
22,671
US
✟1,723,562.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
"Where is the scripture for that?" -- RDKirk

"Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you." -- Matthew 28:18-20a

Do you think that's talking about political entities rather than people?
 
Upvote 0

Caretaker

Newbie
Jun 7, 2013
541
113
✟25,632.00
Faith
Anabaptist
Marital Status
Married
Israel, during the time of the judges was a very different context than the US in 2016. Israel had a specific role, that is, to provide the context from which the savior would come. We're no longer awaiting a savior, because he's already come. Instead, we are wheat among tares, awaiting His return. Israel was expected to be a nation devoted to God. We are citizens of heaven on mission in a foreign nation. We cannot expect that nation to live as one dedicated to God, because it is not. So, if we had no government at all, we would not be a nation with God as our only King. We would be living in anarchy. But, I do believe that liberty is the context in which we, as missionaries are best able to accomplish our task; liberty for sinners to sin and for believers to pursue righteousness.

The question here is not expecting the US to "live as one dedicated to God", but instead whether or not WE are willing and able to live as a people dedicated to God. I submit to you that some plain sects, for example the Amish, are a virtual nation within a nation, and that they govern themselves under God much as the ancient Israelites did under the judges.

God tells us to come out and be separate. This the Amish have done. On the flip side, I see very little other than the example they set (which I in no way want to minimize) in way of complying with he "Great Commission" in Matthew 28.
 
Upvote 0

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
39,445
28,896
Pacific Northwest
✟809,800.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
Since dems are ok with several things that are against bible

How does a devout Christian justify voting Republican? Since Repubs are okay with several things that are against the Bible.

-CryptoLutheran
 
  • Like
Reactions: RedPonyDriver
Upvote 0

greenguzzi

Post-Evangelical, Social Anarchist, One of The Way
Aug 25, 2015
1,147
733
Sydney Australia
✟41,363.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Politics
AU-Greens
However, this is for the Body of Christ. The question is really this: What evidence is there that the Body of Christ ever had mission to fix the Roman Empire at all? Where is scripture for that? Did Jesus ever say, "Go out and fix world?" Paul and Peter had a lot to say about how Christians are to operate within the Roman Empire. When did either of them say we had a mission to fix it?

What if we were Christians in China? Would our mission be to make disciples, or would it be to fix the Chinese government? Currently Christians in China are making disciples at the rate of 1,000 a week, but they're not doing anything to change the government...are they disobeying Christ? Christians in North Korea have increased their numbers from 5,000 in 1995 to 50,000 today, but they haven't changed the government--have they disobeyed Christ? Have they done better or worse than Christians in America?
You are putting words in my mouth, and you seem to be confusing voting with revolution. I'm not saying here that we should "fix" the government to make it resemble the Body of Christ. I'm just saying that when we vote we need to consider the morality of all the policies of each party. Each party's policies on poverty are just as important (or possible more important) than the policies on same sex marriage (for example).

Or maybe you are saying that as Christians we should not involve ourselves in civic duty at all? Don't vote, don't serve in public office etc.? If you are saying that, then we have a different discussion to have. But if you are not saying that, then I say we need to vote with the Christian moral mandate against poverty in mind. We don't leave our Christianity behind when we enter the voting booth.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

greenguzzi

Post-Evangelical, Social Anarchist, One of The Way
Aug 25, 2015
1,147
733
Sydney Australia
✟41,363.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Politics
AU-Greens
As for the words of Jesus, did He not say this in Matthew 19:5?:

And he said, 'This explains why a man leaves his father and mother and is joined to his wife, and the two are united into one.

He didn't say same-sex partner or another man, He specifically lists man and woman together.
It's interesting to note how many times this verse is quoted to oppose same sex marriage, when it's actually about divorce. Yet we never hear the same vitriol against Christian divorce as we do against homosexuality. Now, I'm not saying that it definitely can't be applied to same sex marriage, that is debatable. However there is no doubt at all that it is about divorce, and yet the divorce rate amongst Christians is the same as it is in the rest of the population. So, Christians are very selective when it comes to the way they apply scripture: When it applies to someone else (gay rights), then take it out of context and be strict. When it applies to oneself (divorce), then completely ignore it. To be consistent, Christians should be just as open/closed to same sex marriage as they are to Christian divorce. In fact based on this scripture alone we should be more strict on divorce than we are on gay marriage, but as a group we are not.

The government cannot be God. It takes in trillions of dollars and spends like mad, yet poverty, crime and sickness have not gone down.
Reducing poverty and being a good steward has nothing to do with the amount of money spent. As I keep saying, it has to do with having the right policies. Spend all the money you like on the wrong policies, and you will only do harm. You need to look outside the USA to see how good policies affecting poverty and stewardship work. Poverty has nothing to do with spending, it has to do with justice - something close to God's heart.
...not relying on the government to strong-arm people by forcibly taking things away
Left wing economics is not about taking things away. It's quite the opposite actually; it's about keeping the control of wealth in the hands of those who create it. Any redistribution of wealth desired by lefties is to correct the "taking away" of wealth that unfettered capitalism creates.

So much of the current Democrat platform is based on class envy...
I'm not so sure. I agree more with Bernie's policies than I do with any of the other candidates. But I'm also as wealthy as I could ever want to be. So it's not envy. I just don't want to see people starve, or see more of the planet become difficult to live in, or see more of God's creatures become extinct. You and I can recycle all we like, it won't make a difference to global warming. Only things as big as governments can fix this problem. So voting for a party that doesn't even acknowledge that the problem exists is problematic.

Now, just to be clear. I am not trying to convince anyone that moral issues like gay marriage or abortion are not important, they are. I'm not even trying to change your minds on these issues. I'm just trying to point out that poverty and stewardship of the Earth are also important moral issues, and can't be ignored when making a decision on who to vote for. And sometimes, for a season, maybe good stewardship is more important than who can get divorced.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RedPonyDriver
Upvote 0

RDKirk

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner
Site Supporter
Mar 3, 2013
42,059
22,671
US
✟1,723,562.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I'm just saying that when we vote we need to consider the morality of all the policies of each party. Each party's policies on poverty are just as important (or possible more important) than the policies on same sex marriage (for example).

Yep, you want to fix it. You want to make government behave as you believe a Christian should behave.

But in fact, scripture suggest man's government do only one thing: Provide an environment in which Christians can operate in peace and quiet Godliness.

This doesn't really require government either to feed the poor or to prevent abortion. In fact, I'd argue that the Founding Fathers were uncommonly wise (wiser than most politicians today) to have created a federal government that does very little more than provide an environment in which Christians can operate in peace and quiet Godliness.

This does not mean Christians would not publicly extol the moral virtues of our own culture and nation--the Kingdom of Heaven--just as American diplomats are quick to extol the virtues of the US when in foreign countries. Even in the 2nd century under heavy government oppression, Christians were preaching against abortion and infanticide (see: The apologetics of Athenagoras to the two emperors, 140 AD). So, yes we always preach Godliness, but with the intent of making disciples--defectors to our nation, not trying to change the culture of the host nations.

Or maybe you are saying that as Christians we should not involve ourselves in civic duty at all? Don't vote, don't serve in public office etc.? If you are saying that, then we have a different discussion to have. But if you are not saying that, then I say we need to vote with the Christian moral mandate against poverty in mind. We don't leave our Christianity behind when we enter the voting booth.

I'm saying it's irrelevant. We have our mission to accomplish, and it's not to change the host nation but to attract defectors to our nation.
 
Upvote 0

Spiritlight

✰•.¸¸★•*´¨`*•.¸.✰
Apr 1, 2011
2,116
429
manitoba
✟30,618.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Both sides of the political debate are lying to get elected, how does a Christian justify voting for a liar anyway. No matter what's said before Election day it will be another story after it as usual like any other year...
 
Upvote 0

greenguzzi

Post-Evangelical, Social Anarchist, One of The Way
Aug 25, 2015
1,147
733
Sydney Australia
✟41,363.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Politics
AU-Greens
I'm saying it's irrelevant. We have our mission to accomplish, and it's not to change the host nation but to attract defectors to our nation.
Ah, I finally get where you are coming from. I must confess this is not a position I have heard anyone actually claim before. Although I'm sure it was common in the first century.
I get that my question is irrelevant to you from a philosophical point of view. But please help me understand how this works out in practice. Does it mean that if I were to adopt your point of view that I would not vote or lobby etc.? Surely if I had the ear of the king (= my vote, and my lobby) of this host nation, I would use it to possibly influence the host nation to implement the best policies for its citizens; then its citizens will be more open to my message.
 
Upvote 0

greenguzzi

Post-Evangelical, Social Anarchist, One of The Way
Aug 25, 2015
1,147
733
Sydney Australia
✟41,363.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Politics
AU-Greens
What are rep for that are immoral?...dems are ok for abortion, same same marriage and lgb community...
The Reps are for poverty and ruination of God's Earth, and all the good things it contains.
 
Upvote 0

greenguzzi

Post-Evangelical, Social Anarchist, One of The Way
Aug 25, 2015
1,147
733
Sydney Australia
✟41,363.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Politics
AU-Greens
Both sides of the political debate are lying to get elected, how does a Christian justify voting for a liar anyway. No matter what's said before Election day it will be another story after it as usual like any other year...
So maybe it's time for a revolution?
 
Upvote 0

greenguzzi

Post-Evangelical, Social Anarchist, One of The Way
Aug 25, 2015
1,147
733
Sydney Australia
✟41,363.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Politics
AU-Greens
What if we were Christians in China? Would our mission be to make disciples, or would it be to fix the Chinese government? Currently Christians in China are making disciples at the rate of 1,000 a week, but they're not doing anything to change the government...are they disobeying Christ? Christians in North Korea have increased their numbers from 5,000 in 1995 to 50,000 today, but they haven't changed the government--have they disobeyed Christ? Have they done better or worse than Christians in America?
Most Chinese citizens don't have the opportunities that we in the west have to influence government. We do have that option, so I say we do both. Making disciples is the priority. But sometimes we can do both, and sometimes one predicates the other:

Those who have just-enough seem to be able to understand scripture and propagate the gospel better than those who have too-much, and also better than those who don't have enough. So maybe the best environment for Christians is created by an earthly government that provides just-enough for it's citizens, without the extremes of poverty and excess. The Republican's policies create this extreme environment more so than do those of the Democrats.
 
Upvote 0

revanneosl

Mystically signifying since 1985
Feb 25, 2007
5,480
1,479
Northern Illniois
✟47,010.00
Faith
Methodist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Democrat
It is absolutely true that nothing in the New Testament imagines that the followers of Christ will ever have the ability to control the policy of a nation. The only NT biblical instruction that Christians have concerns how to live righteously withing an essentially sinful nation.

This fact is what made medieval Europe so terrible. They tried to construct various flavors of a "christian nation" and all failed miserably (in retrospect).
 
Upvote 0

RDKirk

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner
Site Supporter
Mar 3, 2013
42,059
22,671
US
✟1,723,562.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Most Chinese citizens don't have the opportunities that we in the west have to influence government. We do have that option, so I say we do both. Making disciples is the priority. But sometimes we can do both, and sometimes one predicates the other:

That's called "mission creep," and the enemy loves to encourage mission creep. Mission creep consumes more resources than the commander has provided for the mission he commanded, resources the commander intended for some other purpose. Mission creep moves us out of the position the commander intended us to be at a particular time and place.

No, in obedience to a commander we never, ever have an "option."

No one serving as a soldier gets entangled in civilian affairs, but rather tries to please his commanding officer. -- 2 Timothy 2

Those who have just-enough seem to be able to understand scripture and propagate the gospel better than those who have too-much, and also better than those who don't have enough. So maybe the best environment for Christians is created by an earthly government that provides just-enough for it's citizens, without the extremes of poverty and excess. The Republican's policies create this extreme environment more so than do those of the Democrats.

Democrats stir up enough discord themselves. Citizens of the Kingdom of Heaven should not proclaim anyone but Jesus. In a nation like the US, a Christian really ought to be independent of any political party.
 
Upvote 0

RDKirk

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner
Site Supporter
Mar 3, 2013
42,059
22,671
US
✟1,723,562.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Ah, I finally get where you are coming from. I must confess this is not a position I have heard anyone actually claim before. Although I'm sure it was common in the first century.
I get that my question is irrelevant to you from a philosophical point of view. But please help me understand how this works out in practice. Does it mean that if I were to adopt your point of view that I would not vote or lobby etc.? Surely if I had the ear of the king (= my vote, and my lobby) of this host nation, I would use it to possibly influence the host nation to implement the best policies for its citizens; then its citizens will be more open to my message.

Ah, what does an ambassador do when he has an opportunity to speak to the king of the nation to which he's deployed?

He speaks directly in behalf of nation and of his fellow countrymen also in the host nation.

Look at the examples of Joseph, Mordechai, Esther, Nehemiah, and Ezra. The entire point of their being positioned was so they could protect their own people.

They never tried to change the culture of the host nation--that's not the role of an ambassador.
 
Upvote 0