Null

[sanderabeer]

null

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

Monarchy is more compatible with any biblical vision of governance which is effectively minimal because the King cannot possibly affect thr whole of society like modern democracy can.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

I support eliminating government "waste" and "inefficiencies." This is biblically sound, as it falls under stewardship. But often times what constitutes "waste" or an "inefficiency" is a matter of debate. And in the currently American political climate, the idea of eliminating government waste and inefficiency is often tied to reducing the size of the government.

This idea is usually a "conservative" idea, but an often repeated one by politically conservative American Christians. As such, I am curious if there is a biblical basis for this idea. And if so, what is the appropriate size of the government? What would an American government without waste and inefficiency look like? What services would it provide?

A government rooted in love and service.
Jesus Christ of Nazareth repeatedly emphasized the importance of love in passages like ,John 13:34-35, where he gives a "new command" to "love one another." He also taught that true greatness lies in serving others, not in dominating them. His teachings consistently promote humility and selflessness. He encouraged his followers to prioritize the needs of others over their own.
Blessings

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

A government rooted in love and service.
Jesus Christ of Nazareth repeatedly emphasized the importance of love in passages like ,John 13:34-35, where he gives a "new command" to "love one another." He also taught that true greatness lies in serving others, not in dominating them. His teachings consistently promote humility and selflessness. He encouraged his followers to prioritize the needs of others over their own.
Blessings

A government can never be rooted in such self giving love because a government is required to punish those who violate the law. It requires a willingness to fight other governments and to dominate. A government which fails in these things is no real government.

 

[FireDragon76]

Every plea from the poor, the needy, and the oppressed for justice is a cry to heaven that will not be forgotten: such injustices offend the Divine Majesty and warrant God's eternal wrath and condemnation upon those who perpetuate injustice, scorn compassion, and despoil the creation.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

A government can never be rooted in such self giving love because a government is required to punish those who violate the law. It requires a willingness to fight other governments and to dominate. A government which fails in these things is no real government.

People make a government. How they act in that position can go towards evil or good. Good is always based on love.

 

[Laodicean60]

What would an American government without waste and inefficiency look like?

It would be running like a well-oiled machine. We need better oversite on the use of tax dollars.

What services would it provide?

With more money in the coffer, we can give UBI or a stem check to low to middle-working Americans but we have to reduce debt because we are borrowing too much money to service our debt.

This idea is usually a "conservative" idea, but an often repeated one by politically conservative American Christians. As such, I am curious if there is a biblical basis for this idea.

The Bible does promote both ideals, but the problem is tribalism, which involves picking part of the scripture instead of the whole.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

People make a government. How they act in that position can go towards evil or good. Good is always based on love.

Aside from sentimentality, what does said government look like? What does love look like in practice? Is it love towards one's enemy? Does that mean a loving nation cannot fight wars on behalf of it's people? I'm just curious about concrete examples of what this looks like, instead of it being mere words.

 

[Richard T]

There is no particular and specific size and or powers of government that are set forth in the bible. I do think though that God often seeks to spread power out. (God prefers that for churches too I might add). Concentrated power is rarely a good thing. Sure there can be benevolent dictators, but many more are closer to tyrants. As to the entire scope of government, I do think that as the government has taken over many programs to help the poor and needy that this leaves churches with less of a role. For instance, food banks are still helpful, but not as critical if there was not SNAP or other welfare benefits to alleviate hunger. Many more socialist countries, create a dependence on the government and less on God in ways that can be unhealthy, such as giving aid so that people have little incentive to work.
If I had to sum up the role and size of government though, there is no magic number but instead each program should be conceived, implemented and checked to insure it accomplishes what its goals are. Where is is hard is that some programs probably need more government involvement and many others need less. It seems quite ignorant to me for someone to always say there is too much regulation, or too much government activity. Generally that might be the case, but there are also instances that need more government. Food and Drug use, inspection and safety comes to my mind.
Another theme from the bible to be a good steward. Government typically fails in this because it tends to be bloated and inefficient as is mentioned in here. U.S. health care for instance and the monies spent by the USA government yield pretty poor outcomes versus other Western nations. Some though say more privatization while others say a national system would be far more efficient. So sometimes the policies are tough to judge and require good discernment as to the motives of each promoter. If the motive is to simply save money, what then is that savings going too? So I would always argue that there is no definitive answer as to whether a specific government program should expand or contract. For instance, many think the IRS should be abolished, or severely reduced. I would argue they need more agents at present if one assumes that each additional agent finds at least 500,000 dollars in errors that increase legal government revenues. Why some would oppose that goes to motives.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

Aside from sentimentality, what does said government look like? What does love look like in practice? Is it love towards one's enemy? Does that mean a loving nation cannot fight wars on behalf of it's people? I'm just curious about concrete examples of what this looks like, instead of it being mere words.

No death penalty for starters.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

No death penalty for starters.

Is that because the state should not be allowed to kill anyone?

 

[Maria Billingsley]

Is that because the state should not be allowed to kill anyone?

Jesus Christ of Nazareth would not kill anyone. Is that not obvious among the flock?

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

Jesus Christ of Nazareth would not kill anyone. Is that not obvious among the flock?

The problem being is that the state ultimately relies on the threat of violence and death in order to compel order in society. If Christians cannot kill, because Jesus would not kill then this renders us pacifists who cannot hold power at all.

 

[Maori Aussie]

The problem being is that the state ultimately relies on the threat of violence and death in order to compel order in society. If Christians cannot kill, because Jesus would not kill then this renders us pacifists who cannot hold power at all.

I stand with the Roman Centurian, who had a faith that Jesus had not seen in all Israel. We are figuratively the two swords that Jesus said were "enough" in the Garden of Gethsemane. However, I also have a huge respect for conscientious objector Desmond Doss (Medal of Honour): Desmond Doss - Wikipedia

 

[Maria Billingsley]

The problem being is that the state ultimately relies on the threat of violence and death in order to compel order in society. If Christians cannot kill, because Jesus would not kill then this renders us pacifists who cannot hold power at all.

Incarceration rather than death. Many, many, many come to the Lord in such a situation. "Every Soul Matters" to our Father, even the worst of the worst. Think about it.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

Incarceration rather than death. Many, many, many come to the Lord in such a situation. "Every Soul Matters" to our Father, even the worst of the worst. Think about it.

And what if someone resists incarceration?

 

[Maori Aussie]

Incarceration rather than death. Many, many, many come to the Lord in such a situation. "Every Soul Matters" to our Father, even the worst of the worst. Think about it.

Fighter ace Pappy Boyington said that the Japanese throwing him into a POW camp during WW2 was the best thing that ever happened to him. It enabled him to beat his Alcoholism once and for all.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

And what if someone resists incarceration?

How does one resist incarceration when they are incarceraed? BTW, there is a reason that Jesus Christ of Nazareth made a point of saying this:

I was a stranger and you did not take Me in, naked and you did not clothe Me, sick and in prison and you did not visit Me.’

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

How does one resist incarceration when they are incarceraed? BTW, there is a reason that Jesus Christ of Nazareth made a point of say this:

I'm talking about those who resist arrest and imprisonment. If you can't kill them and they violently resist and avoiding death is your first responsibility then to avoid death of the criminal. What should be done? Are you opposed to all violence?

I was a stranger and you did not take Me in, naked and you did not clothe Me, sick and in prison and you did not visit Me.’

So you'd want a society without prisons?

 

[Maori Aussie]

And what if someone resists incarceration?

Someone like me will apply the minimum amount of force to help them, in their best interests.
If I injure them, I will then treat that injury.
Not out of hate, but love.