# Why are so many Christians more interested in politics than evangelism?



## thistle93

Hi! Why do you think it is that many who claim to be Christians seem to be more concerned and excited about getting a particular politician in office or getting abortion outlawed (I am all for voting and fighting against abortion) than proclaiming the saving message of Jesus Christ to those who are lost? Seems people are willing to be scorned for their political and moral belief's but not so much for sharing their faith in Jesus Christ. I know there are many Christians who do both politics and evangelism rightly but their does seem to be a large group in America who think if we can just get certain politicians in and change laws then peoples hearts will be changed and people will then be saved. Whereas I see it we need to be be telling people about the wrath and love of God first so that He will change their hearts and then laws will be changed as people are changed. I am not a postmillenalists (I lean towards amill) so I do not see the world getting any better but worse though under God's sovereign hand and within His time table. Not that we should not be doing our part as Christians to influence the culture but the commission we have been given is to spread the Gospel not a political party or moral laws (as good as they may be). It is not an either/or issue but I do think the Gospel needs to take priority. Just curious your thoughts given the season we are in. 

Any books you know of that address this issue rightly?

Thanks!


For His Glory-
Matthew


----------



## Elizabeth

Well, you'd have to give a concrete example or two of folks championing the one while neglecting the other, otherwise, aren't you being a bit, well, possibly, presumptuous? Are you talking about some specific incident you've witnessed?


----------



## Miss Marple

I enjoy politics but see political activism as a great platform for witnessing. I have often been asked why I support this proposition or oppose that candidate, and I freely share that I am a Christian and try to apply scripture to my political ideals. Further, as to motivation, I talk about Jesus telling us to love one another, and to do unto others as I would have done unto me.

For instance I may be challenged, hey, if you don't like abortions, don't have one. I respond that I won't, but I feel compelled to do something when innocent children are being aborted, because I love them. Also, if I were in the womb, I'd like someone advocating for my life.

So I don't see the two areas (politics and evangelism) as rivals, but as parts of a whole and living faith. Since I enjoy politics, I participate more than "normal," but suppose I enjoyed boating, or gardening, or soup kitchen work. Presumably I'd use these situations and relationships as platforms for evangelism, as well.


----------



## Peairtach

*Miss Marple*


> So I don't see the two areas (politics and evangelism) as rivals, but as parts of a whole and living faith.



Two kingdoms, or rather two co-ordinate spheres of the one Kingdom.

*Matthew*


> It is not an either/or issue but I do think the Gospel needs to take priority.



The Great Commission overlays the Cultural Mandate. The Gospel message does need to take priority, but some Christians may be called to more work in the political sphere. But we always need to ask ourselves are we neglecting evangelism, because it can be very easy to get discouraged in evangelism and turn to other aspects of Christian work.


----------



## Scott1

Matthew, a few thoughts below.




thistle93 said:


> Hi! Why do you think it is that many who claim to be Christians seem to be more concerned and excited about getting a particular politician in office or getting abortion outlawed (I am all for voting and fighting against abortion) than proclaiming the saving message of Jesus Christ to those who are lost?
> 
> While that is often said, I'm not seeing that happen. It's more like the evangelical churches here in the USA are confused, and not united on the clear biblical moral issues like you mention. They were more so thirty years ago. In the meantime, it does not seem the spirituality of the church has clarified and improved either- again very broadly speaking. The spirituality of the church would include preaching and discipling by the gospel.
> 
> For example why has the annual march for life on the Roe v. Wade anniversary dwindled? Why is there no unambiguous pro-life position being articulated as a unifying principle of Christianity?
> 
> We had, for example the "Manhattan Declaration," that while appearing to compromise important biblical doctrine, did not result in any real action in opposing the biggest advancement of abortion and euthanasia since Roe v. Wade- the federal "health" care takeover? When the Supreme Court upheld that by one vote it was as big judicial activism to support the evil of abortion as Roe v. Wade.
> 
> Why DIDN'T Christians "get involved in politics" over that? What's it going to take?
> 
> Why weren't more Christians really involved in politics to oppose that and promote life?
> 
> Seems people are willing to be scorned for their political and moral belief's but not so much for sharing their faith in Jesus Christ.
> 
> The appearance seems more not willing to suffer or contend for either, compared to thirty years ago. But this is very broad, and anecdotal, and admittedly a very subjective evaluation.
> 
> I know there are many Christians who do both politics and evangelism rightly but their does seem to be a large group in America who think if we can just get certain politicians in and change laws then peoples hearts will be changed and people will then be saved. Whereas I see it we need to be be telling people about the wrath and love of God first so that He will change their hearts and then laws will be changed as people are changed.
> 
> My understanding is that the church focuses on discipling people toward the Word of God for all of life, and only incidentally speaking out to political institutions when there is a clear biblical moral issue at stake.
> 
> I am not a postmillenalists (I lean towards amill) so I do not see the world getting any better but worse though under God's sovereign hand and within His time table. Not that we should not be doing our part as Christians to influence the culture
> 
> But in their private capacities, Christians ought be the MOST involved people in spheres like politics, etc.
> 
> but the commission we have been given is to spread the Gospel not a political party or moral laws (as good as they may be). It is not an either/or issue but I do think the Gospel needs to take priority. Just curious your thoughts given the season we are in.
> 
> Any books you know of that address this issue rightly?
> 
> "How then shall we Live? by Francis A. Schaeffer might be helpful. And the classic work, "Lex Rex" by Reverend Samuel Rutherford.
> 
> I think the Westminster Confession with the American revisions does an excellent job of summarizing the doctrine of Scripture on the matter.
> 
> It's "two kingdoms," but not two radical ones.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> 
> For His Glory-
> Matthew


----------



## Scott1

Here's a paper that isn't perfect in its theology, but might be helpful:

http://www.biblicalblueprints.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/GettingChristiansIntoPolitics.pdf


----------



## CuriousNdenver

thistle93 said:


> Seems people are willing to be scorned for their political and moral belief's but not so much for sharing their faith in Jesus Christ. I know there are many Christians who do both politics and evangelism rightly but their does seem to be a large group in America who think if we can just get certain politicians in and change laws then peoples hearts will be changed and people will then be saved. Whereas I see it we need to be be telling people about the wrath and love of God first so that He will change their hearts and then laws will be changed as people are changed.



I have seen the same thing here in Denver, Colo. Evangelism is a direct attack into enemy territory - it is bound to draw enemy fire. My take is that sometimes that fire is in the form of fear on the believer's part. Many believers who I know are terrified to share the gospel. Yet, it is the power of God unto salvation, (Rom. 1:16). 

In many cases, when believers participate in political activism, they are surrounded by others who support the same cause. When believers participate in evangelism, they are often not supported by other believers or sometimes, even their church.

It is not to imply that being involved politically is wrong, or that we should not stand for righteousness. But this activity should not replace evangelism.


----------



## Scott1

CuriousNdenver said:


> It is not to imply that being involved politically is wrong, or that we should not stand for righteousness. But this activity should not replace evangelism.



Yes,
The understanding of the right biblical relationship of this, might be described as
The purpose and focus of the church is discipling believers and obeying the Great Commission.
It is not promoting the political solutions of men.
That focus means the church ordinarily abstains from political involvement EXCEPT it can incident to its mission speak to political institutions and to culture about clear biblical issues. In my understanding, this is especially biblical moral issues. For example, the church of Jesus Christ ought speak unambiguously for innocent human life when civil authorities significantly advance its unlawful destruction.
In fact, I would say the church MUST NOT remain silent in the face of it.
That doesn't mean that is its focus. It is not a substitute for the church's priority and ordinary activity, discipling believers (and their children) by the ordinary means of grace God has provided- Word, sacraments and prayer.
And believers ought, in their personal lives be as involved in politics and advancing God's Kingdom (His ways) in that as in all spheres of life.



> I Peter 2
> 
> 9 But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light;


----------



## NaphtaliPress

Keep this to generalities or a moderator will move this to Politics and Government.


----------



## OPC'n

I think you're mostly right. I don't believe that we are to push for a Christian government. I vote for the person who upholds the Constitution. It doesn't matter if the president is a Christian or not. It also doesn't matter if he outlaws abortion or gay marriage. Ppl are going to practice both with or without a law. The Gospel is the only thing that will change hearts. So we should vote for those who uphold the Constitution and we should spread the Gospel to change hearts.....2k!


----------



## Pergamum

I try to keep politics out of witnessing. 

The USA has become a Fox news culture of whoever yells the loudest wins....and the church has been too keen to speak of causes and governmental solutions and too little of Christ and Him crucified.

I want people to know me for what I am FOR (Jesus) instead of what I am against (liberalism, gay rights, or whatever political cause you want to write here, no matter how good).... 


Here is a quote from John Newton from his letters:



> "The whole system of my politics is summed up in this one verse, "The Lord reigns! Let the nations tremble!" Psalm 99:1
> 
> The times look awfully dark indeed; and as the clouds grow thicker--the stupidity of the nation seems proportionally to increase. If the Lord had not a remnant here, I would have very formidable apprehensions. But He loves His children; some are sighing and mourning before Him,
> and I am sure He hears their sighs, and sees their tears. I trust there is mercy in store for us at the bottom; but I expect a shaking time before things get into a right channel--before we are humbled, and are taught to give Him the glory.
> 
> The state of the nation, the state of the churches--both are deplorable! Those who should be praying--are disputing and fighting among themselves! Alas! how many professors are more concerned for the mistakes of government--than for their own sins!"


----------



## OPC'n

Pergamum said:


> I try to keep politics out of witnessing.
> 
> The USA has become a Fox news culture of whoever yells the loudest wins....and the church has been too keen to speak of causes and governmental solutions and too little of Christ and Him crucified.
> 
> I want people to know me for what I am FOR (Jesus) instead of what I am against (liberalism, gay rights, or whatever political cause you want to write here, no matter how good)....
> 
> 
> Here is a quote from John Newton from his letters:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "The whole system of my politics is summed up in this one verse, "The Lord reigns! Let the nations tremble!" Psalm 99:1
> 
> The times look awfully dark indeed; and as the clouds grow thicker--the stupidity of the nation seems proportionally to increase. If the Lord had not a remnant here, I would have very formidable apprehensions. But He loves His children; some are sighing and mourning before Him,
> and I am sure He hears their sighs, and sees their tears. I trust there is mercy in store for us at the bottom; but I expect a shaking time before things get into a right channel--before we are humbled, and are taught to give Him the glory.
> 
> The state of the nation, the state of the churches--both are deplorable! Those who should be praying--are disputing and fighting among themselves! Alas! how many professors are more concerned for the mistakes of government--than for their own sins!"
Click to expand...


Amen!!! And ty for all that you and your family does in spreading the Gospel !


----------



## TylerRay

As for me, I do not have much hope for our political situation here in the United States without reformation and Revival. However, I have civil duties that cause me to be "interested in politics." What I do not have is the ministry of the Word committed to me, so disseminating that Word (the Gospel of the Kingdom), is not only _not_ my duty, but it is not my prerogative.

The great commission is given to ministers (beginning with the Apostles, in context) to preach/disciple and baptize--the ministry of Word and sacrament.


----------



## Tim

With a correct understanding of the duty of nations to the Lord Jesus Christ, political action toward the ideals of civil recognition of Christ as King is an endeavor that need not be seen as outside the Gospel priority (cf. Matthew 28:19-20). However, a secular approach to politics may be rightly criticized as representing a skewed priority. 



> "It's our duty to testify to all men that they owe submission to Jesus Christ and His Kingship; it is our duty to testify to all men that there is a King. It is not Caesar, it is not Barack Obama, it is not the Constitution of this United States of America, it is not autonomous reason, it is not self-interest, it is not capitalism, it is not philosophy, it is not academia. It is Jesus Christ, He's the King. And our solemn obligation is to tell all men that there is this King and He requires their submission. "
> 
> Pastor John Sawtelle, Sermon on Christ's Mediatorial Kingship. (Source: Facebook page of All Saints Reformed Church, RPCNA)


----------



## kodos

I hear this charge that there are people who think that by passing laws that people will be saved. I don't really run in any circles like that, does someone have an example of these people?

There are those of us who believe that abortion is wrong because it violates God's Laws and thereby His character. Not everything has to do with saving people, but this has to do with restraining evil and punishing it. Now woe to us if we do not preach the gospel, and particularly in some circles they do not preach much if any of the gospel. And this is dreadful.

But, the Civil Magistrate upholds Gods Laws and punishes evildoers. The Church proclaims the gospel and preaches the Good News. Working hand in hand like this they would be a powerful force for good!


----------



## OPC'n

kodos said:


> I hear this charge that there are people who think that by passing laws that people will be saved. I don't really run in any circles like that, does someone have an example of these people?
> 
> There are those of us who believe that abortion is wrong because it violates God's Laws and thereby His character. Not everything has to do with saving people, but this has to do with restraining evil and punishing it. Now woe to us if we do not preach the gospel, and particularly in some circles they do not preach much if any of the gospel. And this is dreadful.
> 
> But, the Civil Magistrate upholds Gods Laws and punishes evildoers. The Church proclaims the gospel and preaches the Good News. Working hand in hand like this they would be a powerful force for good!



Yep they would be a powerful force, but can you honestly say that one day everyone in government will be a Christian working hand in hand with the church? And if they do you then have to decide which denomination they will represent. Seems like an unlikely event.


----------



## thbslawson

Mitt Romney can raise millions in a week, but it took us over a year to raise $100k to fund the printing of the Bible in the Tuvan language. Just saying.


----------



## SolaScriptura

I grew up in "mainstream Evangelicalism" (as did some of you!) 

Several of the people with which I associated thought that the Christian Coalition was the cat's meow. 

But those same people - in their mind - NEVER confused evangelism with political activism. And in NONE of the churches in which I ever stepped foot in which they were "actively interested" in politics did they EVER forego evangelistic outreach because they were too busy doing activism.

I think some folks who have made it popular to criticize evangelicals taking a stand in the public sphere do so because they know that they are at least close enough to the evangelicals to have a hearing.

But in truth... you know which churches are given to political activism at the expense of evangelism? It isn't churches on the "right" of the political spectrum, it's from those on the "left!"

I mean Mainline and to an even greater degree... Black churches.

What is exceptional in evangelical circles is mainstream in these contexts. But we don't really have a hearing there do we? So I guess criticism is viewed as being a waste of time.


----------



## Southern Presbyterian

OPC'n said:


> Seems like an unlikely event.



Jesus commissioning 12 working class guys from Galilee to change the world as they knew it within their lifetime also seems like an unlikely event, but it happened. With God, all things are possible. The fact that the human mind can see no likely way to accomplish a goal does not place any limitation on Christ and His goal.


----------



## jandrusk

Don't want to go off-topic, but I want to qualify my statement before I make it in that I'm all for the outlaw of abortion, but there seems to be a contradiction in that on the one hand Christians don't want the government to meddle with the affairs of the church and on the other hand they do by wanting that same government to outlaw abortion. To me the only solution appears to be a fully instituted Christian Theonomic government. Is it just me or is there an inconsistency among Christians and their presuppositions regarding this?


----------



## Zach

What troubles me is not that Churches are more concerned with politics than bearing witness to the grace and glory of God, but that individual Christians are more concerned with this election than the state of our own and others' eternal souls. I think is this what our brother was getting at in the OP. To be honest, I think many Christians are in need of rebuke for the amount of hope they have placed in their candidate getting elected.


----------



## Tim

Zach said:


> To be honest, I think many Christians are in need of rebuke for the amount of hope they have placed in their candidate getting elected.



Yes. I believe your statement is spot on.


----------



## SolamVeritatem

While that is often said, I'm not seeing that happen. It's more like the evangelical churches here in the USA are confused, and not united on the clear biblical moral issues like you mention. They were more so thirty years ago. In the meantime, it does not seem the spirituality of the church has clarified and improved either- again very broadly speaking. The spirituality of the church would include preaching and discipling by the gospel.

For example why has the annual march for life on the Roe v. Wade anniversary dwindled? Why is there no unambiguous pro-life position being articulated as a unifying principle of Christianity?

We had, for example the "Manhattan Declaration," that while appearing to compromise important biblical doctrine, did not result in any real action in opposing the biggest advancement of abortion and euthanasia since Roe v. Wade- the federal "health" care takeover? When the Supreme Court upheld that by one vote it was as big judicial activism to support the evil of abortion as Roe v. Wade. 

Why DIDN'T Christians "get involved in politics" over that? What's it going to take?

Why weren't more Christians really involved in politics to oppose that and promote life?

Scott for the win!!!!!


----------



## SolamVeritatem

Ben,

I wholeheartedly concur. I wish I had 10 bucks for everytime I saw an African American congressman, alderman or senate candidate be given not only the pulpit but at least 30-45 mins IN THE MIDDLE OF THE SERVICE to "talk to us about his commitment to better the community" (read: campaign). 

They got in office and when did we see that guy or gal again? You guessed it, during the next election. Of course, this issue was only systemic of an array of core issues plaguing the "church" I was a part of (another story for another post...)


----------



## Miss Marple

P. Geek,

"on the one hand Christians don't want the government to meddle with the affairs of the church and on the other hand they do by wanting that same government to outlaw abortion."

I think this goes to sphere sovereignty. The church has its sphere; the government has its sphere; the family has its sphere. But there is legitimate overlap.

For example, I do want the government-funded fire dept. to come put the fire out if our building is on fire. I do want the police to pursue threatening letters addressed to our church. They can require basic zoning, like no neon signs in a residential neighborhood, or garbage cans brought back in within 24 hours. This is their legitimate sphere. However they can't tell us how to worship, or whether we may, or appoint our elders, etc.

So the church may tell the government that they must forbid abortion, that homosexuality should not be promoted, that stealing even in more muted forms is a sin, etc. The church has no legitimate "force," police or what have you. It is limited to admonition and prayer and such. Perhaps, arguably, some resistance (for another thread I'm sure). To fail to call our public officials to account, or to behave as though their promotion and pursuit of evil is ok, would be wrong. That is a particular role of ours.


----------



## Pantocrator

*Why politics > evangelism in the eyes of many American Christians*

A lot of people place more emphasis on politics than evangelism because . . . .

1.	people are lazy, and politics (which requires walking into a voting booth) is a lot easier than leading souls to Christ (which “with men is impossible”)
2.	mainstream American culture labels religion and theology as “divisive”
3.	the widespread influence of Arminianism in American Christianity causes people to seek sanctification through law rather than sanctification through Christ
4.	millions of dollars are spent to convince us that conservative politics is the answer (imagine if millions of dollars were spent on evangelism instead!)
5.	a large portion of the American left are god-haters (as shown by abortion, gay marriage, booing God at the DNC, ect.)
6.	A lot of conservative Christians really, really, really, really, really, really hate Obama.


----------



## Rufus

SolaScriptura said:


> Several of the people with which I associated thought that the Christian Coalition was the cat's meow.



Wut?


----------



## SolamVeritatem

Sean,

Here's a lil' help brother...

Christian Coalition of America | Defending America's Godly Heritage!


----------



## BibleCyst

SolaScriptura said:


> But in truth... you know which churches are given to political activism at the expense of evangelism? It isn't churches on the "right" of the political spectrum, it's from those on the "left!"



There is a LOT of truth to this statement! The doctrinal statements of some of the mainline churches sound like they were lifted directly out of the Democratic Party platform! While I definitely agree with the OP that the Christian Right as a whole is *louder* in the political sphere than it is in the evangelism sphere, at least this same group (again, generally speaking) proclaims the gospel of Jesus Christ.

I'm often very hard on the Christian Right, and sometimes crass. I'm not pleased with the fact that my brethren place influencing the government as the highest priority. Sometimes, I even wonder if it's intellectual laziness, and not having enough faith in the sword of God's Holy Word; placing it in turn in the sword of the kingdom of the flesh. Perhaps there is some truth to this in the more broadly evangelical churches, though I know that one most tread carefully when making accusations like this (especially if one has a plank in their eye). It's such a blessing, though, to have good, Reformed denominations - such as the PCA or the others in NAPARC. Denominations full of men and women who believe in the power of the infallible Word, and seek to the best of their abilities to vote according to what this Word tells them.


----------



## gls3ms

They never read Romans 13


----------



## BarryR

OPC'n said:


> kodos said:
> 
> 
> 
> I hear this charge that there are people who think that by passing laws that people will be saved. I don't really run in any circles like that, does someone have an example of these people?
> 
> There are those of us who believe that abortion is wrong because it violates God's Laws and thereby His character. Not everything has to do with saving people, but this has to do with restraining evil and punishing it. Now woe to us if we do not preach the gospel, and particularly in some circles they do not preach much if any of the gospel. And this is dreadful.
> 
> But, the Civil Magistrate upholds Gods Laws and punishes evildoers. The Church proclaims the gospel and preaches the Good News. Working hand in hand like this they would be a powerful force for good!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep they would be a powerful force, but can you honestly say that one day everyone in government will be a Christian working hand in hand with the church? And if they do you then have to decide which denomination they will represent. Seems like an unlikely event.
Click to expand...



Can you honestly say that it _wouldn't _be possible? Regardless if it was possible or not - is it not what we "ought" to do as Christians? Wouldn't it be glorious if Christians stopped voting for the lesser of two evils and began to vote for those that called Christ King!


----------



## Miss Marple

Hey, I like the Christian Coalition and appreciate the excellent work they've done.


----------



## OPC'n

Southern Presbyterian said:


> OPC'n said:
> 
> 
> 
> Seems like an unlikely event.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jesus commissioning 12 working class guys from Galilee to change the world as they knew it within their lifetime also seems like an unlikely event, but it happened. With God, all things are possible. The fact that the human mind can see no likely way to accomplish a goal does not place any limitation on Christ and His goal.
Click to expand...


True God can do anything. But the apostles never were political and never tried getting only Christians into office. Probably bc they knew as Christ said his kingdom is not of this world . His command was to spread the Gospel to all. Never did he say to "establish my kingdom here on earth". All of the earth's inhabitants will be Christians once he comes again.


----------



## KaphLamedh

Pergamum said:


> Here is a quote from John Newton from his letters:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "The whole system of my politics is summed up in this one verse, "The Lord reigns! Let the nations tremble!" Psalm 99:1
> 
> The times look awfully dark indeed; and as the clouds grow thicker--the stupidity of the nation seems proportionally to increase. If the Lord had not a remnant here, I would have very formidable apprehensions. But He loves His children; some are sighing and mourning before Him,
> and I am sure He hears their sighs, and sees their tears. I trust there is mercy in store for us at the bottom; but I expect a shaking time before things get into a right channel--before we are humbled, and are taught to give Him the glory.
> 
> The state of the nation, the state of the churches--both are deplorable! Those who should be praying--are disputing and fighting among themselves! Alas! how many professors are more concerned for the mistakes of government--than for their own sins!"
Click to expand...


There's nothing to add in this.


----------



## Peairtach

jandrusk said:


> Don't want to go off-topic, but I want to qualify my statement before I make it in that I'm all for the outlaw of abortion, but there seems to be a contradiction in that on the one hand Christians don't want the government to meddle with the affairs of the church and on the other hand they do by wanting that same government to outlaw abortion. To me the only solution appears to be a fully instituted Christian Theonomic government. Is it just me or is there an inconsistency among Christians and their presuppositions regarding this?



Outlawing abortion isn't meddling in the affairs of the church.

Some/many Reformed Christians don't view their opposition to theonomy as inconsistent, because they view theonomy as inconsistent in its call for laws which were part of the Old Covenant administration of the Covenant of Grace to be simplistically transferred to the statute books of modern non-Christian and Christian states.

The subject of theonomy can be discussed at the PB section on theonomy.


----------



## Edward

Miss Marple said:


> I like the Christian Coalition and appreciate the excellent work they've done.



No wonder. Ralph Reed was a Bulldog and a Demostheian. He got them off to a good start.


----------



## Francisco Luna

I just wonder what people really mean when they say "I'm a Christian"?????????

I'm this and I'm that. I belong to to this group or that ministry, they use to say.


That just come from people full of themselves. That's why they take part and they judge about political issues, because they are still full of themselves.

Churches are full of people going to church for the sake of have the right to say, "I go to church", what translated is, "I am a good guy"..........that is not "salt" at all........ that's so dull and boring. Parents take their children to church with that same mentality and then they complain why their kids are not living a "Christian" life!
More and more Cultural "Christianity"!


WE ARE FOREIGNERS, WE ARE STRANGERS, we are PILGRINS IN THIS WORLD.....
*"No one engaged in warfare entangles himself with the affairs of this life, that he may please him who enlisted him as a soldier. " *said Apostol Paul to Pastor Timothy in his Second Letter.


----------



## Rufus

SolamVeritatem said:


> Sean,
> 
> Here's a lil' help brother...
> 
> Christian Coalition of America | Defending America's Godly Heritage!



I know the Christian Coalition, it was the Cat's Meow expression that got me.


----------



## Tim

Rufus said:


> I know the Christian Coalition, it was the Cat's Meow expression that got me.



Now you're on the trolley.


----------



## Miss Marple

I had to look up "Demostheian," and it was hard, and I had to settle for Demosthes, or something like that, anyway, he was supposed to be a great orator and debator. If that is what you mean, yes, I do think he is Demostheian, and a great asset in that sense.

It is not so much I like or don't like Ralph Reed as a figurehead. I like the whole organization.

And to Francisco I say, why would political involvement imply a cultural yet not sincere Christianity? That is what you seem to be saying. Why fear the political sphere?

This world is ours. We will inherit it. Go take dominion! If politics is not your main interest, that is fine, but why opine (unless I read you wrongly) that a believer engaged in politics is somehow doing poorly? 

I will not cede any area of life to our enemy. I am not sure why this one area (politics) is held to the side so often, as something out of all of life the believer must shun.


----------



## jandrusk

I hear ya sister. I think it comes down to the truth that the government will enforce some form of morality on its citizens. The Row vs. Wade was moral declaration that everyone woman has the choice to terminate a pregnancy. That's why I think the only solution is to replace the current governmental system with a Christian one where the law of the land is the scriptures and the scriptures along. 



Miss Marple said:


> P. Geek,
> 
> "on the one hand Christians don't want the government to meddle with the affairs of the church and on the other hand they do by wanting that same government to outlaw abortion."
> 
> I think this goes to sphere sovereignty. The church has its sphere; the government has its sphere; the family has its sphere. But there is legitimate overlap.
> 
> For example, I do want the government-funded fire dept. to come put the fire out if our building is on fire. I do want the police to pursue threatening letters addressed to our church. They can require basic zoning, like no neon signs in a residential neighborhood, or garbage cans brought back in within 24 hours. This is their legitimate sphere. However they can't tell us how to worship, or whether we may, or appoint our elders, etc.
> 
> So the church may tell the government that they must forbid abortion, that homosexuality should not be promoted, that stealing even in more muted forms is a sin, etc. The church has no legitimate "force," police or what have you. It is limited to admonition and prayer and such. Perhaps, arguably, some resistance (for another thread I'm sure). To fail to call our public officials to account, or to behave as though their promotion and pursuit of evil is ok, would be wrong. That is a particular role of ours.


----------



## Edward

Miss Marple said:


> I had to look up "Demostheian," and it was hard, and I had to settle for Demosthes, or something like that, anyway, he was supposed to be a great orator and debator. If that is what you mean, yes, I do think he is Demostheian, and a great asset in that sense.



It is the oldest collegiate debating society in the country, and one of two at the University of Georgia. In the 70s and 80s, it was one of the few places that conservatives could gather. The competing organization devolved into a social club for the homosexuals on campus during the same era.


----------



## J. Dean

kodos said:


> But, the Civil Magistrate upholds Gods Laws and punishes evildoers. The Church proclaims the gospel and preaches the Good News. Working hand in hand like this they would be a powerful force for good!



But not properly kept in their prescribed spheres they also open the door for a theocracy or a church committing adultery with politics for the sake of power and influence. This is not a temptation faced only by Rome in the Middle Ages or the Anglican Church in England.


----------



## J. Dean

Tim said:


> Zach said:
> 
> 
> 
> To be honest, I think many Christians are in need of rebuke for the amount of hope they have placed in their candidate getting elected.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes. I believe your statement is spot on.
Click to expand...


+10. We too often put more faith and stock in our candidates than in our God who is sovereign over the affairs of men, and this erroneous idea is not isolated to one political side or the other.


----------



## gordo

kodos said:


> But, the Civil Magistrate upholds Gods Laws and punishes evildoers. The Church proclaims the gospel and preaches the Good News. Working hand in hand like this they would be a powerful force for good!



Or a powerful force for evil. I think I would rather have corrupt politicians in power then what would come from a so-called 'godly' government. Reminds me of this CS Lewis quote.

_Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. - C. S. Lewis_


----------



## Miss Marple

"I think I would rather have corrupt politicians in power then what would come from a so-called 'godly' government. Reminds me of this CS Lewis quote."

Wow. I can't believe you said that.


----------



## gordo

The CS Lewis quote explains my thoughts. I don't think it is possible to have a _godly government_.


----------



## Tim

gordo said:


> I don't think it is possible to have a godly government.



Wow. I can't believe you said _that_. So, it's possible to have godly self-government, godly family government, godly church government, but not a godly civil government? What is your evidence for this? Were there not times in England, Scotland and Switzerland when this was the case? What about local governments? Do you think it impossible that there could be a godly city council?


----------



## Tim

Do you not believe that revivals can occur by the grace of God? Do you not believe that this can extend to the government that a revived people choose?


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian

Anabaptism


----------



## Shawn Mathis

Want an example (albeit old) of too much politics and not enough Gospel? Consider Randall Terry of Operation Rescue, circa 1995: 

"All our gospel preaching hasn't stopped...a tidal wave that threatens our very survival." "Why do [Christians] cling to an obviously inadequate solution?"

Beyond the Culture Wars, Dr. Horton, p. 73.


----------



## Scott1

Perhaps this is just the gravity of the moment settling in, the election, et. al.
But it seems there is indeed a correlation between freedom, i.e. the political state, and the ability to evangelize freely.
And a correlation between government dependency and the perceived need for evangelism, on the other hand.


----------



## Iconoclast

thistle93 said:


> Hi! Why do you think it is that many who claim to be Christians seem to be more concerned and excited about getting a particular politician in office or getting abortion outlawed (I am all for voting and fighting against abortion) than proclaiming the saving message of Jesus Christ to those who are lost? Seems people are willing to be scorned for their political and moral belief's but not so much for sharing their faith in Jesus Christ. I know there are many Christians who do both politics and evangelism rightly but their does seem to be a large group in America who think if we can just get certain politicians in and change laws then peoples hearts will be changed and people will then be saved. Whereas I see it we need to be be telling people about the wrath and love of God first so that He will change their hearts and then laws will be changed as people are changed. I am not a postmillenalists (I lean towards amill) so I do not see the world getting any better but worse though under God's sovereign hand and within His time table. Not that we should not be doing our part as Christians to influence the culture but the commission we have been given is to spread the Gospel not a political party or moral laws (as good as they may be). It is not an either/or issue but I do think the Gospel needs to take priority. Just curious your thoughts given the season we are in.
> 
> Any books you know of that address this issue rightly?
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> 
> For His Glory-
> Matthew



Hello Matthew,

Psalm 8 is in part quoted in Hebrews 2.



> 6 But one in a certain place testified, saying, What is man, that thou art mindful of him? or the son of man that thou visitest him?
> 
> 7 Thou madest him a little lower than the angels; thou crownedst him with glory and honour, and didst set him over the works of thy hands:
> 
> 8 Thou hast put all things in subjection under his feet. For in that he put all in subjection under him, he left nothing that is not put under him. But now we see not yet all things put under him.




It seems to indicate man has responsibilites in all spheres of life. Many postmill writers take note of this.While Jesus spoke of the Kingdom reign being of heavenly origin it extends to this earth in and through believers.


> After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name.
> 
> 10 Thy kingdom come, *Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.*


*
*
in Numbers we read this:33 *So ye shall not pollute the land wherein ye are: for blood it defileth the land: and the land cannot be cleansed of the blood that is shed therein, but by the blood of him that shed it.*

34 Defile not therefore the land which ye shall inhabit, wherein I dwell: for I the Lord dwell among the children of Israel.

This principle would indicate God's judgment on our land for the blood of aborted babies.
It does not need to be an either or...but both and. The gospel is about salvation...but also about The Kingdom reign.
From Ken Gentry postmillenialism made easy


> In fact, the most important prophetic psalm in the Old Testament
> declares that Christ will be seated at God’s right hand until all of his
> enemies become his footstool (Psa. 110:1). This dramatic declaration is
> so important that it becomes the most cited Old Testament verse found
> 16 Postmillennialism Made Easy
> Quotations include: Matt 22:1 44; 26:64; Mark 12:36; 14:62; Luke 20:42–43;
> 22:69; Acts 2:34–35; Heb 1:13. Allusions may be found in: 1 Cor 15:24; Eph
> 1:20–22; Phil 2:9–11; Heb 1:3; 8:1; 10:12, 13; 1 Pet 3:22; Rev 3:21.
> in the New Testament.1 Note that his enemies become his footstool while
> he is seated at God’s right hand (where he appears after his ascension: Acts
> 2:33–35; 5:31; 7:56; Rom 8:34; Eph 1:20; Col 3:1; Heb 1:3, 13; 8:1; 10:12;
> 12:2; 1 Pet 3:22) — not after leaving that place and returning to earth at his
> second coming. *Again, his victory will occur in contemporary history as
> Christ presently rules from heaven*.




So some see us carrying out the Great Commission extending Kingdom rule in both spheres as part of the gospel of both salvation from sins reign and kingdom living.


----------



## kodos

gordo said:


> kodos said:
> 
> 
> 
> But, the Civil Magistrate upholds Gods Laws and punishes evildoers. The Church proclaims the gospel and preaches the Good News. Working hand in hand like this they would be a powerful force for good!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Or a powerful force for evil. I think I would rather have corrupt politicians in power then what would come from a so-called 'godly' government. Reminds me of this CS Lewis quote.
Click to expand...


Woah! How is it possible for such words to come from your ... fingers? You would desire to live under a government that sanctions murder, that sanctions rape, sanctions the blasphemy of God's name, outlaws His Church, mistreats the poor, and promotes immorality? Don't even know where to begin.

And you'd rather have this than living under a society that acknowledges the _rule of God, and His Laws?_ No wonder the Church is such a mess, with this sort of sloppy, and frankly juvenile thinking.


----------



## gordo

kodos said:


> And you'd rather have this than living under a society that acknowledges the rule of God, and His Laws?



No. Not at all. It's like no one even bothered reading the quote. I will break it down for you then.

Godly society with no abuses of power and run perfectly = Good
Secular society run by crooked politicians = Bad
godly society run by 'moral busybodies' who start abusing their power = Terrifying

Nonetheless, my comments to your post did come out of left field and I apologize for that. I should have read more of the thread.


----------



## TylerRay

gordo said:


> kodos said:
> 
> 
> 
> And you'd rather have this than living under a society that acknowledges the rule of God, and His Laws?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No. Not at all. It's like no one even bothered reading the quote. I will break it down for you then.
> 
> Godly society with no abuses of power and run perfectly = Good
> Secular society run by crooked politicians = Bad
> godly society run by 'moral busybodies' who start abusing their power = Terrifying
> 
> Nonetheless, my comments to your post did come out of left field and I apologize for that. I should have read more of the thread.
Click to expand...


That's not godly government. Godly government enforces God's law.

This discussion has been somewhat derailed. Perhaps we should start a new thread on what godly civil government looks like and does.


----------



## jwithnell

I am old enough to remember when many Christians thought politics were "too worldly." I think Roe v. Wade really woke many people, particularly in light of writers like Francis Schaeffer urging that the gospel applies to all areas of life. The 1980s brought a kind of flowering of this perspective but took it too far. The Reconstructionists really rode this wagon.

We live first in the kingdom of Christ. We should be salt and light to the world around us no matter what the political party or political line. But we should never place our hope in a candidate or political party. The gospel alone can address the fall and the sinful hearts of men.

I linked to this blog right before the election. You might find it interesting and a far better explanation than I can give.



> I wish I had 10 bucks for everytime I saw an African American congressman, alderman or senate candidate be given not only the pulpit but at least 30-45 mins IN THE MIDDLE OF THE SERVICE to "talk to us about his commitment to better the community" (read: campaign)


 The black churches fostered the righteous push to recognize the dignity of all those created in God's image. (In some cases it actually protected the lives of those involved. In one harrowing night, a whole Alabama congregation spent the night with mobs outside the church building and eventually had to be rescued by the National Guard.). I think the political, church connection is perhaps more of a cultural manifestation than a specific confusion of gospel and politics.


----------



## J. Dean

Tim said:


> gordo said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think it is possible to have a godly government.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wow. I can't believe you said _that_. So, it's possible to have godly self-government, godly family government, godly church government, but not a godly civil government? What is your evidence for this? Were there not times in England, Scotland and Switzerland when this was the case? What about local governments? Do you think it impossible that there could be a godly city council?
Click to expand...


I believe government can be "godly" relatively speaking (politicians are not infallible, and even in a Christianized state you will have your nominal "believers" in office). I also know from history that godly governments are also short-lived and degenerate into either a godless government or a theocracy. The issue I (and I think a few others here have) is that political activism becomes a substitue for (or put on par with) the gospel and preaching. 

If we inherit a godly government, so be it. But it may very well be that we will simply have to submit to the government given us (a la Romans 13) and concentrate more on being salt and light rather than formulating a sort of cultural revolution (like a great many of our Christian forefathers were forced to do in times past).


----------



## J. Dean

One other question: godly government according to _whom?_ Reformed Christians are not the only Christians occupying America, and there is significant disagreement on some matters that stand a good chance of inevitably working their way into policy. Would you, for example, enact Sabbath Laws? Not all Reformed Christians (like me) agree with the strict interpretation of the Sabbath, and that says nothing about Lutherans, Baptists, Catholics, etc., who also have differing views. Or when you have a chaplain pray, which denomination will you select from? This country does not have a monolithic denominational affiliation like Rome, Germany, or Switzerland. Would a Reformed-based legislature have an issue with, say, a Lutheran pastor offering prayer? Or what about having a Wesleyan politician draw up a policy that mandates the recognition of Christmas and Easter? How about a Baptist president advocating the re-enactment of prohibition? Last time I checked, prohibition did a number in strengthening the mob. 

Do you see the can of worms you open when going in this direction? 

The idea of having a godly government is a good one, and a wonderful one, and certainly government can be better than it is. And to the extent that Christians can and should exert influence in the political sphere via voting and advocation of good policies, they absolutely should. But when you're dealing with questioning the idea of church-state separation in a country that has a plethora of denominations both Christian and cultic who have disagreement on some significant issues, you're risking opening a Pandora's box that may make a bad situation worse.


----------



## Tim

J. Dean said:


> One other question: godly government according to whom? Reformed Christians are not the only Christians occupying America, and there is significant disagreement on some matters that stand a good chance of inevitably working their way into policy. Would you, for example, enact Sabbath Laws? Not all Reformed Christians (like me) agree with the strict interpretation of the Sabbath, and that says nothing about Lutherans, Baptists, Catholics, etc., who also have differing views. Or when you have a chaplain pray, which denomination will you select from? This country does not have a monolithic denominational affiliation like Rome, Germany, or Switzerland. Would a Reformed-based legislature have an issue with, say, a Lutheran pastor offering prayer? Or what about having a Wesleyan politician draw up a policy that mandates the recognition of Christmas and Easter? How about a Baptist president advocating the re-enactment of prohibition? Last time I checked, prohibition did a number in strengthening the mob.



Dis-unity is to be addressed like any other problem of man, by adopting a Berean-like attitude of searching the scriptures. That there is currently widespread disagreement on these aforementioned doctrines is not a reason to avoid pursuing a more explicit civil recognition of the true Christian religion. 

If the Lord were pleased to bless this nation with revival, wouldn't greater doctrinal unity be a part of that blessing?


----------



## kodos

J. Dean said:


> One other question: godly government according to _whom?_ Reformed Christians are not the only Christians occupying America, and there is significant disagreement on some matters that stand a good chance of inevitably working their way into policy. Would you, for example, enact Sabbath Laws? Not all Reformed Christians (like me) agree with the strict interpretation of the Sabbath, and that says nothing about Lutherans, Baptists, Catholics, etc., who also have differing views. Or when you have a chaplain pray, which denomination will you select from? This country does not have a monolithic denominational affiliation like Rome, Germany, or Switzerland. Would a Reformed-based legislature have an issue with, say, a Lutheran pastor offering prayer? Or what about having a Wesleyan politician draw up a policy that mandates the recognition of Christmas and Easter? How about a Baptist president advocating the re-enactment of prohibition? Last time I checked, prohibition did a number in strengthening the mob.
> 
> Do you see the can of worms you open when going in this direction?
> 
> ...




My friends, here is a wonderful study in how utterly brainwashed we have become as a people. I would LOVE to have the problems that you list above. Rather than debate these fine points of theology, we have to debate this:


Argue against same-sex marriage
Argue that a baby is a human being.
Decide whether or not if Christians preaching against immorality are really committing hate crimes.
We are on the verge of saying that a Christian teaching 6-day Creation is causing child-abuse to their children.
Decide if the government has the right to tell you that you are too much of a burden on society and must be terminated.
The brainwashing of our children to accept homosexual behavior.

And on and on it goes.

*Don't be fooled* - we have a national religion in our government, and it is purely anti-Christ as it doesn't acknowledge Him as King. And this godless national religion that has been established will not stop until they attempt the eradication of Christians and Christian thought in this nation.

As Christ said - you are either for Him, or against Him. The United States government is against Him, as it does not acknowledge Him as King of Kings and Lord of Lords.

So yes, give me the can of worms. Please.


----------



## TylerRay

J. Dean said:


> One other question: godly government according to _whom?_



Godly government according to the established Church. And hopefully that Church would be Reformed. Here's what Godly government looks like:



> WCF XXIII
> 
> Paragraph I
> God, the Supreme Lord and King of all the world, hath ordained civil magistrates to be under him over the people, for his own glory and the public good; and to this end, hath armed them with the power of the sword, for the defense and encouragement of them that are good, and for the punishment of evil-doers.
> 
> Paragraph III
> The civil magistrate may not assume to himself the administration of the Word and sacraments, or the power of the keys of the kingdom of heaven: yet he hath authority, and it is his duty, to take order, that unity and peace be preserved in the Church, that the truth of God be kept pure and entire; that all blasphemies and heresies be suppressed; all corruptions and abuses in worship and discipline prevented or reformed; and all the ordinances of God duly settled, administered, and observed. For the better effecting whereof, he hath power to call synods, to be present at them, and to provide that whatsoever is transacted in them be according to the mind of God.



You have used the word "theocracy" several times. Can you explain what you mean by "theocracy?"


----------



## Miss Marple

I'd like to put forward that we always have a 'theo'cracy. The question is, which 'theo?'

I find it mystifying when people argue against having God in government. There is always a God, or gods, in charge - their names may be Materialism, Complacency, Tyranny, Appeasement, Theft, Dagon, Perversity. . . but they are gods, to be sure, and I do prefer God's word in charge, no matter how imperfectly we might implement that.


----------



## Tim

Right. And there is also a distinction to be made between theocracy and ecclesiocracy. I wonder how often these are confused....


----------



## jandrusk

gordo said:


> The CS Lewis quote explains my thoughts. I don't think it is possible to have a _godly government_.



Luke 18:27: "And he said, The things which are impossible with men are possible with God." I make it a point never to put God and the negation of possible in the same sentence. Nothing is too hard for the Lord and he could institute the most holy civil government ever seen in the blink of an eye.


----------



## Tim

Yes. The same God that can do this for the individual:



> And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner (Luke 18:13)


...can also do this for the collective:



> And when Pharaoh drew nigh, the children of Israel lifted up their eyes, and, behold, the Egyptians marched after them; and they were sore afraid: and the children of Israel cried out unto the LORD (Exodus 14:10)


----------

