Why should Christians care about politics?

parousia70

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow
Supporter
Feb 24, 2002
15,532
4,826
57
Oregon
✟791,315.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
So, what do you see as our Biblical justification for being active in politics?

EJ

Scripture shows the victory and liberty that awaits us whenever our people lead as magistrates (Gen 41:39-44; Daniel 2:46-49) and elect godly leaders (Ex 18:21-25/Deut 1:13-17/Deut 16:18-20). Civil Government is ordained of God (Rom 13:1-7; 1 Pet 2:13-17). It is not evil.

The sovereign work of Almighty God includes civil government (Rom 13:1-7; 1 Pet 2:13-17), and the virtue of God's people being the leaders and influencers is taught plainly in scripture (Gen 41:39-44; Daniel 2:46-49). Electing good people is part of the work of the people of God (Ex 18:21-25/Deut 1:13-17/Deut 16:18-20).
 
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
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.
Not a game, but there are similarities which permit analogies to be used. But the second part is puzzling: you seem to be ignoring the fact that another company will come in and do things only if they can make money doing it. If the first company cut corners in order to cut costs, why would a second company pick up those costs with no hope of profit? You seem to be arguing from pure theory, without referencing the way things actually work in practice. For-profit companies will do things only if money can be made by doing them. Only government will spend money on a large scale, without expecting a return on investment, in order to achieve a public benefit.
 
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
Not a game, but there are similarities which permit analogies to be used.

I didn't say it is or isn't a game, I said it isn't a zero-sum game.

But the second part is puzzling: you seem to be ignoring the fact that another company will come in and do things only if they can make money doing it.

Nope, I'm ignoring nothing.

If the first company cut corners in order to cut costs, why would a second company pick up those costs with no hope of profit? You seem to be arguing from pure theory, without referencing the way things actually work in practice.

It can cover those corners without covering the corners covered by the other company, which does happen. Such as with Cable & DSL: you will not see AT&T invest in cable or Comcast invest in DSL, despite both being profitable. In the computer market: Intel cannot profit in the mobile market even though it's been able to profit for decades in the personal computer market, so it sticks with Central Processing Units tasked for Desktop and Servers using the x86_64 architecture (then you have IBM); then even though its processors are useful for every day use, Nvidia and AMD/ATi come into covering the high-end graphical market for gamers and professional workstation usage. Then there's how EVGA, Asus, Gigabyte, MSI, PNY, and many others manufacture their own boards and kits based on the original reference designs between Intel, AMD/ATi, and Nvidia.

For-profit companies will do things only if money can be made by doing them. Only government will spend money on a large scale, without expecting a return on investment, in order to achieve a public benefit.

What government does is force everyone else to pay for it while barring the private market from entry (and of course the government can come in and spend money on a larger scale, because the goverment is inflating the money supply and never spending its own money!). Such as with space exploration, wherein NASA managed to keep private space exploration effectively banned for decades within the United States (it wasn't until a decade ago that private space exploration in the United States even became legal). Nevermind how every single invention in the world was invented not by a government, but by an individual.
 
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
It can cover those corners without covering the corners covered by the other company, which does happen. Such as with Cable & DSL: you will not see AT&T invest in cable or Comcast invest in DSL, despite both being profitable.

OK, time to back up and clarify, to keep the discussion as beneficial as possible. When one side starts responding to things that the other side thinks it never said, confusion and unnecessary conflict results. My goal in a discussion is always to have a fruitful conversation, not merely a contest to see who “wins.” So let me review.

I started this particular back-and-forth by saying, “an Environmental Protection Agency is a whole lot better than having killer smog and rivers that catch fire.” You responded with “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.” So then I pointed out that killer smog and blazing rivers were a historical reality, not just a theoretical possibility, and that the EPA was established to take care of such problems. I then used the NFL to illustrate that business entities (represented by the individual teams) need a higher authority (rule books and referees) to restrain those individual teams who are willing to get ahead by cheating. "Zero sum" was not the point of the illustration; it was all about the benefit of having a rule-enforcing entity above the teams. You responded with, “If one business cuts its corners, all businesses inevitably cut corners, that allows another business to cover the corners previously cut.” (emphasis added)

Here is where I think the confusion started on my part. When I read “cut corners” I thought of things like going cheap on maintenance of a truck fleet, dumping raw toxic waste into a river rather than spending money to treat the waste before discharging it, and so on. This is the sort of “cutting corners” that actually did lead to rivers catching fire, toxic material seeping into underground sources of drinking water, and smog making thousands of people ill and killing hundreds of them. The problem with the belief that the “free market” will solve this problem is that those companies that freely try to operate responsibly will have higher expenses than those companies that go cheap, and the good companies eventually will have no choice but to adopt the same practices that the bad companies use, since consumers tend—in real life, not in theory—to patronize the company with the lower prices, without asking questions about why the prices are lower.

The only solution to this type of “corner cutting” is for a higher authority (government) to impose rules which all companies must follow equally. Then the operating costs are higher, but they are equally higher for all companies, so nobody gets an unfair advantage. And most citizens would rather have slightly higher prices and clean air and water than lower prices and polluted water and air.
 
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
[M]ost citizens would rather have slightly higher prices and clean air and water than lower prices and polluted water and air.

Yet somehow, you believe those customers need to be forced into doing so.
 
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
Yet somehow, you believe those customers need to be forced into doing so.
OK, I worded that clumsily. Let's try it this way:

Most people answering a poll would state a preference for higher prices and a clean environment rather than lower prices with a polluted environment. But the majority of those same people will buy the cheaper product, and then complain later about the pollution.

Do you accept that statement as true?
 
Upvote 0

Calminian

Senior Veteran
Feb 14, 2005
6,789
1,044
Low Dessert
✟49,695.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
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.

This may sound even more harsh, but the idea of Christians evacuating politics sounds like a scheme of the Devil. He would love for Christians mind their own business and let unbelievers govern everything. Evil would abound.

But Scripture tells us to be involved with our government both materially and spiritually. Paul told us to give taxes, customs, fear and honor (Romans 13:6-7). Living in a 'We The People' democracy, I don't see how we can in good conscience abandon our duty as citizens, abandoning the unborn, the family, the Supreme Court. If we don't become that voice, who will? Do we just turn our backs on the suffering and share the gospel? Is that even a good testimony?
 
Upvote 0

Bible2+

Matthew 4:4
Sep 14, 2015
3,001
375
✟91,195.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Calminian said in post #47:

This may sound even more harsh, but the idea of Christians evacuating politics sounds like a scheme of the Devil. He would love for Christians mind their own business and let unbelievers govern everything. Evil would abound.

Note that evil already abounds, just as it always has. For:

1 John 5:19 . . . the whole world lieth in wickedness.

Also, Jesus said: "My kingdom is not of this world" (John 18:36).

John 18:36 means Jesus Christ's future, physical reign on the earth with the physically resurrected Church (Revelation 20:4-6, Revelation 5:10, Revelation 2:26-29) won't be of this world in the sense it won't come by worldly means, such as by the Church fighting physically (or politically) to establish it (2 Corinthians 10:3-4, Matthew 26:52, Matthew 5:39). Instead, it will come only by Jesus Himself returning physically from heaven to establish it (Revelation 19:7 to 20:6, Zechariah 14:3-21). Also, after the future Millennium and subsequent events (Revelation 20:7-15), a New Earth will be created and God's Kingdom will continue forever on the New Earth (Revelation 21:1 to 22:5).

Calminian said in post #47:

This may sound even more harsh, but the idea of Christians evacuating politics sounds like a scheme of the Devil. He would love for Christians mind their own business and let unbelievers govern everything. Evil would abound.

Note the Bible shows no matter what Christians try to do politically, unbelievers will still eventually govern everything.

For Daniel 12:7b means at Jesus Christ's future, Second Coming, He will come to a Church which will have been completely defeated physically by the Antichrist. For during the Antichrist's future, literal 3.5-year worldwide reign, he will be allowed to make war against the Church and overcome it physically in every nation (Revelation 13:5-10, Revelation 14:12-13, Revelation 20:4-6, Matthew 24:9-13). It's only when the Antichrist has completely broken all the physical power of the Church that the future Tribulation of Revelation chapters 6 to 18 and Matthew 24 will end (Daniel 12:7b), and Jesus' Second Coming will immediately occur, at which time He will physically resurrect and rapture (gather together) the Church (Matthew 24:29-31; 2 Thessalonians 2:1-8, Revelation 19:7 to 20:6). And at His Second Coming, Jesus Christ will tread the winepress of God's wrath alone (Isaiah 63:3, Revelation 19:15-21), and so He/God will get all the glory for defeating the power of evil on the earth (Deuteronomy 32:39-43). For He/God won't share this glory with the Church (cf. Isaiah 42:8-14, Isaiah 26:18).
 
Upvote 0

Calminian

Senior Veteran
Feb 14, 2005
6,789
1,044
Low Dessert
✟49,695.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
...Note the Bible shows no matter what Christians try to do politically, unbelievers will still eventually govern everything.

Well, technically, eventually antichrist will govern the world for a short time, but then be defeated.

And???? Does the mean we ignore evil in our midst we can change today? Wow, what a way to view Christianity. How about a word from James.

James 4:17 Therefore, to him who knows to do good and does not do it, to him it is sin.

"But but I'm not going to do what is good, because eventually the devil will get his way."

Oy! God help the Church is we live by that.
 
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

HighCherub

Active Member
Jul 20, 2017
361
158
36
Richmond, VA
✟4,182.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Romans contains a highly misinterpreted passage that leads a lot of people into an errant idea that men ought to submit to government as they do God.

That interpretation is simply hogwash when you examine the plain observation that God led His people against world authority for centuries; Abraham did not subject himself to Sodom, or David to the surrounding nations.

It's rather taught that man ought to obey God rather than man- what Paul explains in Romans is an appeal to agreement rather than an act that would cause unneeded death. It's likely that he took the incident in Gethsemane as his inspiration for stating such.
 
Upvote 0

Bible2+

Matthew 4:4
Sep 14, 2015
3,001
375
✟91,195.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Calminian said in post #49:

Does the mean we ignore evil in our midst we can change today?

It depends on how Christians go about trying to change it. For:

Matthew 5:39 . . . I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.
40 And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloke also.

This means Christians are not to use violence (or even human-legal means, which would include politics) to fight against evil people.

Under the Old Covenant, murder was forbidden (Deuteronomy 5:17), while killing in a war commanded by God was required (1 Samuel 15:3).

But under the New Covenant, which Christians are under (Matthew 26:28, Jeremiah 31:31), Christians are commanded never to harm anyone, even in self-defense (Matthew 5:39, Matthew 26:52). They're to be as harmless as doves (Matthew 10:16c). For Christians are commanded to love even their enemies (Matthew 5:44), and this means they must do them no harm (Romans 13:10a, Matthew 7:12).

It's the meek who will inherit the earth (Matthew 5:5, Psalms 37:11).

Christians don't employ physical weapons or any other violence against people (2 Corinthians 10:3-5, Ephesians 6:12-18). Instead, Jesus Christ at His first coming set the example for what Christians are to do when they're physically attacked by people (1 Peter 2:19-23). They're to go meekly like sheep to the slaughter (Romans 8:36), just like Jesus did (Isaiah 53:7). Obedient Christians don't fear death (Hebrews 2:15), and don't love their lives unto death (Revelation 12:11b), but hate their lives in this world, so they might retain eternal life (John 12:25, Mark 8:34-38). For obedient Christians know being killed is no loss for them, but gain (Philippians 1:21), as it brings their still-conscious souls into heaven to be with Jesus (2 Corinthians 5:8), which is far better than remaining in this world (Philippians 1:23).

During the future Tribulation of Revelation chapters 6 to 18 and Matthew 24, Christians (not in hiding) will have to face martyrdom with patience and faith to the end (Revelation 13:7-10, Revelation 14:12-13, Revelation 20:4, Matthew 24:9-13), just as Christians have always had to spiritually overcome in the face of martyrdom (e.g. Revelation 2:10-11).
 
Upvote 0

Bible2+

Matthew 4:4
Sep 14, 2015
3,001
375
✟91,195.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
HighCherub said in post #51:

Romans contains a highly misinterpreted passage that leads a lot of people into an errant idea that men ought to submit to government as they do God.

Romans 13:1 ¶Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.
2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.

This, like 1 Peter 2:13-14, Titus 3:1, Hebrews 13:17, and Matthew 18:17, applies to every case in which human rulers (whether secular or religious) aren't commanding Christians to do something contrary to what God Himself commands (Acts 5:29, Daniel 3:18, Galatians 2:5,11-14).

-

Regarding the similar Daniel 4:25c: "the most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will", this means the human rulers of the world are ultimately determined by God: "the powers that be are ordained of God" (Romans 13:1c). This can include God's judgment against sinful nations (cf. Isaiah 3:12).

It can also include God's mercy (2 Peter 3:9b). For example, Trump's election could have been a miracle which will delay the coming of the Antichrist's social policies in the U.S. for a few years, whereas Hillary would have set them up perfectly. Trump's election could also be called "the Jonah 3 Option", in that God showed mercy to the ancient city of Nineveh in Jonah 3, even though Nineveh, the capital of the Assyrian empire, would still eventually be destroyed (Zephaniah 2:13).

For in the U.S., the Jonah 3 Option could be followed in only four years by the Athaliah Option, that is, a President Elizabeth Warren hell-bent on an anti-Christian agenda, which will be employed even more vehemently (than even Hillary would have done) after years of Trump.

Also, Trump and his military-minded appointees may inadvertently help to prepare the way geopolitically and militarily for the Antichrist.
 
Upvote 0

Shempster

ImJustMe
Supporter
Dec 28, 2014
1,560
786
✟258,881.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
No politics for me. I really don't participate.
When you boil it down, the point of politics is law-making and law-enforcing.
The problem is we have two distinct groups, the left and the right, which by the way exists in all countries. Each group clings to certain tenets that oppose the other party.

So each group fights for control and then when they get it, they institute laws that punish the other folks. Then when the other guys get in, they do the same thing. On and on it goes until now.
Look up the stats. The USA has more laws than anyone else. About 500,000 and counting.
And to go with it, we have the most criminals.

If instead we had laws that punished acts of greed, selfishness, jealousy, lust, hate, and deceit I wonder what it would look like. Then it would make no difference what party one belonged to.
 
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
(snip)
Look up the stats. The USA has more laws than anyone else. About 500,000 and counting.
And to go with it, we have the most criminals. (snip)
Do you have proof the US has the more laws then anyone else? :scratch:
tulc(is honestly curious) :wave:
 
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

Shempster

ImJustMe
Supporter
Dec 28, 2014
1,560
786
✟258,881.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Do you have proof the US has the more laws then anyone else? :scratch:
tulc(is honestly curious) :wave:

If you don't believe that then there's no proof in the world to make you believe it. But if you just want to know-just look it up.
 
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
If you don't believe that then there's no proof in the world to make you believe it. But if you just want to know-just look it up.
Ahh! So you don't actually have any proof for this claim but you wanted to make it anyway? :scratch:
tulc(suspected as much, but was willing to look at any proof Shempster offered) :)
 
Upvote 0

Shempster

ImJustMe
Supporter
Dec 28, 2014
1,560
786
✟258,881.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Ahh! So you don't actually have any proof for this claim but you wanted to make it anyway? :scratch:
tulc(suspected as much, but was willing to look at any proof Shempster offered) :)

(in my kindest tone...) the point of the post was not the number of laws. I did some looking (not sure why I bothered - it was not the point of the post) and it seems that nobody actually knows. In 1982 a government program was implemented to come up with an exact number of laws and it failed. The Heritage foundation claims there are 5,000 federal laws with with 10,000-300,000 regulations that can be enforced criminally. This leaves out County, State and local laws.

The point of my post really was to show that law making does not make a country better.
I shouldn't do this....but....Ill also say that religion does not make a country better either.
The country with the most churches per capita is Jamaica and the crime is out of control there for sure.
I am not going to post any web sites that agree with me because the first thing that will happen is that someone will find some false data in that site and discount the whole thing. You could do that with any site or publication.

Agenda trumps everything.
I really wish I never bothered looking in this section.
 
Last edited:
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