Christians and Politics

[amortalman]

The following is a direct quote from a dedicated evangelical Christian:

"We are being told and some Christians believe we should not engage in politics. We are not engaging in politics we are standing for righteousness!"

How do you feel about the above statement?

For debate: Should Christians engage in politics?

[Erexsaur]

[Replying to post 9 by amortalman]

Hello Amortalman,

Thank you for your comments. May I please start with your last statement?

Sorry, but no. What we need are people with principles, intelligence, talent, and good character. If they believe in God that's fine, if not, that's fine also.

You are correct that we need people with principles and intelligence. But as for good character, what standard do we depend on to know what's good or evil?

You also said, "If they believe in God that's fine, if not, that's fine also," thus implying that it makes no difference whether one believes God or not. Are you sure? How did you arrive at that conclusion? Can a non-believer in God rule without being godless? Both history and experience tell us that any action without God or with a false dependence on God is guaranteed to fail.

Have you considered possible effects on behavior toward you because of non-belief in God by a leader? Even if apparently good, have you considered the possibility of deception?

If true that good government exists without God as you claim, then the DOI would be worthless and questionable as to why it was even written. What better document would have served as justification for the then undeveloped US colonies to separate from the government of the most powerful nation in the would? I only know that some today are trying very hard to undermine and destroy its worth.

But if you mean that righteousness in government means pushing and promoting certain religious dogma then that's a dangerous thing to open the door to.

You are correct. My respect for you is based on my preference, not out of fear that someone will horse whip me. Otherwise it would be hypocritical. All of God's commandments are peacefully and voluntarily carried out for the good of another and none can be forced. Let's please be careful not to forget the abundance of wisdom found in the Bible that we tend to take for granted.

But have you considered the danger of one allowing himself to have harmful un-Biblical commandments forced on him because someone created unnecessary fear within him of Biblical commandments unnecessarily forced on him?

Earl

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 11 by Erexsaur]

Both history and experience tell us that any action without God or with a false dependence on God is guaranteed to fail.

Please substantiate this. What you're proposing is bigotry - restricting political power to those who believe in the same god as you.

Even if apparently good, have you considered the possibility of deception?

Leaders who believe in God have done this as well.

[Erexsaur]

[Replying to rikuoamero]

Hello Rikuoamero,

Please substantiate this. What you're proposing is bigotry - restricting political power to those who believe in the same god as you.

Have you read my post #10 for you on page 1 where I substantiated my claims for your previous post? As for real life experience to back up my statement, haven't you heard someone ask another for prayer before an endeavor? What about massive failures of godless actions? Examples are all around us if we care to notice.

Am I bigoted? Am I wrong in my support for the engagement of those of my Biblical belief in the political arena?

We are well aware that the various religions and beliefs of the world conflict with each other to the point that coexistence is impossible. So do those that claim to be non-religious conflict with the religious.

Maybe it would help to consider the fruit of various religions and beliefs and make comparisons to determine which is preferable to live under if it happens to be the dominant religion of the nation lived in should that religion be perfectly followed. Speaking of multiculturalism, the world with the sum total of all its conflicting religions is what we may consider as multicultural. Is it possible to serve more than one master?

Do you consider how Christians tend to be mistreated in some non-Christian countries? Churches have been blown up. Should it be considered problematic for Christians to found a nation to where not only Christians, but all are free to live their religious conscience as long as they abide by the nation's Bible based laws? Is there a need to undermine this system that allows this?

Leaders who believe in God have done this as well.

Don't all disciplines have their violators? Biblical believers are warned by scripture not to allow their good to be evil spoken of. Should the Biblical faith therefore be judged evil because of violators that depart from what the faith stands for?

Earl

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 10 by Erexsaur]

OK. You probably by now know about George Washington that went aside to pray for himself and the men in his army.

Actually no. I didn't know that. It might behoove you to either ask about your opponents, or to look at their profiles or usergroups. I am Irish, and as such, not especially versed in American history.

With the Continental Congress deadlocked for a long time and the participants were about to give up and go home, Benjamin Franklin gave a speech that admonished all to pray. Things began to move from that time on.

Could you be more vague? What began to move? What exactly do you mean by move? Where is the evidence that the thing was supernatural?

When the people of Boston found out that ships of the French Navy were on their way to destroy the city, Its citizens were instructed to fast and pray. Most of the attacking vessels were lost because of extreme weather. Only a few returned to France.

And so, without any evidence whatsoever, you immediately leap to the conclusion that the storm was of divine origin, caused by the prayers of Boston's citizens.
Also...didn't you notice the mistake you just made? You commented that the US founding fathers had supernatural aid during the War of Independence, I asked you to substantiate that...and yet here you are asserting that God caused a magical storm to wreck the fleet of Washington's allies, the French.
So was God aiding both sides of the war, for laughs and giggles?

OK. You probably by now know about George Washington that went aside to pray for himself and the men in his army. Morals were low and many were about to abandon him. But the prayer made a big difference.

And...? Where's the supernatural in this? Soldiers moral is restored...big whoop. All you can point to there is that Washington was a skilled orator, able to strengthen the convictions of his men in his speeches...like many people throughout history.

In addition to the three stories above from memory, The websites below contain material and videos I would highly recommend. They contain much information in addition to what's needed to back me up. You are probably familiar with some of it.

Again, no I wouldn't be familiar with it. You seem to have this habit of lazily assuming things about people. Besides, I don't think I'll be bothered. Not after the 'stellar' showing you did here.

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 13 by Erexsaur]

What about massive failures of godless actions? Examples are all around us if we care to notice.

And there are plenty of examples of massive failures by the theistic leaders.

Am I bigoted? Am I wrong in my support for the engagement of those of my Biblical belief in the political arena

It's not just that you're giving support to Christian politicians, it's that you seem to be very strongly advocating that politicians should only be Christians, as if that should be a rule, a law.

We are well aware that the various religions and beliefs of the world conflict with each other to the point that coexistence is impossible.

False. Some religions are very hard to live with yes...but not all religions. Take the Sikh population of England. I've yet to hear a bad word out of them and they are living in what is nominally a Christian nation (more atheistic and Islamic nowadays).

Maybe it would help to consider the fruit of various religions and beliefs and make comparisons to determine which is preferable to live under if it happens to be the dominant religion of the nation lived in should that religion be perfectly followed.

Are you advocating that political offices should be held ONLY by Christians?
I want to make sure I'm understanding you correctly.

Do you consider how Christians tend to be mistreated in some non-Christian countries?

Do you consider how {Insert-Religious-Demographic-Here} would be mistreated under what is your seeming preferred system, a system where they are prevented from holding political office?

Churches have been blown up.

So have mosques and temples, and other names for similar buildings, and by Christians too.

Should it be considered problematic for Christians to found a nation to where not only Christians, but all are free to live their religious conscience as long as they abide by the nation's Bible based laws?

So they can have any colour they want, so long as its black? How can one be free to live by their own religious conscience, if they have to abide by a different set of religious based laws?
I'm an atheist, and I would chafe at having to live under both Christian and Islamic theocracies.
What would count as a "Bible based law"? There are arguments to be made that not a single jot or tittle of Old Testament laws were ever abrogated.

Should the Biblical faith therefore be judged evil because of violators that depart from what the faith stands for?

And yet you are all too willing to judge other religions for being evil because some of their adherents blow up Christian churches.

...it's like you don't even care that you're being hypocritical, it's like you revel in it...

[2ndRateMind]

Should Christians engage in politics? Certainly they should. Politics is basically about how we should best organise our societies. And Christians are entirely at liberty to take a view on this, and express it through the democratic process. Indeed, did they not, I would find them deficient in an important dimension of the human condition.

Best wishes, 2RM.

[amortalman]

[Replying to post 9 by amortalman]

You are correct that we need people with principles and intelligence. But as for good character, what standard do we depend on to know what's good or evil?

Contrary to what you have been taught morality exists independent of the Bible. Some believe it exists in spite of the Bible. After all, God ordered the slaughter of the Canaanites including the women and children. While the Hebrews were in the wilderness God ordered that a man found picking up sticks on the Sabbath be stoned to death.
But the answer to your question is secular morality. It is a common belief among religious folk that goodness and morality cannot exist apart from God. This is a gross misconception. I suggest you read up on it.

You also said, "If they believe in God that's fine, if not, that's fine also," thus implying that it makes no difference whether one believes God or not.

There are both moral and immoral unbelievers. There are also both moral and immoral believers.

Are you sure?

Yes, I am sure.

How did you arrive at that conclusion?

From observing reality. How did you arrive at the conclusion that believers in God are somehow morally superior to unbelievers?

Can a non-believer in God rule without being godless?

You are equating non-believers with immoral lowlifes devoid of principles and good character. I assure you that is not the case.

Both history and experience tell us that any action without God or with a false dependence on God is guaranteed to fail.

If you try to put away your bias I think you'll find that the rate of success or failure of anything is independent of one's calling on God. Those who pray to God tend to remember only the "answered prayers."

Have you considered possible effects on behavior toward you because of non-belief in God by a leader? Even if apparently good, have you considered the possibility of deception?

More of the same. Now you're saying only God believers will deal fairly and without deception. Some of the most heinous crimes against humanity have been committed by God believers.

If true that good government exists without God as you claim, then the DOI would be worthless and questionable as to why it was even written.

The main purpose of the DOI was to announce separation from Great Britain. If you have read beyond the preamble you know that the DOI lists a total of 27 grievances against King George III and these complaints constitute the proof of the right to rebellion. Nowhere in the 27 complaints is God even mentioned. Read it for yourself. https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/ ... oes-it-say

But if you mean that righteousness in government means pushing and promoting certain religious dogma then that's a dangerous thing to open the door to.

Let's please be careful not to forget the abundance of wisdom found in the Bible that we tend to take for granted.

Certainly, there is a lot of wisdom found in the Bible just as there are in numerous other ancient writings, the writings of Confucious are some.

[2ndRateMind]

The following is a direct quote from a dedicated evangelical Christian:

"We are being told and some Christians believe we should not engage in politics. We are not engaging in politics we are standing for righteousness!"

How do you feel about the above statement?

I suspect your 'dedicated evangelical Christian' is confusing what (s)he thinks is righteousness for what actually is righteousness. Those of us who have attempted to grapple with ethics, and appreciate its complexity as a field of human enquiry, would tend to be more circumspect in our pronouncements.

Best wishes, 2RM.