• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Are certain political views sinful?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Dave G

Well-Known Member
To put it another way, if the doctrine of sovereignty causes you to sit on the sidelines, maybe you don't really understand it.
It doesn't.
What causes me to sit on the sidelines is His express command to not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers and to be separate from the world and its ways.

If this were the thousand year millennium and Christ were ruling from Jerusalem, my vote would count, because theirs wouldn't.
In effect, His vote, which will be all that counts, would be my vote.;)

For now, I'm "benched" because I have no place in this world.

It's not mine, I'm simply passing through it.
I'm also occupying until He comes.
Part of the occupation is to do His will in the midst of being among unbelievers....to do good to all, especially them who are of the household of faith.

Like Timothy, I'm a good soldier... and I firmly believe that no man that wars against the flesh, should get entangled with the affairs of this life.
That's why I would never seek to hold public office; because in order to be elected, majority wins ( unless God over rules men's collective will and places a person into a position of authority )...and my views are not represented by the majority of people who would vote.

Therefore, I would automatically lose, unless I compromise what is right in some area or another.:oops:
Since I refuse to compromise on anything, I wouldn't stand a snowball's chance in Hell of getting into even the primaries.:(
Plus, I don't care to seek the esteem of others, so that nails the door completely shut.;)

Apologies for seeming to hijack your thread, but I thought the issue of Christians in politics should probably be addressed.
To me, certain political views are not what's at the heart of the problem...

Whether or not believers should even be involved with this world and its ways, is.



I wish you well, sir, and this is my last reply in this thread.:)
 
Last edited:

1689Dave

Well-Known Member
No, it was unchecked antisemitism, finally ended by good soldiers taking out Hitler.


“He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.” John 3:36 (KJV 1900)
 

Calminian

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
....Apologies for seeming to hijack your thread, but I thought the issue of Christians in politics should probably be addressed.
To me, certain political views are not what's at the heart of the problem...

Whether or not believers should even be involved with this world and its ways, is.



I wish you well, sir, and this is my last reply in this thread.:)

No problem, thanks for the input. It's a messy subject with several variables and potential directions. I knew this going in.
 

canadyjd

Well-Known Member
Yes, you've made that position clear. I think it's shameful to ignore macro political issue which affect millions. It's amazing to me you can't see the good of the political abolition fight a few (quite a few) decades ago. Would you have stayed on the sidelines for that one as well? You really would have stayed on the sidelines and just did nothing will thousands suffered? That's hard to believe you wouldn't have at least casted your vote for freedom.



You are correct I do. And you're trying to make me ashamed about it, ironically.



And they agree with you that you're being noble for staying out of politics and not fighting for the unborn. I think that's worse.
Once again, you make assumptions about me without knowledge. Your focus is off.

We know the whole world will follow the ant*-christ, and there will be a great apostasy (a falling away of those professing christ).

Professing Christian brothers and sisters will align with the government and make accusations against those Christians that refuse to follow the government rules, given by ant*-christ. They will betray Christ and His children and embrace the government.

Ant*-christ will portray himself as an angel of light. He is a deciever. I can see him outlawing abortion, and other righteous causes, as long as you agree to follow him. How about that? All you have to do is follow him and his government, and he will give you all your political desires.

You already have your feet planted firmly, trusting the government to enforce your beliefs. You already attack brothers and sisters in Christ that don't agree with your view of politics or involvement in politics.

We have people praying for the death of those they disagree with. Without a doubt, ant*-christ will make those wishes come true.

Your focus is off. When your focus is off, it is easier for a person to be decieved.

Peace to you
 

Calminian

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Once again, you make assumptions about me without knowledge. Your focus is off.

My focus actually isn't on you. My focus is on the issue of voting and politics, whether or not it's morally relevant. My view is that it is.

Professing Christian brothers and sisters will align with the government and make accusations against those Christians that refuse to follow the government rules, given by ant*-christ. They will betray Christ and His children and embrace the government.

I see where you're going with this. You're confusing a couple issues. Christians are commanded to pay taxes customs fear and honor to their local lands and governments (Romans 13:7). The Bible isn't anti-government. It is anti-globalism, the idea of national governments relinquishing their sovereignty, but it's actually very pro-government. You've been deceived on this.

Read what Paul said about government:

Rom. 13:1 Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2 Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. 3 For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended. 4 For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. 5 Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also as a matter of conscience.​

This passage refutes your post. It's not sovereign national governments we should fear, it's the dissolving of sovereign governments into globalism (a big staple of leftism). God created the nations at Babel as a gift to us, and Satan has been trying to undo that gift ever since.

I think this is where our primary disagreement lies. You don't believe government is from God. You apparently don't agree with Paul on this issue.
 

canadyjd

Well-Known Member
My focus actually isn't on you. My focus is on the issue of voting and politics, whether or not it's morally relevant. My view is that it is.



I see where you're going with this. You're confusing a couple issues. Christians are commanded to pay taxes customs fear and honor to their local lands and governments (Romans 13:7). The Bible isn't anti-government. It is anti-globalism, the idea of national governments relinquishing their sovereignty, but it's actually very pro-government. You've been deceived on this.

Read what Paul said about government:

Rom. 13:1 Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2 Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. 3 For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended. 4 For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. 5 Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also as a matter of conscience.​

This passage refutes your post. It's not sovereign national governments we should fear, it's the dissolving of sovereign governments into globalism (a big staple of leftism). God created the nations at Babel as a gift to us, and Satan has been trying to undo that gift ever since.

I think this is where our primary disagreement lies. You don't believe government is from God. You apparently don't agree with Paul on this issue.
When Paul wrote Romans, the madman Nero was emperor. Christians would be crucified and burned alive in his garden to give light for a party.

Paul was telling Christians not to rebel against the government in the midst of persecution. The "wrongdoing" was rebelling, fighting back against persecution, refusing to pay taxes and so on.

You are assigning 21st century political structures (globalism) to Romans. Even so, the first verse says there is no authority except that which God established. If the world turns to a global government, then you are rebelling against God if you oppose it, right?

The Roman Empire conquered and enslaved many "nations". If they could have, they would have enslaved the whole world and established a one world government.

A Roman man could do anything he wanted to any person in his household, perhaps with the exception of killing his wife, including s*xual assault or even execution of slaves or his children.

God put that government in place. If there is a global government, God will put that in place as well, and you should not oppose it, right? Surely you will quote Romans 13 to support the global government that God has put into place?

Or do you not apply scripture when it is contrary to your beliefs?

Peace to you
 

canadyjd

Well-Known Member
By the way, my primary disagreement with you is that you focus on politics and seek to have the government enforce your beliefs and then attack brothers and sisters in christ because they believe focusing on the gospel of Jesus Christ is the only command we have been given by God.

Peace to you.
 

Calminian

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
When Paul wrote Romans, the madman Nero was emperor. Christians would be crucified and burned alive in his garden to give light for a party.

Paul was telling Christians not to rebel against the government in the midst of persecution. The "wrongdoing" was rebelling, fighting back against persecution, refusing to pay taxes and so on.

You are assigning 21st century political structures (globalism) to Romans. Even so, the first verse says there is no authority except that which God established. If the world turns to a global government, then you are rebelling against God if you oppose it, right?

The Roman Empire conquered and enslaved many "nations". If they could have, they would have enslaved the whole world and established a one world government.

A Roman man could do anything he wanted to any person in his household, perhaps with the exception of killing his wife, including s*xual assault or even execution of slaves or his children.

God put that government in place. If there is a global government, God will put that in place as well, and you should not oppose it, right? Surely you will quote Romans 13 to support the global government that God has put into place?

Or do you not apply scripture when it is contrary to your beliefs?

I'm not sure what you're saying here. Are you saying Paul is not writing this to Christians in General, but just to the Church at Rome, just telling them not to rebel against Rome, because they're evil and dangerous? I'm just trying to understand your exact position.
 

Calminian

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
By the way, my primary disagreement with you is that you focus on politics and seek to have the government enforce your beliefs and then attack brothers and sisters in christ because they believe focusing on the gospel of Jesus Christ is the only command we have been given by God.

The only thing I seek and encourage my government to do is God's basic will for governments—protect the innocent and punish evil. Beyond that, I don't want government to do too much more.
 

HankD

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
When Paul wrote Romans, the madman Nero was emperor. Christians would be crucified and burned alive in his garden to give light for a party.

Paul was telling Christians not to rebel against the government in the midst of persecution. The "wrongdoing" was rebelling, fighting back against persecution, refusing to pay taxes and so on.

You are assigning 21st century political structures (globalism) to Romans. Even so, the first verse says there is no authority except that which God established. If the world turns to a global government, then you are rebelling against God if you oppose it, right?

The Roman Empire conquered and enslaved many "nations". If they could have, they would have enslaved the whole world and established a one world government.

A Roman man could do anything he wanted to any person in his household, perhaps with the exception of killing his wife, including s*xual assault or even execution of slaves or his children.

God put that government in place. If there is a global government, God will put that in place as well, and you should not oppose it, right? Surely you will quote Romans 13 to support the global government that God has put into place?

Or do you not apply scripture when it is contrary to your beliefs?

Peace to you
Yes God put America in place via the Revolutionary War against the tyranny of the British Crown.
Also, I am perfectly obedient to God by being obedient to the Bill of Rights, the second Amendment in particular.
 

Calminian

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
When Paul wrote Romans, the madman Nero was emperor. Christians would be crucified and burned alive in his garden to give light for a party.

Paul was telling Christians not to rebel against the government in the midst of persecution. The "wrongdoing" was rebelling, fighting back against persecution, refusing to pay taxes and so on.

You are assigning 21st century political structures (globalism) to Romans. Even so, the first verse says there is no authority except that which God established. If the world turns to a global government, then you are rebelling against God if you oppose it, right?

The Roman Empire conquered and enslaved many "nations". If they could have, they would have enslaved the whole world and established a one world government.

A Roman man could do anything he wanted to any person in his household, perhaps with the exception of killing his wife, including s*xual assault or even execution of slaves or his children.

God put that government in place. If there is a global government, God will put that in place as well, and you should not oppose it, right? Surely you will quote Romans 13 to support the global government that God has put into place?

Or do you not apply scripture when it is contrary to your beliefs?

Peace to you

Regardless, the theme of honoring authority and kings is not something limited to oppressive governments. This goes against the basic reading of Romans 13 that states categorically governments are from God for our good.

3 For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended. 4 For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. 5 Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also as a matter of conscience.​

The focus here has nothing to do with rebelling against evil governments. Paul specifically tells us governments are for our good. They are called "God's servant."

And these were established at Babel. We have trouble understanding that, but life can be very cruel away from civilization. Even the Roman Empire was better than anarchy.

But this does explain why we're having such a sharp disagreement. You believe honoring and depending on your government is akin to idolatry. Paul, I can assure you, did not think this way. He often cited Roman law for his own protection. He often called himself a Roman citizen.

That said, the scope of God's will for government is very limited. Minister to the innocent, punish the guilty. That can have a broad range of applications, but it's very simple. Abortion, therefore, is not something governments should be doing, and the death penalty for murder is.

And God has granted you the right to vote! Very few in history have had this right. You are actually part of a governing body, with authority from God. That's why I can't separate it from moral relevancy.
 

Calminian

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Yes God put America in place via the Revolutionary War against the tyranny of the British Crown.
Also, I am perfectly obedient to God by being obedient to the Bill of Rights, the second Amendment in particular.

And I think you could say that Britain at that time was practicing globalism. It's one thing to rule local lands, another to try to conquer the world. Hitler, also, is properly understood as a globalist (not a nationalist as some assert).

And Jesus seems to be telling us the personal weapons are not only permissible, but necessary. "...and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one." (Luke 22:36)
 

HankD

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
And I think you could say that Britain at that time was practicing globalism. It's one thing to rule local lands, another to try to conquer the world. Hitler, also, is properly understood as a globalist (not a nationalist as some assert).
Indeed as long as the globe had Der Führer sitting on its throne.

And Jesus seems to be telling us the personal weapons are not only permissible, but necessary. "...and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one." (Luke 22:36)
I believe the OT proves that God approves of a righteous self defense both of individuals and nations.

An eye for an eye, tooth for tooth tempered/superseded by "turning the other cheek"...
However what then when one runs out of cheeks?
 

Calminian

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
....An eye for an eye, tooth for tooth tempered/superseded by "turning the other cheek"...
However what then when one runs out of cheeks?

I've changed on my understanding of "turn the other cheek." I'm convinced this is a reference to insults rather than violence. Christ is not saying offer your other check if someone punches you, or offer another child if some one kills the first. A smack on the cheek was a pretty grievous insult in those days. Christ is basically saying, don't match insult for insult. He's reiterating the Proverb that a wise man overlooks an insult.

Same is true with giving your coat and scarf away and walking 2 miles. Christ is not saying you have to give your house or your car away, or move to the east coast on someone's request. He's telling us not to sweat the small things, so to speak.
 

HankD

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I've changed on my understanding of "turn the other cheek." I'm convinced this is a reference to insults rather than violence. Christ is not saying offer your other check if someone punches you, or offer another child if some one kills the first. A smack on the cheek was a pretty grievous insult in those days. Christ is basically saying, don't match insult for insult. He's reiterating the Proverb that a wise man overlooks an insult.

Same is true with giving your coat and scarf away and walking 2 miles. Christ is not saying you have to give your house or your car away, or move to the east coast on someone's request. He's telling us not to sweat the small things, so to speak.
Yes - acceptable/worthy interpretation.

Lets see if our progressive brethren can receive it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top