Should Christians take political sides?

[Wesley Briggman]

But what about the rights to freedom of religion and freedom of conscience?

For a Christian, where do you believe such rights originate and by what authority?

 

[kyredneck]

The context was that I was beginning to believe a crude nationalist is preferable to a sophisticated internationalist.

Lol, you're not alone there either!

 

[I Love An Atheist]

For a Christian, where do you believe such rights originate and by what authority?

Jesus Christ.

The record of history shows this, too. History shows that nobody had any concept of individual rights, or even the concept of the individual as we know it and take it for granted today. Not until after Jesus Christ walked the earth, lived, was crucified and rose from the dead. The historical record shows that Catholic thinkers gradually developed our concepts of individuals and individual rights.

Then Protestants used many of those concepts against the Catholic church when they rebelled against the over-reaching of the Popes. Protestants then completed the development of Classical Liberalism, not to be confused with contemporary liberalism.

Jesus Christ mediated between each individual and God, and this is where the concept of an individual came from historically.

Then the concept of individual rights developed because of the belief that Christians need freedom of conscience. If the purpose of this life is moral development within the grace and love of Jesus and with the help of the Holy Spirit, then it makes sense that people need to be free to make the choices of their conscience. This is what the Catholic thinkers worked out over the centuries. And then later Protestant thinkers developed it further.

The concept of individual rights is a concept of this world, but there is no historical evidence to believe that it ever would not have developed, but for He who came into our world in the flesh.

This is what I said to progressives in a very progressive forum that made some of them come out of the woodwork to get me. I was trying to convince them that even if they are not believers, they should still give Christianity credit where credit is due and be careful not to try to stamp out Christians. Otherwise they might lose all their rights some day. I appealed to history because it is something one can reason with people about in a secular way. This made some people go nuts on me.

Of course I realize that Christianity is not about rights. But we are still supposed to live under human laws. And rights are now a part of our human laws, and those human laws can be traced back historically to Jesus Christ.

And it is Biblical to be law abiding as long as the laws do not require you to serve a worldly master in preference to serving God.

Therefore we do get rights from Christianity, but only indirectly.

 

[I Love An Atheist]

But the Enlightenment may have been more influenced by Deists and Masons? The Enlightenment relied on ideas developed by Christians, although it was anti-clerical.

I think the Founding Fathers were Gospel Christians, except for Ben Franklin, who was a Deist? Of course we know now many were also Masons. But this was before the Illuminati infiltrated Masonic lodges in the United States. That is a digression, though.

But rights alone are a selfish concept. That I will acknowledge. If the branch had not been ripped from the tree and grafted onto a different tree, maybe it would still be okay? Maybe it wouldn't mean entitlements, like it often means now in actual usage?

 

[1689Dave]

I am very involved with my political party!

I cannot say too much because anyone can google my name and find my voter registration and party affiliation. But I think we polarize opposing party members and remove them from the audience we should be trying to reach.

 

[1689Dave]

Give me an example of a Christian producing a false image of Christ, bringing persecution on others by espousing political views.

If we support a foreign policy that favors one nation above another, we associate Christ with that policy and alienate those we should be trying to reach.

 

[Wesley Briggman]

Jesus Christ.

The record of history shows this, too. History shows that nobody had any concept of individual rights, or even the concept of the individual as we know it and take it for granted today. Not until after Jesus Christ walked the earth, lived, was crucified and rose from the dead. The historical record shows that Catholic thinkers gradually developed our concepts of individuals and individual rights.

Then Protestants used many of those concepts against the Catholic church when they rebelled against the over-reaching of the Popes. Protestants then completed the development of Classical Liberalism, not to be confused with contemporary liberalism.

Jesus Christ mediated between each individual and God, and this is where the concept of an individual came from historically.

Then the concept of individual rights developed because of the belief that Christians need freedom of conscience. If the purpose of this life is moral development within the grace and love of Jesus and with the help of the Holy Spirit, then it makes sense that people need to be free to make the choices of their conscience. This is what the Catholic thinkers worked out over the centuries. And then later Protestant thinkers developed it further.

The concept of individual rights is a concept of this world, but there is no historical evidence to believe that it ever would not have developed, but for He who came into our world in the flesh.

This is what I said to progressives in a very progressive forum that made some of them come out of the woodwork to get me. I was trying to convince them that even if they are not believers, they should still give Christianity credit where credit is due and be careful not to try to stamp out Christians. Otherwise they might lose all their rights some day. I appealed to history because it is something one can reason with people about in a secular way. This made some people go nuts on me.

Of course I realize that Christianity is not about rights. But we are still supposed to live under human laws. And rights are now a part of our human laws, and those human laws can be traced back historically to Jesus Christ.

And it is Biblical to be law abiding as long as the laws do not require you to serve a worldly master in preference to serving God.

Therefore we do get rights from Christianity, but only indirectly.

Western Civilization = Our Rights. I agree that "civil rights" are derived from the experience(S) of man throughout history and are not from eternity past through God. Civil rights can and are abused by our fellow man daily.

The rights I have as a child of God cannot be denied me by my fellow man or other power.

God decreed the universal condition of mankind and their universal need for the Savior.

 

[I Love An Atheist]

If we support a foreign policy that favors one nation above another, we associate Christ with that policy and alienate those we should be trying to reach.

That was not an example of your assertion, it was a restatement of it, but thank you for replying anyway. I suspect I know the example you would have in mind, but I don't want to make assumptions. Hence rather than make assumptions, I was asking you. If you wish to leave me with my suspicions, that is your choice. I am not going to ask any more. It would become a hugely controversial tangent within this thread if it is what I think it is.

So maybe it's just as well. There are only so many topics one can discuss at one time. But on the other hand, when you make such high level generalizations, it does tend to lead to quite a few other subjects.

 

[1689Dave]

That was not an example of your assertion, it was a restatement of it, but thank you for replying anyway. I suspect I know the example you would have in mind, but I don't want to make assumptions. Hence rather than make assumptions, I was asking you. If you wish to leave me with my suspicions, that is your choice. I am not going to ask any more. It would become a hugely controversial tangent within this thread if it is what I think it is.

So maybe it's just as well. There are only so many topics one can discuss at one time. But on the other hand, when you make such high level generalizations, it does tend to lead to quite a few other subjects.

I do not have any examples to prove my point. But I think if you side with one group, you also take on their enemies. And you project a false image of Christ to their enemies.

 

[Revmitchell]

I do not have any examples to prove my point. But I think if you side with one group, you also take on their enemies. And you project a false image of Christ to their enemies.

There is no such thing as neutral. If we refuse to take a side and support it then we are seen as enemies. Neutrality is a myth.

 

[Salty]

I do not have any examples to prove my point. But I think if you side with one group, you also take on their enemies. And you project a false image of Christ to their enemies.

Or - the enemy of my enemy is my friend...... at least for a time......

 

[1689Dave]

Or - the enemy of my enemy is my friend...... at least for a time......

Think about the Internet and the image of Christ we reflect. And how we misrepresent him by taking sides. Our nation's enemies are not automatically his enemies.

 

[Squire Robertsson]

1689, I see you haven't interacted with the thread linked to below. It explains a lot.

I started this thread Why Christians Vote Republican Despite It All earlier.

 

[1689Dave]

1689, I see you haven't interacted with the thread linked to below. It explains a lot.

I (secretly) vote Republican. But since I do not make it known, I can witness to people that you cannot, by placing politics in your forefront. Jesus told us to treat all as our equal. And not look down our noses at the less pure as the Pharisees do.

 

[Squire Robertsson]

By it, I meant the video not your lack of interaction.

I (secretly) vote Republican. But since I do not make it known, I can witness to people that you cannot, by placing politics in your forefront. Jesus told us to treat all as our equal. And not look down our noses at the less pure as the Pharisees do.

 

[1689Dave]

By it, I meant the video not your lack of interaction.

Sorry for my misunderstanding. But I believe I can speak with many who politicised Christians drive away.

 

[I Love An Atheist]

Sorry for my misunderstanding. But I believe I can speak with many who politicised Christians drive away.

Five or six years ago, I was one of those driven away by politicized Christians. But the Holy Spirit had to open my eyes and my heart and my mind to some of the true Christians around me. I started meeting some and speaking to some. Before I would not have. They would probably have been guarded with me. Or somehow I just wouldn't have been blessed by them.

 

[I Love An Atheist]

I tried to speak to those who may be alienated as I once was, but I found as soon as I said I was Christian, that was enough to get negative responses. And I was not presenting myself as a conservative Christian. I was presenting myself as a moderate independent.

I know what kinds of articles they read about Christians in their Leftist media.

I think I may possibly have reached a very few, but who can know? It was difficult to be a good example of a Christian while under constant attacks that were highly inflammatory to me.

This was online, not offline. Offlline we still have some kind of a "live and let live" culture where I am located, thank God.

I tend to be reticent about both politics and religion in the brick and mortar world. Years of corporate life, plus growing up Midwestern where you don't run your mouth, plus my own introverted nature, plus my personality of being more perceiving and less judging...

It is when I write that I organize my opinions best. I am not nearly as contentious offline as online. But I was not contentious with these progressives who attacked me. I was only contending for the faith. When they were slandering Christianity, I was trying to clear up the record.

Since they responded with hostility to me, then what were my options after that? Didn't Christ say we have to shake the dust off our feet and move on?

I think I am way too thin skinned for being good at something like that. It wouldn't be long before they would have made me angry and foolish. The stage of eloquent, ice cold indignation would have given way to a less articulate and not so very gracious stage. So I left their midst before that would happen.

Perhaps it would be helpful if you could provide people with more specific stories or examples about how they contend with the faith to people who are angry at Christians.

Because there will always be Christians out there giving all of us a bad name, and Leftist media will always preferentially write about those kinds of Christians who make everybody else look bad.

When I asked you how you do it, I was asking sincerely. It was not a rhetorical question. You are so insistent, but do you have a lot of experience, and if you do, I would sincerely love more detailed accounts about it.

 

[1689Dave]

I know what kinds of articles they read about Christians in their Leftist media.

The problem is, the politicised Christians have driven a wedge between themselves and the people they should be trying to reach. Try speaking out against politicised Christianity. It will warm the hearts of those we need to reach.

 

[I Love An Atheist]

The problem is, the politicised Christians have driven a wedge between themselves and the people they should be trying to reach. Try speaking out against politicised Christianity. It will warm the hearts of those we need to reach.

What about the parable about the wheat and the tares, though? Jesus said the tares would grow among the wheat until the harvest. He said if you rip up the tares before the harvest, you will harm the wheat.

I don't completely disagree with you. I feel cautious about your advice, though.

I am not allowed to talk here about one of the main reasons why. It involves being a mother in a world where children are being subjected to education in the subject I'm not allowed to speak about.

Those on the Christian Right seem to be the only ones who are opposing this agenda, but they are now being classified as hate groups by the SPLC.

Don't you realize this is the number one issue in our contemporary society that is making the other side angry at Christians? Don't you know I can't speak out against it?