Christians in politics

[LeeJUk]

Well basically lately I've been wrestling with the notion of getting involved in politics. As to what depth to be involved in I don't yet know. So my question is, is it OK for a Christian to support and further a political party?

My motive is so that the poor and working class in this country are helped through the means of a party that represents them and this party I believe (and many will disagree im sure) is the Labour party in the UK.

Now I'm not willing to sit and argue with other members over the Labour party, so please just stick to the question I've asked.

 

[Christoffer]

I have been thinking about this also, though I don't think the Lord means for the to get involved in politicis. But we'll see. The political scene is not so much about having good arguments these days, it is more about rhetoric.

As I see it voting for a party and being a member are two different things. When you vote, you don't necessarily agree to everything the party stands for, it might just be that one party har less ungodly principles than the others.

Becoming a member is somewhat different though. Unless the party allows for much freedom of conscience, I cannot see how one can join a party that officially believes immoral things. So it would depend on whether you will be forced to violate your conscience or not.

Another thing I think is important is to think through all the issues thouroughly. You subscribe to a Biblical ethic, how does that affect the positions you ought to take on taxes, healthcare, immigration, crime etc.?

Then, will the party force you to take unbiblical stances on these questions? If not, I say no problem. Otherwise, don't do it.

 

[buggy]

I will only choose a party that goes in line with this Bible verse:

"I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty. For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth."
- 1 Timothy 2:1-4

A party that is a supporter of civil liberties, including religious freedom, with less intrusive tax policies, will win my support.

 

[jayce475]

Well basically lately I've been wrestling with the notion of getting involved in politics. As to what depth to be involved in I don't yet know. So my question is, is it OK for a Christian to support and further a political party?

My motive is so that the poor and working class in this country are helped through the means of a party that represents them and this party I believe (and many will disagree im sure) is the Labour party in the UK.

Now I'm not willing to sit and argue with other members over the Labour party, so please just stick to the question I've asked.

Lee, do you have a conviction with regards to theocracy? The stance that one takes has tremendous influence on how one views politics.

I will only choose a party that goes in line with this Bible verse:

"I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty. For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth."
- 1 Timothy 2:1-4

A party that is a supporter of civil liberties, including religious freedom, with less intrusive tax policies, will win my support.

Tian, to jump from "lead a quiet an peaceable life in all godliness and honesty" to "civil liberties, including religious freedom, with less intrusive tax policies" is a pretty major leap isn't it? It sounds remarkably like our social studies textbooks Anyway, as a civil servant, I shall not comment too much on such stuff, just making a point that there's much more to it.

 

[Scott1]

Lee,

I realize you are in a different system and have been raised to implicitly see things in light of that.

My thinking is that "helping the poor" is something one seeks to do individually, or through church or charity work.

For example, I spend a significant part of my time helping the "needy," at least, by serving as a Deacon. My understanding is this office is perpetual (lifetime), so this is nothing short term for me.

Redistribution of wealth, through government bureaucracy, primarily seems to me an unbiblical principle to start with, and is inherently wasteful, selective and unresponsive (compared to alternatives). I can't help but see it as something other than God trying to receive glory and dependence.

Both the freedom to keep one's property and the capital that freedom tends to produce are diminished greatly by forced government bureaucracy redistribution of wealth.

I do believe government can "set a tone" that influences poverty, though. It can also, to some extent, protect the poor from being abused, through legislation. Government itself can and does sometimes abuse the poor also by using them and their poverty to exploit only for political purposes. It can be it actually subsidizes poverty to exploit the issue to create dependency on them and a vote base.

One of the things I think many find repulsive is what we see people who focus on telling someone else to help the poor.

For example, a politician who continually talks about it and gives almost nothing to charity (and gave very little time or money to charity before he came to office). Unfortunately, one can feel justified telling someone else to do something they themselves do not do (and advocate that it be done with someone else's freedom and money).

In that vein, I would look for a party that supports traditional families (by minimizing their tax and regulatory burden), protects innocent unborn children from abortion, encourages marriage, and encourages work and the rewards that go with it. Scripture tells us sin tends to poverty, everything from sexual immorality, sloth, etc.

Proverbs 23:21

21For the drunkard and the glutton shall come to poverty: and drowsiness shall clothe a man with rags.

Proverbs 19:15

15Slothfulness casteth into a deep sleep; and an idle soul shall suffer hunger.

I have not enough information among the choices in your country which party might best further those aims, or what alternatives might be available.

 

[buggy]

Politics as a whole never works - the laws that any country passes may only sustain in the long-term if it has popular support. Hearts must be changed, souls must be saved, before there will be any genuine change in a society. A biblical society must happen from bottom-up, not the other way round.

For example, we do not deal with homosexuality by demanding the State outlaw it, but rather by showing to the world the examples of a godly family (and obviously a scriptural church should never endorse homosexuality as proper). We must recover biblical marriage through godly courtship, marriages, raising covenant children for the Lord, and elevate marriage above the common social definition today whereby marriage is just a contract people get into.

Likewise, we do not fight poverty by demanding the State implement higher taxes or more welfare, but we as the Church must take up the role of welfare and charity to the people.

That is why I am pretty much a "leave me alone" kind of person politically. My view is that any form of "Christian" politics, Left or Right, be it the compassionate social-justice variety or the social-conservative variety does not work.

 

[JonathanHunt]

It is hard to seperate what you have said from what you have asked. But basically, you will not help the poor by going into politics, because the poor will always be poor, Jesus said so.

Your concern must be the souls of all men, before their bodies. YOu can do much to help the poor without going into politics, through the local church.

I know you didn't want to discuss political parties in particular, so let me say this - they are ALL hell-bent against the freedom on preachers to preach the whole counsel of God. True, it is Labour who have brought in the anti-christian laws in the past 13 years, but nobody will repeal them. Don't touch British politics with a ten-foot pole, brother. If you feel you have spare time and energy, then use it in your own endeavours through the church, to first preach the gospel, and then to help the poor.

 

[Philip]

Scott,

You are speaking as you have been raised in the individualistic classical liberal-leaning United States. If you want to debate Lee's political philosophy, that's fine, but the question is whether being involved in politics at all is fine for a Christian. There have been Christians on both the right and left wings in the past and there will likely be Christians on both in the future.

Lee,

Speaking as one who has done grassroots political campaigning before and has Christian friends who have been heavily involved in politics, I think it's good for Christians to be involved in politics. Augustine maintained that Christians have a duty to seek the good of the city of man even though we know it will not last. In democratic countries (particularly in the US) I would say we have a duty to be at least somewhate politically involved as it is simply part of being good citizens.

That said, here are my cautions: there's a good reason why I no longer campaign or go to political events. I got very sick of the opinionation and infighting even among members of the same party. I then realized that this wasn't my calling. Some Christians have the stomach for it and I admire them, but I just don't.

The major temptation of politics, though, is to put your trust in politicians (princes) rather than in the name of the Lord--if you do decide to be politically involved, then be in prayer that you would trust in God above and against all others.

 

[Puritan Scot]

Can I recommend to you an excellent free booklet "Why Parliament Needs the Christian Faith" based on an address given by Mr Bob Graham in the House of Lords on 13 May 2009. This is available as a download on FREE Booklet - Why Parliament Needs The Christian Faith Mr Graham comes from Dumbarton just outside Glasgow and his book comes with considerable commendation.

Also can I suggest you Christian Watch website Christian Watch - A Biblical Witness - they have excellent resources and come from a Reformed perspective.

As Jonathan mentioned above the going into politics to help the poor will have minimal impact - Our Lord said "The poor are always with you" and the real change in society is made through REGENERATION - The New Birth - not for nothing is it emphasised not once, twice but three times - John 3v3v5v7.

Regarding politics - unless you have been clearly called to that work, ensure that you first loyality is to the work of your local church, in the proclamation of the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ.

However I believe all Christians have a duty to be as "salt and light" in our society - to do our part in ensuring that "Righteousness exalteth a nation: but sin is a reproach to any people". We must pray for those that are in places of authority in our civil realm. The role of the civil magistrate is very important in society - as they are meant to be "ministers of God for good" in our society. Punishing the evil doer and protecting and law abiding citizen.

For any Christian getting involved in politics - the Word of God must be his clear guide and his constant handbook - "Therein is wisdom".

Regarding the current political parties in the UK - I am afraid there is not much to commend them as they have in the main forsaken the biblical path. The Civil Magistrate rules in Parliament but always remember that they are accountable to the King of Kings and the Lord of all - The Lord Jesus Christ of whom scripture states that "the government rests on His shoulders. Read if you have a chance "The beauty of the Magistracy" by George Swinnock (Vol 4) BOT. Tremendous reading by one of the great Puritans.
You mentioned Labour earlier - It is not for me to influence you one way or another, but please take time to look at the Christian Institute" website. You can look at the voting record of the MP's from the various parties in the UK. You will be surprised how anti-Christian some individual MP'S are and in some cases their whole party have turned their backs upon the Word of God and its authority and wisdom for the governing of the nations.

 

[Particular Baptist]

John MacArthur has a VERY good series on this subject entitled "A Radical Alternative to Political Activism". A Radical Alternative to Political Activism

Having been very passionate about politics earlier in life, I found that my loyalty cannot be divided whatsoever between politics, the government, the state, or any political ideology that might take even one millisecond away from glorifying God and celebrating his sovereignty.

 

[Montanablue]

Scott,

You are speaking as you have been raised in the individualistic classical liberal-leaning United States. If you want to debate Lee's political philosophy, that's fine, but the question is whether being involved in politics at all is fine for a Christian. There have been Christians on both the right and left wings in the past and there will likely be Christians on both in the future.

Lee,

Speaking as one who has done grassroots political campaigning before and has Christian friends who have been heavily involved in politics, I think it's good for Christians to be involved in politics. Augustine maintained that Christians have a duty to seek the good of the city of man even though we know it will not last. In democratic countries (particularly in the US) I would say we have a duty to be at least somewhate politically involved as it is simply part of being good citizens.

That said, here are my cautions: there's a good reason why I no longer campaign or go to political events. I got very sick of the opinionation and infighting even among members of the same party. I then realized that this wasn't my calling. Some Christians have the stomach for it and I admire them, but I just don't.

The major temptation of politics, though, is to put your trust in politicians (princes) rather than in the name of the Lord--if you do decide to be politically involved, then be in prayer that you would trust in God above and against all others.

Hear hear.

 

[LeeJUk]

I'd like to thank everyone for their posts. As to what I'm going to do I do not yet know. Some points I would like to make though.

1) Will we always have poor people? Yes but I don't believe that this means we are told to give up and I certainly don't believe this is scripture telling us we cannot help people or try to help them.

2) I don't think you can say left leaning nor right leaning politics are biblical or unbiblical. Both are philosophies that are totally foreign to the times of the old and new testaments. I find it foolish when people say Jesus was a communist or socialist but I also find it foolish when people on the right and especially facists like the BNP quote the bible to justify their position.

3) Do I believe to a certain extent in wealth re-dist ? Yes. How can it ever be just to tax a millionaire the same as you would tax a person on minimum wage? Also its not like the government uses this money for it's own ends under MOST circumstances, it uses it for public services which are in the interests of everyone, to have a well educated and skilled population through a free education system, to have a healthy population from a national health service. People must be helped according to their need of housing, health, education and not according to their salary.

4) I want to remind you that the book of proverbs is not a book of promises, It's a book of wise principals. To say that poor people are poor because of sloth is correct in some cases, but in the vast majority a person can be working a full time job and earn very little to be able to provide for their family or they may want to work but perhaps they lost their job, can't find one or have had an injury that prevents them from working. The problem with the majority of right leaning views is that those who have jobs and good salaries will always do well under that kind of a system but the poor, the injured, the elderly and those who are genuinely unemployed or badly paid will always be ignored and disenfranchised under that system.

5) I also want to say something about the view America takes of socialism. You need to realise that during the cold war period your government condemned and preached against the Russian communist system and even called it socialism (which it wasn't it was very right-wing the Russian system even though it called itself communism/socialism to gain popular support) to the point where people in America are still afraid of any government control and any socialistic ideas like a national health service. I still find it shocking that in 2010 in America you still do not have a fair for all national health service but instead an industry that is more concerned about profit than people and that's why people aren't getting insurance and why people are waiting for treatment and dying, because business has one goal and one goal only, Profit and it can often be in cases of health insurance, at the expense of people but I thank God even if some of you don't that under Obama your health care system is starting to get a bit more moral. (of course there is the whole argument over abortion being funded by taxes and thats a valid point but i dont think it means that you should throw out the entire system because of this point.)

Anyway thats all I have to say, I'm sure it will cause much controversy but oh well I hope at least some of you have been challenged in your deep fear of democratic socialism.

 

[au5t1n]

Oh dear. Lee, doctors' services and medicine costing money is no more unfair than a restaurant charging money or a grocery store charging money or a housing complex charging money. Yes, everyone needs food, shelter, and medicine, and yes, they should cost money. Someone had to pay for them. It's called trade, and it benefits everybody.

What if your government started a program where grocery stores were government-owned and all food was free--distributed through a food rationing system in which everybody pays a "grocery tax" and then everybody gets a certain amount of regular food ration based on their family's need (as determined by the powers-that-be). Would you consider that fair? I'm genuinely asking.

 

[LeeJUk]

Well what happens when they cannot afford it because of circumstances, let them suffer or die? Again your system practically ignores those who don't have good salaries and its criminal. Also I want to make it clear, I don't mean make everything free, someone is paying for the services, the tax payer. The rich logically pay more and the poorer pay less. It's a much fairer system than profit driven trade. I don't advocate getting rid of trade altogether but when it comes to things in the national interest, necessities of life like health, education, housing and making sure families have enough food, I don't believe trade should be the ruler because they cannot be trusted because their goal is not helping people but making profit.

 

[au5t1n]

I assure you, Lee, government-controlled systems are every bit as profit-driven (only the profit doesn't go to the people who actually made the desirable goods) and always result in more poverty and less freedom than free trade.

 

[RandPhoenix]

"they cannot be trusted because their goal is not helping people but making profit. "

Which is why they largely CAN be trusted. At least you know their goal right away. Do not think that the politician's goal in socializing health care and education is the "best interests of the people." They have an interest and an agenda, too.

Furthermore, I do not believe that government has any real right to poke its nose into private businesses or into education, for that matter.

---------- Post added at 01:17 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:16 PM ----------

I assure you, Lee, government-controlled systems are every bit as profit-driven (only the profit doesn't go to the people who actually made the desirable goods) and always result in more poverty and less freedom than free trade.

You beat me to it.

 

[Kevin]

Lee, as someone that spent 20+ years in the game, the last 10 as a pro, I have thought about this a great deal.

In my humble opinion, a christian aught not to be involeved in party politics, except as a self conscious change agent. The temptations of partisanship are too great to be avoided long term.

The role of christians in any field is to be a witness for Christ, and to bring that area of life under the dominion of GOD. In the field of politics that can only be done by subverting the process to a higher end.

Let me give an example. I don't believe that there is any doubt that one of the greatest evils that are practised in the western democracies today is the "legal" murder of the unborn. A christian that engages in the political process must always be prepared to witness for Christ by opposing this evil. That means you must have a long term view to ending this practice. A christian that is primarily a "party man" will find himself promoting the most pernicious & evil men, because they are on "our team".

I made my peace with this, choosing only to work for candidates that passed my personal test. Were they opposed to abortion was at the top of this list. I would ( and did) work with politicians from different parties, and lost some big contracts because I was not "loyal" to the party. But I could not live with myself if I knowingly help someone that was an open anti-Christ.

I spoke very often to large party gatherings about my grass roots methods. I always gave the same opening. "I am here because politics is about who governs. And governing is about making laws. Some laws are bad & aught to be repealed, others are good & aught to be passed. For me it really is this simple; freedom, justice, and protect the innocent. If you every do anything to violate those principles then I will do everything I can to defeat you and send you home". Now it had a few quotes & some flourishes, but in a nutshell that was the speach. I always got applause, sometimes a standing O. people loved (at least southerners did) that kind of frank talk.

Because I was open about my faith, and what it meant in advance, people began to ask if i "would be OK" with a cerain vote that they were considering.

In effect I became my own whip, for those in my area. I know that it can be done in a faithful way, but it will be hard.

Final advice. Never join a party that promotes, as a part of their platform sin. All are fallen and all sin, I know that. A party is also not a church. But you should never plendge yourself to promoting murder, or immorality. In this you might be tempted by the opposite error of insisting of too great a level of purity. However in my experience the temptation is to set the bar too low.

peace,

 

[LeeJUk]

I assure you, Lee, government-controlled systems are every bit as profit-driven (only the profit doesn't go to the people who actually made the desirable goods) and always result in more poverty and less freedom than free trade.

If your government is profit driven then you should expose it and exercise your democratic right to vote for another party and get that government out of power. As for my government, I'm pretty confident even though there are some MP's who are profit driven the majority of them I believe are there to help people and they have done many things to help people. Thats why we have a national health system, a welfare system, an army and so forth. Everyone I know has benefited from government including myself.

My single parent mother didn't have to pay hundreds or thousands of pounds to get health or dental care, she got a council house for us from the government, my family the majority of them don't need to be under heavy mortgages because of state provided council housing, my job was provided for me by God through the provision of a government scheme to help young people get into work. My uncle who is very handicapped doesn't need to work and he and my grandmother get provided for by the government and also my grandmother gets a government allowance like all pensioners to get financial help during the winter months to pay the heating bills. I only have begun paying taxes until now I've never had to pay for health care and the taxes are very reasonable because I know it does help all the people of these lands whether their need be health, education or housing.

To assert that government control is always bad is totally unreasonable and it doesn't take into the account the fact that our government are elected and are not dictatorships.

 

[py3ak]

Lee, you might be interested in the writings of Theodore Dalrymple as an astute observer who not only lived under, but worked in your national health care system and with the prisons. And just as I'm sure you're surprised at some of the perceptions people over here have of your government's workings, I think some of us are surprised at some of the observations you're making about the system over here.

 

[George Bailey]

The problem with socialism is that sooner or later, you run out of other people's money...what happens when you tax the "rich" so much, that they become the poor? Where will the money come from, then?

 

[JennyG]

To answer the original question, I think a Christian always has to be very, very careful of getting involved with, that is committing to, any political party. John (Puritan Scot) suggested checking out the Christian Institute for info, and I second that. You will find that all the parties without exception have ungodly policies of one kind or another built into the fabric of their thinking, to the extent that it must be difficult if not impossible for active party members to keep clean hands

 

[Glenn Ferrell]

Politics as a whole never works - the laws that any country passes may only sustain in the long-term if it has popular support. Hearts must be changed, souls must be saved, before there will be any genuine change in a society. A biblical society must happen from bottom-up, not the other way round.

For example, we do not deal with homosexuality by demanding the State outlaw it, but rather by showing to the world the examples of a godly family (and obviously a scriptural church should never endorse homosexuality as proper). We must recover biblical marriage through godly courtship, marriages, raising covenant children for the Lord, and elevate marriage above the common social definition today whereby marriage is just a contract people get into.

Politics does work when it does what God ordained it to do. Civil magistrates are to punish and restrain evil while praising them that do good (1 Peter 2:14). God gives civil magistrates authority and the sword to accomplish these ends.

As homosexuality is sin punishable by civil rulers in the Bible, the “general equity” of biblical judicial law implies continuing authority to censure such behavior. Also, adultery, polygamy, desertion, abuse of family members, and violation of marriage vows should be subject to civil punishment.

Well basically lately I've been wrestling with the notion of getting involved in politics. As to what depth to be involved in I don't yet know. So my question is, is it OK for a Christian to support and further a political party?

If I lived in the UK, with your parliamentary system, I might be more inclined to be involved in politics. In such a system, a minority party might actually win seats in the House of Commons, and have some influence in the formation of a government or policy. Such a party might also be an explicitly Christian Party, advocating national covenanting and civil enforcement of the first table of the law.

The RPCNA has a part of their Testimony (parallel interpretation of the Westminster Standards), Chapter XXIII, section 29, this helpful statement:

When participating in political
elections, the Christian should support
and vote only for such men as
are publicly committed to scriptural
principles of civil government. Should
the Christian seek civil office by political
election, he must openly inform
those whose support he seeks of his
adherence to Christian principles of
civil government.
1 Chron. 16:31; 2 Cor. 6:14-18; 2 Chron.
19:6-7; Dan. 2:48; Eph. 4:25.​

3) Do I believe to a certain extent in wealth re-dist ? Yes. How can it ever be just to tax a millionaire the same as you would tax a person on minimum wage? Also its not like the government uses this money for it's own ends under MOST circumstances, it uses it for public services which are in the interests of everyone, to have a well educated and skilled population through a free education system, to have a healthy population from a national health service. People must be helped according to their need of housing, health, education and not according to their salary.

Some matters to consider:

1) Scripture forbids giving preferential treatment to the rich; but also forbids preferential treatment to the poor (Lev. 19:15).

2) God establishes the right to private property in the 8th commandment. Although governments have some authority to tax to provide the services warranted by God, this can not mean absolute authority to nullify property rights. The premisses behind a graduated income tax seems to be that all we own or earn belongs to the civil magistrate and he may take whatever he wants and leave us with what he will. The case of Naboth and Ahab demonstrates Kings do not have absolute authority or jurisdiction over the property of others. There is such a thing as government theft by legislation and covetousness of the majority.

3) While 1 Pet. 2:14 gives civil government clear authority to restrain evil, its role in bring about good seems to be more in the realm of positive reinforcement by praise.

4) However, I will suggest to my American and Libertarian friends, that when scripture calls kings and queens “nursing” fathers and mothers in Isaiah 49:23, this may imply a more active concern for the welfare of their subjects than we are often willing to admit. Calvin commented:

“Undoubtedly, while kings bestow careful attention on these things, they at the same time supply the pastors and ministers of the Word with all that is necessary for food and maintenance, provide for the poor and guard the Church against the disgrace of pauperism; erect schools, and appoint salaries for the teachers and board for the students; build poor-houses and hospitals, and make every other arrangement that belongs to the protection and defense of the Church.”​

5) Though the civil magistrate should have some positive concerns for the needs of their people, these might be better provided for through the church, families, responsible businesses and private charities.

The WLC says regarding the positive aspects of the 8th Commandment:

“The duties required in the eighth commandment are, truth, faithfulness, and justice in contracts and commerce between man and man; rendering to every one his due; restitution of goods unlawfully detained from the right owners thereof; giving and lending freely, according to our abilities, and the necessities of others; moderation of our judgments, wills, and affections concerning worldly goods; a provident care and study to get, keep, use, and dispose these things which are necessary and convenient for the sustentation of our nature, and suitable to our condition; a lawful calling, and diligence in it; frugality; avoiding unnecessary lawsuits, and suretiship, or other like engagements; and an endeavor, by all just and lawful means, to procure, preserve, and further the wealth and outward estate of others, as well as our own.”​

Such an economic ethic would go a long way in alleviating inequities and injustice, giving opportunities for the marginalized, exploited and disadvantaged, recognizing our mutural responsibility "by all just and lawful means, to procure, preserve, and further the wealth and outward estate of others, as well as our own.”

 

[au5t1n]

Great answer, Pastor Ferrell!

 

[Jack K]

Yes, you may be involved in politics. It's good for believers to be involved in the work of society. In fact, the world's governments and policital interests need us.

But you must be a Christian first. As such, you may never be involved in the same way an unbeliever would. Just as in any other good endeavor (law, medicine, education) you must conduct yourself in a manner worthy of Christ and for his glory. This will mean acting differently than unbelievers act in the same endeavor. You might act VERY differently, yet still be able to work with unbelievers.

I'd suggest two things that would make a Christian different from the typical person who's strongly involved in the particular endeavor of politics.

1. A Christian will not make politics into a game or competition, as if what matters is your party winning at any cost. Christians actually practice kindness to enemies.

2. No matter how good the ideals of a particular party, a Christian will not get sucked into thinking that if only that party succeeds things will be right. Our real hope is in the Eternal King, not any earthly one.

This will make you very different from the typical party politics guy. But if you can make it work, go ahead and jump in.

 

[AThornquist]

Of course Christians can and should be involved in politics! How else could Christians be registered, loyal Republicans and members of the NRA? These three are practically synonymous.

 

[Blue Tick]

Christians should only be in politics if their registered Republicans

 

[jambo]

It depends upon what you mean by poor. I go to many "poor" people's houses and I have found the poorer the home the bigger and more modern the TV. The welfare state means that the poor are better of than the father struggling to get by on the minimum wage so being a politician would not really help the poor. To really help the poor I think something like the Glasgow City Mission which seeks to both help and evangelise the poor.

 

[Peairtach]

I don't know if Labour necessarily helps the poor. The deficit of £170 billion that Gordon Brown ran up in indiscriminately throwing money at the public sector, selling government gold at a knock down price, and eventually having to bail out the banks - something he should have seen coming if he was as good an economist as he proudly believed he was - isn't going to help the poor or the rich in this country for years.

Carefulness and prudence in debt management is taught throughout the Bible, otherwise the poor will not/cannot be helped by individuals or governments in debt.

Also, the Bible teaches that the government should make sure that society is using just weights and measures, which means that each pound in your pocket should be linked to something intrinsic like a fixed amount of gold which can be redeemed at any time from the bank.

The British government long ago abandoned this principle so that they could inflate and control the money supply. This leads to price increases, increased credit availability, increased debt and the boom and bust cycle which Brown proudly boasted he had put an end to. These price increases rob the poor as much as the rich, and the poor aren't in as good a position to cope with them. Tories tend to control the money supply better, but should put an end to the inflation of the money supply by returning to the gold standard.

 

[PuritanCovenanter]

Amazon.com: Messiah the Prince Or, The Meditorial Dominion of Jesus Christ (9781110772155): Symington William: Books

I would read this. This has helped me to some degree.

 

[Scott1]

LeeJUk
I'd like to thank everyone for their posts. As to what I'm going to do I do not yet know. Some points I would like to make though.

1) Will we always have poor people?

Yes.
It’s almost like asking whether there will be sickness in the world before our Lord returns.

Mark 14:7
7For ye have the poor with you always, and whensoever ye will ye may do them good: but me ye have not always.

Yes but I don't believe that this means we are told to give up and I certainly don't believe this is scripture telling us we cannot help people or try to help them.

Yes, in fact we are commanded to help the poor.

Proverbs 19:17
17He that hath pity upon the poor lendeth unto the LORD; and that which he hath given will he pay him again.

I believe Scripture basically teaches:

1) eliminate poverty within the household of faith
2) work to alleviate poverty outside of it

Lee, if you really believe this, God will test you with your own wealth and time in this.

We must ask a couple questions, though:
1) How do we “help”?
2) What do we mean by “poor”?

Here's a book you may find helpful in this regard, "When Helping Hurts: Alleviating Poverty Without Hurting the Poor. . .and Ourselves"
http://www.amazon.com/When-Helping-Hurts-Alleviating-Ourselves/dp/0802457053

2) I don't think you can say left leaning nor right leaning politics are biblical or unbiblical. Both are philosophies that are totally foreign to the times of the old and new testaments. I find it foolish when people say Jesus was a communist or socialist but I also find it foolish when people on the right and especially facists like the BNP quote the bible to justify their position.

Not familiar enough with the parties you speak of here to comment.

I take it we know Jesus could not be Communist, because that is, by definition atheism.

And I would say it could not be socialism because private property rights are a basic part of the ten commandments (e.g. Commands two, eight, ten). Remember, envy and resentment over the good (material) fortune of your neighbor is a violation of the Tenth Commandment.

I can only say that you have some clear lines though when a party:

1) supports protecting innocent human life (as opposed to promoting abortion, euthanasia, etc.)
2) supports sexual morality (as opposed to promoting immorality)

Let me go out a bit more on a limb here and add:
1) supports “living within one’s means" as a basic way to handle the resources of others (as opposed to promoting living by debt, presumption and entitlement)

Look for these as "clear lines" in choosing a political party to represent you.

3) Do I believe to a certain extent in wealth re-dist ? Yes. How can it ever be just to tax a millionaire the same as you would tax a person on minimum wage? Also its not like the government uses this money for it's own ends under MOST circumstances, it uses it for public services which are in the interests of everyone, to have a well educated and skilled population through a free education system, to have a healthy population from a national health service. People must be helped according to their need of housing, health, education and not according to their salary.

“Nationalizing” health service enterprise, in itself, has NOTHING to do with being more "moral."

4) I want to remind you that the book of proverbs is not a book of promises, It's a book of wise principals.

In a sense, yes.

But it is, like all of Scripture, the revealed will of God. It reveals with pleases and displeases God- what He will bless, what He will judge.

To say that poor people are poor because of sloth is correct in some cases, but in the vast majority a person can be working a full time job and earn very little to be able to provide for their family or they may want to work but perhaps they lost their job, can't find one or have had an injury that prevents them from working. The problem with the majority of right leaning views is that those who have jobs and good salaries will always do well under that kind of a system but the poor, the injured, the elderly and those who are genuinely unemployed or badly paid will always be ignored and disenfranchised under that system.

There are many reasons for poverty. Sometimes, especially in our individual capacities, we are simply called to have mercy, regardless of the circumstances. Sometimes, we are called to reprove the causes.

Can’t address this whole topic here, but suffice it to say one observation, an observation only…
When governments subsidize poverty… they tend to get (more) poverty.

5) I also want to say something about the view America takes of socialism. You need to realise that during the cold war period your government condemned and preached against the Russian communist system and even called it socialism (which it wasn't it was very right-wing the Russian system even though it called itself communism/socialism to gain popular support) to the point where people in America are still afraid of any government control and any socialistic ideas like a national health service. I still find it shocking that in 2010 in America you still do not have a fair for all national health service but instead an industry that is more concerned about profit than people and that's why people aren't getting insurance and why people are waiting for treatment and dying, because business has one goal and one goal only, Profit and it can often be in cases of health insurance, at the expense of people but I thank God even if some of you don't that under Obama your health care system is starting to get a bit more moral. (of course there is the whole argument over abortion being funded by taxes and thats a valid point but i dont think it means that you should throw out the entire system because of this point.)

Don't know where to begin here, so I'll only address one point...

The government run health care bill subsidizes abortion on a scale never before seen in the United States- that’s all you need to know- it's not moral (and it's not about "health care")

Anyway thats all I have to say, I'm sure it will cause much controversy but oh well I hope at least some of you have been challenged in your deep fear of democratic socialism.

No, Lee,
We're more afraid than ever, because freedom (including religious freedom) is rare in human history.

While it is the natural yearning of human beings, it is precious, and it is easily lost.