Christians and Government

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

"I do not believe a Christian should choose his government on the basis of which shall be more conducive to his faith any more than he ought to choose his toothpaste on that basis. To be sure, there are certain prohibitions. A Christian should not support a government that suppresses the faith, or one that sanctions the taking of innocent human life, just as a Christian should not wear immodest clothes. But the test of the good government, like the test of well-tailored clothes, is assuredly not whether it helps you save your soul."

"Government is not meant for saving souls, but for protecting life and property and assuring the conditions for physical prosperity. Its responsibility is the here, not the hereafter, and the needs of the two sometimes diverge. It may well be, for example, that a governmental system which keeps its citizens in relative poverty will produce more saints. The rich, Christ said, have a harder time getting to heaven. But that would be a bad government nonetheless. This recognition of the separate spheres of church and state is not just a teaching of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. It is also, I think, the teaching of Jesus Christ who spoke of rendering to Caesar the things that are Caesar's and to God the things that are God's, and who is regarded as not having indicated any preference about government – except one: he did not want the people to make him king."

[AuCivilEng1 10,995]

21 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

"I do not believe a Christian should choose his government on the basis of which shall be more conducive to his faith any more than he ought to choose his toothpaste on that basis. To be sure, there are certain prohibitions. A Christian should not support a government that suppresses the faith, or one that sanctions the taking of innocent human life, just as a Christian should not wear immodest clothes. But the test of the good government, like the test of well-tailored clothes, is assuredly not whether it helps you save your soul."

"Government is not meant for saving souls, but for protecting life and property and assuring the conditions for physical prosperity. Its responsibility is the here, not the hereafter, and the needs of the two sometimes diverge. It may well be, for example, that a governmental system which keeps its citizens in relative poverty will produce more saints. The rich, Christ said, have a harder time getting to heaven. But that would be a bad government nonetheless. This recognition of the separate spheres of church and state is not just a teaching of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. It is also, I think, the teaching of Jesus Christ who spoke of rendering to Caesar the things that are Caesar's and to God the things that are God's, and who is regarded as not having indicated any preference about government – except one: he did not want the people to make him king."

I personally long for the day when we have as much knowledge about a politicians religious faith as we do in what brand underwear they wear. And the only way I want to find out is by seeing them come out of a church while I’m walking down the street. Lol

[homersapien 11,352]

21 hours ago, NolaAuTiger said:

"I do not believe a Christian should choose his government on the basis of which shall be more conducive to his faith any more than he ought to choose his toothpaste on that basis. To be sure, there are certain prohibitions. A Christian should not support a government that suppresses the faith, or one that sanctions the taking of innocent human life, just as a Christian should not wear immodest clothes. But the test of the good government, like the test of well-tailored clothes, is assuredly not whether it helps you save your soul."

"Government is not meant for saving souls, but for protecting life and property and assuring the conditions for physical prosperity. Its responsibility is the here, not the hereafter, and the needs of the two sometimes diverge. It may well be, for example, that a governmental system which keeps its citizens in relative poverty will produce more saints. The rich, Christ said, have a harder time getting to heaven. But that would be a bad government nonetheless. This recognition of the separate spheres of church and state is noIt just a teaching of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. It is also, I think, the teaching of Jesus Christ who spoke of rendering to Caesar the things that are Caesar's and to God the things that are God's, and who is regarded as not having indicated any preference about government – except one: he did not want the people to make him king."

Lots of rationalization going on there. 

Are you quoting someone?  If so, you should attribute it.

 

[TitanTiger 20,468]

It's Antonin Scalia.  A great justice and legal mind.  Not a great theologian or moral philosopher necessarily though.

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

2 hours ago, TitanTiger said:

It's Antonin Scalia.  A great justice and legal mind.  Not a great theologian or moral philosopher necessarily though.

You would enjoy the full speech. 

I greatly appreciate his theological and philosophical insights. I find them quite compelling. Obviously, opinions will differ on that. 

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

2 hours ago, homersapien said:

Lots of rationalization going on there.

I disagree. 

2 hours ago, homersapien said:

Are you quoting someone?  If so, you should attribute it.

Yes. I attributed it with the quotation marks. 

[homersapien 11,352]

1 hour ago, NolaAuTiger said:

I disagree. 

Yes. I attributed it with the quotation marks. 

No reason to be a jerk Nola.  We have the other forum for that.

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

1 hour ago, homersapien said:

No reason to be a jerk Nola.  We have the other forum for that.

Oh come. Lighten up. I wasn’t being a jerk. 

[augolf1716 21,094]

1 hour ago, NolaAuTiger said:

Oh come. Lighten up. I wasn’t being a jerk. 

back at you jerk

[Grumps 3,693]

On 4/18/2019 at 1:39 PM, NolaAuTiger said:

"I do not believe a Christian should choose his government on the basis of which shall be more conducive to his faith any more than he ought to choose his toothpaste on that basis. To be sure, there are certain prohibitions. A Christian should not support a government that suppresses the faith, or one that sanctions the taking of innocent human life, just as a Christian should not wear immodest clothes. But the test of the good government, like the test of well-tailored clothes, is assuredly not whether it helps you save your soul."

"Government is not meant for saving souls, but for protecting life and property and assuring the conditions for physical prosperity. Its responsibility is the here, not the hereafter, and the needs of the two sometimes diverge. It may well be, for example, that a governmental system which keeps its citizens in relative poverty will produce more saints. The rich, Christ said, have a harder time getting to heaven. But that would be a bad government nonetheless. This recognition of the separate spheres of church and state is not just a teaching of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. It is also, I think, the teaching of Jesus Christ who spoke of rendering to Caesar the things that are Caesar's and to God the things that are God's, and who is regarded as not having indicated any preference about government – except one: he did not want the people to make him king."

I think it is a great quote. It is interesting how few people understand that God isn't concerned with governments. It is all about our hearts.

[maxwere 82]

On 4/21/2019 at 1:45 PM, Grumps said:

I think it is a great quote. It is interesting how few people understand that God isn't concerned with governments. It is all about our hearts.

 

Quote

 

Matthew 28:18-20 English Standard Version (ESV)

¹⁸ And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. ¹⁹ Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in^[a] the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, ²⁰ teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.”

 

He sounds pretty concerned about it to me.  Obviously, the OP is a nonsensical quote full of self contradiction.

 

[DKW 86 7,410]

55 minutes ago, maxwere said:

 

 

1

49 minutes ago, maxwere said:

He sounds pretty concerned about it to me.  Obviously, the OP is a nonsensical quote full of self contradiction.

Insert the quote about "give to Ceasar the things that are Ceasar's and give to God the things that are God's"

All govts are ordained of God. He allows them to do as he sees fit to be done. Sometimes bad govts drive us to actions, etc. If we allow Religion (notice I did not use the C-Word) to rule over us than we are all living under some sort of sharia law. 

[maxwere 82]

All authority is delegated authority.  Sounds like we agree DK.

[Grumps 3,693]

8 hours ago, maxwere said:

 

He sounds pretty concerned about it to me.  Obviously, the OP is a nonsensical quote full of self contradiction.

 

I don't understand your point. Maybe I should have said, "God isn't concerned with human governments."

[homersapien 11,352]

10 hours ago, Grumps said:

I don't understand your point. Maybe I should have said, "God isn't concerned with human governments."

God isn't concerned with humans, period.

We control our own destiny.  The idea our destiny is in "God's hands" is a very dangerous notion.

[DKW 86 7,410]

On 4/27/2019 at 10:22 AM, homersapien said:

God isn't concerned with humans, period.

We control our own destiny.  The idea our destiny is in "God's hands" is a very dangerous notion.

Serious note here (No snark, intended nor applied): Most would say that Humans are God's Number One Priority. It's the whole point of His focus.

While God does not proactively intervene in all human lives individually, he does indeed intervene in our lives collectively, and in many instances, individually. We are left as our own free moral agents. We do control our own destiny, but there is most definitely a God Component in everything.

This comes from a guy that was at one time 100% Evolution and Borderline Atheist in college. I argued openly, even wrote a paper for class on Evolution being the obvious answer to where we came from. I am now profoundly Christian (please notice I did not use the term Religious.) I understand my place in the Universe and I have really never been happier. So, through what i would call profound challenges right after college, (I gave up my chosen, lifelong love career to care for my Father) I came to Christ. I was age 28 when I came to that decision. 

What, in general, are your beliefs?

[homersapien 11,352]

26 minutes ago, DKW 86 said:

Serious note here (No snark, intended nor applied): Most would say that Humans are God's Number One Priority. It's the whole point of His focus.

While God does not proactively intervene in all human lives individually, he does indeed intervene one our lives collectively, and in many instances, individually. We are left as our own free moral agents. We do control our own destiny, but there is most definitely a God Component in everything.

This comes from a guy that was at one time 100% Evolution and Borderline Atheist in college. I argued openly, even wrote a paper for class on Evolution being the obvious answer to where we came from. I am now profoundly Christian (please notice I did not use the term Religious.) I understand my place in the Universe and I have really never been happier. So, through what i would call profound challenges right after college, (I gave up my chosen, lifelong love career to care for my Father) I came to Christ. I was age 28 when I came to that decision. 

What, in general, are your beliefs?

Please ignore me and I will return the favor.

[I_M4_AU 7,762]

2 hours ago, homersapien said:

God isn't concerned with humans, period.

We control our own destiny.  The idea our destiny is in "God's hands" is a very dangerous notion.

The idea our destiny is in the governments hands is a very dangerous notion.  I see your point, we should be able to control our own destiny.   

[homersapien 11,352]

4 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

The idea our destiny is in the governments hands is a very dangerous notion.  I see your point, we should be able to control our own destiny.   

My point is that relying on some sort of controlling, outside force to control our future - either as individuals or collectively - is dangerous thinking.

Individually, we must rely on our own decisions and efforts.

Collectively, government should never be more than an organizing principle. It should not be an outside force.  We are the government, or should be.  That's what democracy means.  That is the collective responsibility we have.

 

[I_M4_AU 7,762]

Agree and because we have free will, a lot of us disagree as to how to achieve the correct style of government.

[Grumps 3,693]

On 4/27/2019 at 10:22 AM, homersapien said:

God isn't concerned with humans, period.

We control our own destiny.  The idea our destiny is in "God's hands" is a very dangerous notion.

If there is a God then He/She would not have created us if He wasn't concerned with us. It makes far more sense to me to believe that there is no God, than to believe there is a God or gods who doesn't have any concern for His/Her creation.

The idea that we control our on destiny is a great idea, but it is indisputable that many things happen in our lives that are beyond our control. I don't see why it is any more dangerous to believe that God controls our destiny than to believe that fate or luck. In fact, God, who is good being in control seems far less dangerous than random chance.

Regarding chance, does it seem preposterous to you that your own consciousness is just a series of random occurences?

[maxwere 82]

On 4/27/2019 at 10:22 AM, homersapien said:

God isn't concerned with humans, period.

We control our own destiny.  The idea our destiny is in "God's hands" is a very dangerous notion.

Agree 100%.  It's a very dangerous notion indeed!

The worldview being argued for is this: Jesus Christ, King, with all authority of heaven (Cosmos) and Earth (aka the realm of men) has delegated His authority to men on Earth to represent Him (judicial magistrate).  Specifically NOT the same people who represent Him ontologically (the priest or pastor).  There's your separation of church and state.  The magistrates job is to restrain evil (enforce sanctions via negative law).  The ministerial (positive... evangelical) role is reserved for the priesthood (all believers).  That includes the welfare of the poor, the sick, the elderly, the uneducated etc.  Our national destiny is and has been very much wrapped up in the delegation and separation of offices and fulfilling the ministerial responsibility through means other than the magistrate.  How are we doing @Grumps?

[TitanTiger 20,468]

6 hours ago, maxwere said:

Agree 100%.  It's a very dangerous notion indeed!

The worldview being argued for is this: Jesus Christ, King, with all authority of heaven (Cosmos) and Earth (aka the realm of men) has delegated His authority to men on Earth to represent Him (judicial magistrate).  Specifically NOT the same people who represent Him ontologically (the priest or pastor).  There's your separation of church and state.  The magistrates job is to restrain evil (enforce sanctions via negative law).  The ministerial (positive... evangelical) role is reserved for the priesthood (all believers).  That includes the welfare of the poor, the sick, the elderly, the uneducated etc.  Our national destiny is and has been very much wrapped up in the delegation and separation of offices and fulfilling the ministerial responsibility through means other than the magistrate.  How are we doing @Grumps?

This reads like someone desperately trying to reconcile hard-core libertarianism with their faith. 

[homersapien 11,352]

On 4/28/2019 at 12:59 PM, Grumps said:

If there is a God then He/She would not have created us if He wasn't concerned with us. It makes far more sense to me to believe that there is no God, than to believe there is a God or gods who doesn't have any concern for His/Her creation.

The idea that we control our on destiny is a great idea, but it is indisputable that many things happen in our lives that are beyond our control. I don't see why it is any more dangerous to believe that God controls our destiny than to believe that fate or luck. In fact, God, who is good being in control seems far less dangerous than random chance.

Regarding chance, does it seem preposterous to you that your own consciousness is just a series of random occurences?

That is dangerous thinking IMO.  Comforting and reassuring maybe, but very dangerous.

And yes, my own consciousness results from millions of years of random mutations in biochemistry via the evolutionary process.  

That is not a preposterous notion at all.  It's the very basis of our scientific understanding of biology.  It's the "origin of species". 

And as I have said, if God exists, nature reflects It's handiwork.

And if God exists, It's concern for us is no more - or less - than It's concern for all the other species that have gone extinct.

Our time on earth - either individually or as a species - is in our own hands (unless of course, some really bad s*** happens like a major asteroid impact). 

And while s*** happens, it's far more likely we will do ourselves in.  But I wouldn't expect God to intervene.

[SaltyTiger 7,761]

3 hours ago, homersapien said:

 

And if God exists, It's concern for us is no more - or less - than It's concern for all the other species that have gone extinct.

Why do you call God It?

 You do not know that. You are a simple person Brother Homer and I see what you are saying.

Trust this coming from a man that came within a couple of minutes of dying in January. Given a little time and awareness you will want to pray to something one day