Why should Christians care about politics?

dannheim

Honey Badger
Oct 10, 2014
176
107
Rancho Mirage CA
✟23,170.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
I think this whole discussion can be pretty well summed up by reading the Declaration of Independence. When our right, no our duty to worship our loving and almighty God Is upended by government, it is our duty and our responsibility to respond.
 
Upvote 0

tturt

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Oct 30, 2006
15,773
7,240
✟795,766.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
We're to occupy til He comes (Luke 19:13).

Rom 13:1-7 includes not being rebellious against authority.

Also, "I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; 2 For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty. 3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;" I Tim 2:1-3
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

dogs4thewin

dog lover
Christian Forums Staff
Hands-on Trainee
CF Ambassadors
Site Supporter
Apr 19, 2012
30,355
5,608
32
Georgia U.S. State
✟894,529.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
For those of you who say Christians should leave politics alone and I mean no disrespect whatsoever when I asks this, but how do you expect to have Christian leaders and therefore Christians in power who can influence the policies of this country if we do not have Christians that are involved in politics by running for office?
 
  • Winner
Reactions: tturt
Upvote 0

Christie insb

Well-Known Member
Sep 3, 2015
868
513
65
Santa Barbara, California
✟60,196.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
However, Christians should not be involved in politics if all they are doing is arguing, complaining, and insulting the President.
Did you feel the same way when Mr. Obama was president? If not, I suspect this is another example of "politics make strange bedfellows."
 
Upvote 0

dogs4thewin

dog lover
Christian Forums Staff
Hands-on Trainee
CF Ambassadors
Site Supporter
Apr 19, 2012
30,355
5,608
32
Georgia U.S. State
✟894,529.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
Romans 13 tells us that the authorities that exist are appointed by God…if we are willing to serve, surely He is willing to appoint us.

As a Christian, I want Christians in leadership roles in our country! If they are not, how long will it be before no one is in a position to protect our religious freedom? Christians should be encouraged and supported in politics.

However, Christians should not be involved in politics if all they are doing is arguing, complaining, and insulting the President.
There is a big difference in complaining just for the sake of complaining and complaining because you honestly feel that it i wrong and you are looking to change it.
 
Upvote 0

Evan Jellicoe

Well-Known Member
Aug 2, 2016
755
839
downstate Illinois
✟22,984.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Does being directly involved in politics involve putting on a different set of standards than we use at church or in or daily lives? I see “the fruit (evidence) of the Spirit" being entirely qualities related to love and peace, and I see a general command to Christians not to return evil for evil. Then I turn around and see supporters of one party or the other engage in insults, name-calling, and simplistic “shouted” arguments rather than dealing with why I, or anybody, should agree with one position, or the other position, because of what the Bible says to Christians.

To take one example: I see Christians argue for the Libertarian position on the grounds that “charity” should only be administered by individuals, churches, and voluntary associations like the Red Cross, never by the federal government. Yet even the most basic knowledge of history informs us that many of the functions that we take for granted now from the federal government were unheard of in Biblical days. For example, standing armies (with full-time paid professional soldiers) did not exist in ancient Israel, and most Christians in the Roman Empire would not join the Roman army. Yet today we take it for granted that as Christians we, and our sons and daughters, may serve in the American army without compromising Biblical principles. This comes under the “provide for the national defense” clause in the Constitution. Yet when the federal government uses the “general welfare” phrase from that same Constitution to provide for the physical well-being of citizens, they argue that this is illegitimate. As I look at the Bible, I see first of all that even the Old Testament commands that we love “the stranger among you” in the same way we love our neighbor, because “you were strangers in Egypt.” [Leviticus 19:34] This charity was often an individual act such as allowing others to glean in one’s fields, but it was also done by the Levites, who in their God-given office fulfilled many of the same functions that government performs today. (Not all the Levites were priests, since that would have equaled one priest for every 12 men. No, the Levites did many other things besides perform the priestly office.) So if I want my secular, frequently non-Christian government officials to help make this a country that acts like a Christian country would, then I believe that I should be in favor of supporting reasonable “charitable” programs by the government. And I don’t do that by hating on Barack Obama or Donald Trump or the “other” party’s Congressmen, but by working through legitimate channels to lobby for the things that I believe in, such as health care that doesn’t leave to die (or go bankrupt) those people who simply cannot afford adequate medical care.

In short, I think that our political activity should be, first of all, secondary to our spiritual work, and, second, done in a manner that causes those outside the faith to praise Jesus, not reject Him because they don't like His followers.

But that’s my opinion. What do others think?
 
  • Winner
Reactions: Sarah G
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Does being directly involved in politics involve putting on a different set of standards than we use at church or in or daily lives? I see “the fruit (evidence) of the Spirit" being entirely qualities related to love and peace, and I see a general command to Christians not to return evil for evil. Then I turn around and see supporters of one party or the other engage in insults, name-calling, and simplistic “shouted” arguments rather than dealing with why I, or anybody, should agree with one position, or the other position, because of what the Bible says to Christians.
That is indeed commonplace in politics, but so also is it commonplace with religion--as we can all see here on CF. The point is that neither politics nor religion require anyone to behave that way.
 
Upvote 0

Evan Jellicoe

Well-Known Member
Aug 2, 2016
755
839
downstate Illinois
✟22,984.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
That is indeed commonplace in politics, but so also is it commonplace with religion--as we can all see here on CF. The point is that neither politics nor religion require anyone to behave that way.
I'm not sure I'm clear on your point. That bad behavior happens even in churches, or that it is acceptable in churches? Certainly it happens, both in churches and on Christian internet sites. But it isn't supposed to.
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
I'm not sure I'm clear on your point. That bad behavior happens even in churches, or that it is acceptable in churches? Certainly it happens, both in churches and on Christian internet sites. But it isn't supposed to.
Of course I was referring to the happens. The point was that it's not inherent in either one for people involved to be rude or abusive, but people can be rude and abusive even if their area of interest is sports or dance clubs.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: tulc
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Evan Jellicoe

Well-Known Member
Aug 2, 2016
755
839
downstate Illinois
✟22,984.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
This is one more reason why I'm the libertarian sort in the first place, politics in itself is nothing more than a group of men . . . believing they know how to run your life better than you do.
Yeah, the "Nanny State" argument. I used to buy it. Until it finally occurred to me that not everybody is as knowledgeable as I am about avoiding being taken advantage of. The attitude that "Well, if they're gullible and stupid, it serves them right if they get ripped off by con artists" is something I no longer believe. Government oversight may be a long way from perfect, but having, say, an Environmental Protection Agency, is a whole lot better than having killer smog and rivers that catch fire. I do believe in "live and let live" as a general principle, but not as an absolute rule that permits me, as a Christian, to stand by and let people die if they made a dumb decision or simply didn't have enough money to do what it took to stay alive.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sarah G
Upvote 0

Vyrzaharak

Active Member
Jul 8, 2017
201
52
40
Sol System, Milky Way Galaxy
✟18,738.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Yeah, the "Nanny State" argument. I used to buy it. Until it finally occurred to me that not everybody is as knowledgeable as I am about avoiding being taken advantage of. The attitude that "Well, if they're gullible and stupid, it serves them right if they get ripped off by con artists" is something I no longer believe. Government oversight may be a long way from perfect, but having, say, an Environmental Protection Agency, is a whole lot better than having killer smog and rivers that catch fire. I do believe in "live and let live" as a general principle, but not as an absolute rule that permits me, as a Christian, to stand by and let people die if they made a dumb decision or simply didn't have enough money to do what it took to stay alive.

Any collective is nothing more than a group of men. If men are good, government is unnecessary; if men are evil, government dare not be wanted. Without government, the market protects, since it is the role of the market to appeal to self-interest and nobody is beyond the self-interest of their life. The alternative to the EPA does not include killer smogs or rivers catching on fire because there is no benefit to a company killing off its potential employees or customers, unlike a government whose sole existence rests on the belief that some men are bad.
 
Upvote 0

Evan Jellicoe

Well-Known Member
Aug 2, 2016
755
839
downstate Illinois
✟22,984.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
The alternative to the EPA does not include killer smogs or rivers catching on fire because there is no benefit to a company killing off its potential employees or customers.
The theory is absolutely reasonable, but the reference was to the real-world killer smog that used to be common in big cities such as London and Los Angeles, and to the Cuyahoga River in Cleveland literally catching fire (multiple times!) In America the EPA was a response to a problem that actually existed, and the rationale for government intervention is the same rationale that places referees and rulebooks in NFL football games. Any reasonable person realizes that intentionally harming the other team's players is bad for the game in the long run, but if only self-interest restrains players who want to harm other players to win games, teams that don't play that way find themselves at a disadvantage. The "good" teams have to start playing dirty in order to stay competitive, just as a trucking company that goes cheap on maintenance will earn better profits that a company that spends more to keep its truck fleet safe. The higher accident rate generally does not discourage business enough to warrant spending more on maintenance. It is pretty well established that long-term benefit usually loses out to immediate gratification.
 
Upvote 0

Vyrzaharak

Active Member
Jul 8, 2017
201
52
40
Sol System, Milky Way Galaxy
✟18,738.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
The theory is absolutely reasonable, but the reference was to the real-world killer smog that used to be common in big cities such as London and Los Angeles, and to the Cuyahoga River in Cleveland literally catching fire (multiple times!) In America the EPA was a response to a problem that actually existed, and the rationale for government intervention is the same rationale that places referees and rulebooks in NFL football games. Any reasonable person realizes that intentionally harming the other team's players is bad for the game in the long run, but if only self-interest restrains players who want to harm other players to win games, teams that don't play that way find themselves at a disadvantage. The "good" teams have to start playing dirty in order to stay competitive, just as a trucking company that goes cheap on maintenance will earn better profits that a company that spends more to keep its truck fleet safe. The higher accident rate generally does not discourage business enough to warrant spending more on maintenance. It is pretty well established that long-term benefit usually loses out to immediate gratification.

Capitalism is not a football game or any other zero-sum game.

If one business starts to pollute the water, that allows another business to come in to clean the water. If one business cuts its corners, all businesses inevitably cut corners, that allows another business to cover the corners previously cut. With a monopoly of authority, however, there's no profit in a business cleaning the water and hardly any room for just any business to come in and grow with another business cutting corners.

Indeed, it is pretty well established that long-term benefit can and does lose out to immediate gratification, and the very dependency on government is proof of that (democracy most especially). Your "solutions" are themselves short-term and poisons in the long run; rather than petitioning people so that they'd realize how it's against their interest and being an example, you'd petition a monopoly of authority to use force for you.
 
Upvote 0

tulc

loves "SO'S YER MOM!! posts!
May 18, 2002
49,401
18,801
68
✟271,570.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I got involved in politics because rich people were trying to drive my poorer neighbors out of the neighborhood. It was really that simple. I could either hike my skirts up (metaphorically speaking) to keep them from getting dirty, piously claim to "love the people around me" and do nothing to help them or I could roll my sleeves up, hold my nose and jump into the fight. I've never once regretted having to put up with the smell. :wave:
tulc(this is also one of the reasons he loves living in Chicago) :clap:
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

dogs4thewin

dog lover
Christian Forums Staff
Hands-on Trainee
CF Ambassadors
Site Supporter
Apr 19, 2012
30,355
5,608
32
Georgia U.S. State
✟894,529.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
Yeah, the "Nanny State" argument. I used to buy it. Until it finally occurred to me that not everybody is as knowledgeable as I am about avoiding being taken advantage of. The attitude that "Well, if they're gullible and stupid, it serves them right if they get ripped off by con artists" is something I no longer believe. Government oversight may be a long way from perfect, but having, say, an Environmental Protection Agency, is a whole lot better than having killer smog and rivers that catch fire. I do believe in "live and let live" as a general principle, but not as an absolute rule that permits me, as a Christian, to stand by and let people die if they made a dumb decision or simply didn't have enough money to do what it took to stay alive.
Well, if you feel the need to help people with medical care you are free to do so that does not mean that everyone who helps others with medical bills is in favor of government run healthcare or forcing others to provide for certain medical bills for people.
 
Upvote 0

Vyrzaharak

Active Member
Jul 8, 2017
201
52
40
Sol System, Milky Way Galaxy
✟18,738.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Well, if you feel the need to help people with medical care you are free to do so that does not mean that everyone who helps others with medical bills is in favor of government run healthcare or forcing others to provide for certain medical bills for people.

It's even funnier when considering a century ago, Americans were also told that their nation was facing a health care crisis. Then, however, the complaint was that medical costs were too low, and that health insurance was too accessible. But in that era, too, government stepped forward to solve the problem. And boy, did it solve it!
 
Upvote 0

AmusingMargaret

Instigator
Dec 26, 2016
192
263
Southeastern US
Visit site
✟39,221.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I agree that Christians should leave politics alone and join together to pray for those in office. I see it all the time, Christians get tied to one party and then they refuse to pray for officials of other parties. I was part of a church that nearly split because of a political divide. Really unfortunate and speaks of the dangers involved with politics. Our kingdom is not of this world and we should not live with this life in mind
At the risk of being harsh, a church that splits over political reasons sounds more like the dangers of being involved with people who are a little more concerned with their own agenda than that of God's.

We can either ignore government and allow them to eventually remove our religious freedom forever, or be involved. I do not want the persecutions that North Korea, Sudan, Syria, Iran, Iraq, and so, so many other countries see, do you? It is imperative that Christians be involved in the government of America.

You are so very right...we must pray and pray often for our leaders. We should also pray that God raise up and place Godly men and women in office. We should be good stewards of this great country that He has given us....we have not been so much in the past, to our detriment. We are on a better path now, and you see how hard the devil is fighting against it, which makes it even more vitally important that we pray God's will, protection, and guidance for those elected to office.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: tturt
Upvote 0

Bible2+

Matthew 4:4
Sep 14, 2015
3,001
375
✟91,195.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Evan Jellicoe said in post #1:

Why should Christians care about politics?

Christians shouldn't care about politics. For politics are just part of the only-temporary stuff that doesn't matter eternally (2 Corinthians 4:18).

Nonetheless, it's hard for Christians to ignore that America's own government (in its Deep State) wants to restore George III's tyranny, by ignoring the Fourth Amendment, Constitutional right to privacy from unreasonable searches. That is, it wants to be able to continually spy on everyone without a warrant, just like George III wanted to do.

And now the U.S. government has gone after the First Amendment's freedom of religion by requiring Christians to support abortions and same-sex marriages. For example, a Christian pharmacy has to sell the morning-after abortion pill, and a Christian bakery has to make a cake for a homosexual wedding.

But the government's anti-Christian agenda will hopefully abate for a few years under Trump. Yet it will still eventually return, and reach a crescendo, possibly under a President Elizabeth Warren and a Supreme Court she will have packed with anti-Christian justices (after enough conservative justices have had "heart attacks", like poor Scalia too-conveniently did right before an important case which would have severely limited abortion access).

For the Supreme Court will eventually outlaw even speaking against homosexuality or abortion, calling it "hate speech", thereby further negating the First Amendment. The way this will be done is by claiming speech against homosexuality or abortion presents a "clear and present danger" (Schenck v. U.S.) to homosexuals and abortion clinics, as such speech could lead to violent attacks against them, such as the mass shooting at the Pulse gay-nightclub in Orlando, or when a man attacked an abortion clinic claiming to be "a warrior for the babies". Of course, from a pacifist's point of view, nothing about Romans 1:26-27, for example, contradicts Matthew 5:39. So simply saying homosexuality is a sin in no way supports violence. But the connection could still be made by a future, anti-Christian Supreme Court as a means to squelch Biblical Christians' Constitutional rights to free speech and religion.

Could then the war-makers among the U.S. populace (that is, as opposed to its pacifists) call for a "NEW American Revolution", this time a violent overthrowing of the U.S. government, especially its Supreme Court, in order to restore the Constitutional freedoms of religion, speech, and privacy?

Or, the war-makers could just be more patient, and wait a little bit longer (peacefully) for Jesus Christ to return from heaven and rule the world (Revelation 19:7 to 20:6).

For any violent rebellion against the U.S. government will simply be quashed (compare the pathetic end of the Burns, Oregon standoff). For Obama's firing of hundreds of generals, and then the JADE HELM exercises, could all have been precisely to prepare for the day when the U.S.'s own federal military forces will be ordered to wipe out all armed militias throughout the U.S. (thereby negating yet another amendment, the Second), calling the militias "an imminent threat to national security", that is, an imminent threat to a future, anti-Christian federal government, which will want to help prepare the way for the future Antichrist's world takeover (Revelation 13:7-18).

But before the Antichrist takes over the world and makes armed rebellion against him impossible (Revelation 13:4b,7), and even before the U.S. government has wiped out all armed militias in the U.S., could such militias unite across the country, and rise up together at the same time, declaring their all-out rebellion against the federal government, because of its tyranny? And could they try to justify their rebellion in a document, which could have points laid out in a structure and wording similar to the Declaration of Independence, which they could call the:

"NEW Declaration of Independence

"When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for the People of a great nation to dissolve the political bands which have being placed upon them by a federal power, and to restore the freedoms which the Laws of Nature and Nature's God have entitled the People, it is reasonable to expect the People to declare the specific causes which have impelled them to violent rebellion.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.

"That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.

"That whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute a new Government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Freedom and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience has shown that mankind is more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such a Government, and to provide new guards for their Freedom and Happiness.

"Such has been the patient suffering of the People of these United States, and such is now the necessity which constrains them to abolish their present system of federal government. The recent history of this government is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over the People of these United States. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world:

"The government has refused its assent to laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good. For the government has trampled upon even the highest laws of these United States, embodied in our Constitution. For the Fourth Amendment declares the right of the People to be free from all unreasonable searches, and no warrants shall be issued except on probable cause. Yet the government now, with the help of computers and compliant corporations, continually spies on all the People, and without any probable cause. For it tracks everywhere the People go through their cell phones, via 'stingray' devices and compliant cell phone corporations, and through license-plate reading cameras set up at major intersections and on patrolling police cruisers. And the government tracks every letter, magazine, catalog, or package the People send or receive through the U.S. Mail, Federal Express, UPS, DHL, or any other courier, through the compliance of these companies. And the government tracks everything the People buy with a credit or debit card, through compliant bank, credit card, and retail companies. And it tracks the People's Ad Choices and Catalog lists, and even sometimes makes insulting additions to them.

"And the government tracks everything the People watch on cable TV or the internet, through compliant cable, telecom, ISP, and internet companies and forums. And it tracks everything the People post on the internet. And it tracks every website and web page they view. And it tracks every phone call they make. And it tracks everything they say or hear on every phone call. And it tracks everything they do in public places by employing facial recognition and spy cameras in almost every store and restaurant, and while walking along public streets. And it listens in on everything they say in their homes, cars, or anywhere else, by remotely and secretly tapping into the microphones on their cell phones, landline phones, computers, televisions, smart speakers, home-security devices, automobile-navigation devices, etc., so that the Fourth Amendment right to Privacy for the People has been completely obliterated by the government.

"Also, the government has taken advantage of compliant intelligence and oversight committees in Congress, and a horrible FISA bill which created a secret, rubber-stamp, FISA court, a veritable Star Chamber, without any effective oversight by the People, in order to take away the People's Fourth Amendment rights, under the guise of 'judicial warrants'. The FISA bill also allowed for unlimited, unwarranted, 'backdoor' snooping on U.S. citizens through its Section 702 loophole. So the U.S. government (like the Stasi before it) has created extensive dossiers on tens of thousands of its citizens who are completely innocent legally. (The Founders are turning in their graves.) Also, these dossiers leave these citizens open to blackmail regarding private matters, by unscrupulous people in the government (even very high up), and by unscrupulous people in government contractors who are given access to these dossiers.

"Also, the government has secretly handed over the personal information (including the weekly and daily schedules) of some U.S. citizens to 'friendly' foreign intelligence agencies who see these citizens as potential threats to their national security. In this way, the government has exposed these U.S. citizens to surveillance and possibly even murder by foreign intelligence agencies operating (with the knowledge and consent of the government) on U.S. soil. The government allows such a setup as this so it can, in turn, surveil, and even murder, citizens of foreign 'friendly' nations, in their own countries, if it deems these foreigners to be dangerously hostile to U.S. national security.

"Also, the government has trampled the First Amendment, which declares the government shall institute no law which prohibits the free exercise of religion. For the government has created and enforced laws, through the Supreme Court, with no assent from the People in Congress, requiring Christians to support abortions and same-sex marriages. For example, a Christian pharmacy has to sell the morning-after abortion pill, and a Christian bakery has to make a cake for a homosexual wedding.

"Also, the government [will] have trampled on the First Amendment's declaration the government shall institute no law which abridges the freedom of speech. For the government [will] have created and enforced laws, through the Supreme Court, with no assent from the People in Congress, forbidding any speech which says homosexuality or abortion is sinful, calling it 'hate speech', even though the Bible shows homosexuality is sinful (Romans 1:26-27), and unborn children have consciousness (Luke 1:41).

"Also, the government [will] have trampled on the Second Amendment, which declares the government shall institute no law which infringes on the right of the People to keep and bear arms. For the government [will] have created and enforced laws, through the Supreme Court, with no assent from the People in Congress, forbidding any civilian to own or use any firearm at any time.

"In every stage of these Oppressions, we the People have petitioned for redress. Our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A government which is thus marked by every act which may define Tyranny is unfit to rule a free People.

"We, therefore, the People of these United States of America, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the World, the Almighty God, for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by the Authority of the People, solemnly publish and declare the Freedom of the People, that they are absolved from all allegiance to the U.S. federal government. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the Protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our Sacred Honor."


At some point in our future, could millions of "patriots" in armed militias across the U.S. add their John Hancocks to such a document as this, not realizing by doing so they will only make themselves liable to being arrested, tortured, and murdered by the federal government?

Better to leave politics alone, and be arrested, tortured, and murdered not for being violent, or for promoting violence, but rather for being a pacifist, and for promoting the peace, love, and faith of Jesus Christ and His Biblical Gospel (Matthew 24:9, Mark 8:34-38).

Maranatha, Come, Lord Jesus Christ, and rule upon the earth (Revelation 19:7 to 20:6, Revelation 22:17a,20).

1 Peter 1:24 ¶For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away:
25 But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you.

1 John 2:17 And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums