Christians And Politics

@TV01,


This sounds like a backslidden TV01    .  No harm intended mr backslider  .

@TV01,


I guess he is working out his salvation with fear and trembling!  Why do you ask?

That is a good question and topic. Personally, I don't see a problem if christians should take an active part in politics if we stop to properly define the purpose of politics. However, it would be foolish of me to give the impression that any christian is expected to remain spotless while being involved, especially in today's politics.

Biblical history has shown where God's chosen were at some point appointed leaders in the affairs of men. Daniel,  Joseph, and queen Esther were good examples. Daniel and Joseph both served as Prime Ministers in governments that were opposed to God at some point in time. Their outstanding and exemplary lives brought great leaders to recognize the Creator-God of heaven. Esther because of her position in the kingdom of Persia was able to influence the salvation of her people.

In essence we would need to weigh the situation. If one believes that God has called him or her to be in a position at that point in time, then God will enable those. When Paul wrote in Romans 13 about the "powers that be", he was referring to the Roman government. He made it clear that it was God who raised it up to function as His minister, despite the fact that Rome at the time under Nero was a terror to christians.

Just my thoughts.

You may well see it as not problematic, but surely pursuing something that will leave a Christian with spot, wrinkle, or blemish is to be steadfastly avoided if not outright abhorred?


Thank you sir.
As yet, no one has demonstrated how it may be done. And that premise is general and should rightfully be considered before a Christian engages in any activity.

God bless

Jesus is our example,He never partispated in politics,so its wrong for a christian to do that because especially in Nigeria,no matter how holy you are you must be tempted to loot and steal.

A sound premise will test true no matter how simply it is stated. Well said


So Christians not participating in politics is sin?

Maybe it would help if we considered that social activism is not limited to part politics.
Christians are called to participate socially by offering succour to the needy, being law-abiding and presenting pure uncompromised witness to their Lord.



Their involvement was not political by any stretch of the imagination. One can be involved in social discourse without resort to partisan politics. Where state and religion are blurred, fascism sets in. Sharia anybody?

God bless

Well for the pro Christianity with politics, i have a little food for thought why separateness from the world and its politics (human rulership handed out by the devil) is a must for true christianity and christians.

1 For those that use Israel as an example, Israel was a chosen nation, a special possesion under a convenant, largely a theocracy and had a mandate and purpose from God. That though ended after the death of Jesus and the law convenant was no longer binding. Which nation today does God wholy support?

2 Who does the politics of the Nations glorify. Does it vindicate the only Goverment of God under his son or are their national intrests their priority? Are the nations pursuing the will of God?

3 During the wars of the nations, for eg 2nd world war, so called christianity (actually a big time harlot) was involved in one of the greatest debacles of its history like it has done since apostacy crept in and still does today. The German Cardinals and their Vatican connection asked the people to pray for Germany because God was with them The German religious leaders blessed the troops and told Hitler that God was with them and asked the citizens to pray for the country. The Italian religious leaders and the Vatican blessed Italian troops and the Facist goverment and told them that God was with them and that the citizens should pray for the country. The Church of England blessed english troops and supported the goverment and asked the people to pray for the country since God was with them. The same story in france, eastern europe and the United States and much of the world.

What was the end result?

Millions of Catholics killing fellow Catholics

Millions of Protestants killing fellow Protestants (Anglicans, Lutherans, Episcopelians etc)

Catholic and Protestant Legislators voting to go to war and Kill fellow Catholics and Protestants

Catholic and Protestant Prime Ministers and Heads of states and Goverments signing of war acts to kill other Catholics and protestants.

The general so called Christians praying to God to help them to kill and finish off enemy countries where millions who profess the same faith live.

Everybody believing that God is with their own country . Hilarious. please guys who was God with in these situations.

What a shame!

What has happened to the hallmarks of true christianity

1 Love among each other.

2 Separateness from the world.

3 Primary comission to preach about the rulership of christ which will destroy present goverments

4 Beign objects of hatred from all these worldly nations (because of non participation in its affairs)

Compare todays so called christianity with true first century christianity and its a sorry sight

Irrespective of if we want to acknowledge it or not, The truth remains that early christians advoided the politics of their day because worldy politics was and still is incompactible with true christianity. They realised that God's destruction of human rulership (and anything or people associated with it and YES THE HARLOT MASQUERADING TODAY AS CHRISTIANITY) was a certainty.

Hi Sage, Concilitory in that I'm willing to talk. I am in no way compromising my position. Christian involvement in politics demonstrates Godliness without power (or even real belief).

God bless.

I can only say  to this.
A comparison with ancient Israel is flawed completely. True worshippers of God did not kill each other and the nation had one sole purpose ie the advancement of pure worship and vindication of God's soveriengty. This cannot be said of the present wordly nations.

The love Jesus was talking about was to identify the Brotherhood. The brotherhood and the commision that they had would superceed anyother obligation to any human govt. If it was missing then those were not true disciples of Christ. Killing each other because human govts ordered it is a lame excuse. When the early christians were ordered to deviate from their primary commision as the people taught that their preaching will sabotage their rulership and the romans too,they clearly refused.

Seperation from wordly politics is the most important step step because it keeps true christians seperate form wordly strife, conflicts contentions and participation in rulership that comes from the devil, things that have no place in true christianity.

The Judgement of nations depends partly on how they treat the spiritual israel of God not anyother wordly nations. In the first century, the nations treated that spiritual israel with disdain and until the great apostasy that saw the Church and state mix together, it was so. When the Church started to colaborate with the state, Jesus admonition that as long as they did what they were supposed to do the way that they were supposed to do it, they would be objects of hatred by all nations,became an irrelevant statement.

Ceaser is God's servant in a relative sense. He provides an enviroment in which the proclamation of the word was and is done. For eg Paul used his Roman Citizenship and Roman aminities that he enjoyed to spread the word but was not going to do anything to help the empire politically or in a political way. The Jewish system also provided the early Christians whit the enviroment in which they taught the word but they did not get involved in the political realm nor help the jewish system in a political way. Christians are asked to be obidient to the supirior authorities and to pay back Caesars things to Caesar but also God's things to God. Any involvement or requirment from Caesar that conflicted with the godly requirment of lauding only the approved kingdom of God would be supersceeded by God's command. So would anything that would jeopardise their identifying marks as one brotherhood.

The jews needed a great political leader when Jesus came to earth. He fitted the bill of a person that would rescue them from opperesion that they were suffering but whenever he was presented a chance to take on the mantle of human rulership, he fled from it. Neither he, nor his apostles who had vast super human powers got involved in human rulership nor did anything to alter their political realm even though they could. It was clear to them that human rulership had already been judged and was up for destruction along with anything that associated itself with it.

The facts are clear from the bible

1 The devil is the ruler of the world, human rulership is under his influence and it is to whom he wishes that he gives rulership

2 The precedent of divine justice shows that when something is up for destruction, anything associated with it is up for destruction as well. From babies to beasts.

3 Jesus and the early christians pointed only to one rulership as the solution to mankinds problems. They never promoted any human ruler as one people should support but rather advoided the politics of their day. True christians today should follow the same precedent.


And i don't understand what you mean by compromise is an internal weakness. A legislator voting to go and kill fellow so called christians. Is it by default that he is there? He has put himself in a position no true christian should.

Christiandom is a harlot in that she has neglected the primary commision of lauding the only rulership that Jesus and his apostles taught. She has turned to supporting human rulerships and interests and taking part in wordly affairs. er alligiances and alliances is now to human rulerships since the great apostacy.

The prince of peace is looking at Christiandom with her God dishonouring doctrines and practices and Man honouring robes and activities and is ready to carry out judgement on the unfaithful harlot.

good point guy. I expected somebody to raise that point.

Different bible passages that clearly show that the devil is the ruler of the world do not contradict Romans 13:1. Paul simply acknowledged the fact that human rulership would not be here without God's permission of it.
For example Jer 12 :1 and 2 says that God planted the wicked and has let them grow and that the works of the wicked are flourishing. Jeremiah spoke of it as if God had planted the wicked and then let them flourish but he was not implying that God was literarily planting wickedness. Jeremiah simply acknowledged the fact that the wicked were existing and flourishing simply because of God's permission. If he did not allow it, there would be no wicked one. So God allows wicked ones and wickedness to thrive until his own due time to take care of those.

In the same vein God allows and permits human rulership to continue till his own due time.

Note that permission and approval are two different things. There are a lot of things that God permits and allows to happen even though he disproves of them. But that in no way alters his plans about dealing with those things at his due time.

The early christians, for example Paul, used the provisions that Caesar made to spread the word. Paul used his Roman citizenship to seek justice in times of trials and spread the word with it. He enjoyed the benefits of Roman citizenship but was not going to do anything to help Rome in a political way or engage in their politics. Same for the early Christians in Judea.
Caesar is God's servant in that sense.

Christians are to be obedient to the Govts, pay their taxes and abide by law. They should not try any subversive moves on Govt. Where the Govt commands conflicts with their God given responsibilities though, God's commands takes precedent.

An example can be taken from Jesus and the early apostles. The nations that they lived in needed  strong political will and leadership. But the truth is now as it was back then that they realised that no human rulership would solve mankinds problems nor achieve God's purpose. Only one could, and that is the rulership under Christ and that was the only kingdom that Christians were to lend their whole support to.
The early christians did not support any human ruler nor did they take part in the political realms of their times.

The great apostacy changed everything.

God in the meantime allows and permits several things including suffering, wickedness, imperfection, rulership under the influence of the devil etc to continue. He has already stated what his plans regarding these are and he intends to remove them all when his time is due.


 

I need to tune down my tone, but it beats me how something that is so clear is so hard for some people to see.

@stimulus,

Thanks for that take.  I have no clue where sage got his theology from.  It justs boosts some people's ego to condemn the church and like the zealots of old, are not interested in the social events of their days.

Sage reminds me of what Jesus said regarding the scriptures: "how readest thou?"

How you read Scripture to suggest that it is the devil that gives rulership to people - now, that would be a surprise treat indeed!

and one other thing

Jesus has laid out the identifying marks of true christianity.

He also said that by their fruits they shall be known.

2 Cor 11:14,15 shows that the Devil keeps transforming himself into an angel of light and so do his ministers.

Christiandom has been parading itself as an angel of light. But as Jesus said, by their works they shall be known. Which brings us back to examining the works of Christiandom
 




and my contrast with what 1st Century Christianity could have looked like if they had mired themselves in the politics of their day

  .

What a disgusting harlot christiandom is.  The king of God's kingdom Jesus is looking on as this so called steward abandons the commision that is laid out by Jesus and turns to promoting human govts, adorning themselves in Man glorifying robes, parading God dishonouring teachings and practices, her history soaked with blood, apostacy and harlotry with human rulers and claiming to be his true sevants at the end of the day .

Little wonder God's judgement on her (and all other parts of that harlot) will be decisive, just and awe inspiring.

I don't think any of us here will honestly examine Christiandom and say she does not deserve every single bit of it.

@sage,

I knew you would predictably bring up all these references; which again proves that you already made up your mind before opening the Scriptures to hear what it has to say on the subject. However, let me walk you through the loopholes in your latest entry:


This text has been misused by many to suppose that the devil actually gives rulership to whomsoever he chooses. Oga, what we many times fail to understand is that the devil was speaking another one of his bogus lies! The Lord didn't have to defend anything or argue with him about his obvious lies. Let me ask you a few questions:

(a) if the devil gives rulership to ANYONE at all, could you cite just two verses where in fact the Bible states that he has ever done that?

(b) whose PREROGATIVE is it to give rulership to anyone - the devil's, or God's?

What you direfully missed here is that the devil was surreptitiously making a claim that does not belong to him at all. The Lord Jesus exposed the devil for who he truly is, for "he was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it" (John 8:44; or as rendered in the NIV, 'When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies'). It is therefore not surprising that the devil was obviously lying in arrogating to himself something that belongs ALONE to the sovereign God.


You obviously are going by the English wording and exposing the fact that you have not studied the context or substance of the texts you quote. There are several contexts of the word "world" in Scripture. 1 John 5:19 does not suppose at all that the devil has absolute power or control of the world in the sense of being in control over the universe; for that is alone the prerogative of the Lord Jesus Christ, of whom it is doubly testified that He upholds all things by the word of His power (Heb. 1:3), and by Him all things consist (Col. 1:17).

When Scripture speaks of the devil as the god of this world (2 Cor. 4;4), it is in reference to the rebellious system of men and fallen angels in the world. It is from such a rebellious system that the Lord Jesus gave Himself to deliver us (girl. 1:4 - 'that He might deliver us from this present evil world'). This rebellious and ungodly system of which the devil stands as the prince is expounded for us in Eph. 2:2 & 3 - "Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience: Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others."

Never forget that all power in heaven and on earth is in the hands of the Lord Jesus Christ (Matt. 28:18); and in the Lord's prayer, believers recognize that the power and the glory and the Kingdom belongs to God (Matt. 6:13), and not at all to the devil.

Hence, when the Bible speaks of the devil as the prince, ruler, or god of this world, it is in reference to a rebellious system operating in the lives of the ungodly. It is not in reference to any idea of the devil setting up or giving rulership to anyone in the first place. Until you find the verse that specifically states that the devil gives rulership to whomsoever he wishes, the idea remains a smoke screen; a facade nowhere supported in the Word of God.


Now, in your second summation I observe you have driven issues far too much in a desperate bid to secure your default misconceptions; and here are a few pointers for your reconsideration:


Again, it does not state that the devil or Satan gives rulership to anyone. In fact, you have just come round reiterating what I stated earlier, that he may influence evil in governance; but it is not in his jurisdiction to set up or give rulership to anyone.


Nope, Christians do NOT have a battle against world leaders, in as much as they are men (termed "flesh and blood" in Eph. 6:12), and our battle is NOT against them; but rather against spiritual forces of wickedness in high places. It is for this reason we are to pray for leaders and all in authority (1 Tim. 2:1-2); respect and obey civil authorities (1 Pet. 2:13-14); and also pay our taxes without a hint of civil disobedience (Rom. 13:1-4). It is really a sad misconception to read that Christians have a battle against the same world leaders that we are to pray for and obey!


Evil rulers - read it in context of the preceding verses. God has nothing against earthly rulers as such; but He will bring evil rulers (who stand as His enemies) to divine judgement.


Same as just above.


The question is: WHO gave rulership to men in the first place - was it the devil, or was it God Himself (Dan. 4:32)? I'm still waiting for a direct reference in the Bible where you read that the devil in any ONE instance set up or gave rulership to ANYONE!



This simply begs the question. Where is it written that the devil GIVES or sets up rulership to ANYONE? You can't dribble round a flawed concept and then build your theology on it.


James 1:27 does not say "wordly affairs" - it simply says: "keep himself unspotted from the world." The same thing is implied in John 17:15 where Jesus prayed: "I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil." The apostle John sums up 'the world' in this context this way: "For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world" (1 John 2:16).

There are issues of world affairs that the Bible says God deals with, and Daniel 4:32 again reminds us that "the most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will."


Abeg you, do all those Scriptures negate the fact that God Himself is the One who gives rulership to whomsoever He wishes? Do those verses even teach the opposite of obeying, respecting and praying for the leaders and authorities that God Himself has set up (Rom. 13:1-4; 1 Tim. 2:1-2; and 1 Pet. 2:13-14)??

You're arguing in circles, because if one should apply the same rule and stretch it the way you do, then think about this: it is no secret that some Christians have defrauded their own brethren (1 Cor. 6:8 ). Does that therefore make Christianity a wrong system? In the same way, your reference to Eccl. 8:9 is too weak a claim for supposing the idea that human rulership or governance is all evil and the Christian should have nothing to do with it. Such an idea simply falls on its face when we read texts upon texts that tell us the undeniable fact that (a) God Himself is the One who gives rulership to whomsoever He wishes; and (b) Christians should obey, respect and actively pray for those in authority, rather than disavow them.


The way you drivel is the icing on the cake!   Do you have another Bible that has 'a host of a MILLION scriptures'? Anyway, enjoyed your joke. At the end of the day, you have failed to clearly enunciate how Scripture indicates that the devil gives rulership to anyone. Do you think there's indeed a verse for that misconception at all, which you could offer us in your next post?

Cheers.