So, what role should faith play in politics?
I've been thinking on this for a few weeks. Haven't really gone into depth on it, it's one of those things that crosses my mind as I'm sitting on the Concept 2 with nothing to do but try and ignore the fact that I can hardly breath.
I do think it's worth more consideration than I've given it, though. I know that for a lot of things "conservative," the answers are pretty clear. Things like abortion and drug use are no-brainers, there are Scriptures to back them up. What about things like firearm control, parental rights, the War on Terror, etc.?
I guess what a person believes about the power of the government depends on what you believe about 1) What Scripture says about governing bodies, and 2) The purpose of a governing body. I'm not trying to set specific answers as much as a concept.
Scripture? There is a lot. In Genesis, God says "Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in his own image." Man's punishment for shedding blood is death...by the hand of man.
Romans says:
Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer. Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God's wrath but also for the sake of conscience.
(Rom 13:1-5)
So, the hand that slays the murderer is appointed by God to be there, slaying the murderer. Well, that's a comforting thought for folks in the military.
In other OT books, God deals out punishment directly, with no intermediary...which would seem to put lie to the two previous verses. I think (emphasize: think) that there were specific reasons. One, no one was committing a man-to-man type of sin. When this type of discipline is meted out (that I remember), the commands that were broken dealt specifically with how the people interacted with and obeyed the Presence. So, the previously established chain of command (Tribal leaders, Aaron/Levites, Moses, God) was skipped and the offenders held directly accountable to Him. A couple of times this didn't happen (like when Moses ground up the calf and made everybody drink it), but I think I'm accurate for the most part.
Notice that when the people rejected the Lord as their ultimate earthly authority, things slightly changed. Only slightly. Now the King was in power (but, ironically, all the kings that were of any use did what the Lord said to do). So then we find various men and women meting out punishment in the name of the Most High. Not so different in concept than before, because there were still elders (and basically anyone zealous for the Lord) to consider. People were often still instruments used to judge and punish evildoers.
What about today? We have no theocracy and America is most decidedly NOT a Christian nation. I think Paul answers it...nothing has really changed, except we have made more efficient ways to sin. So, governments exist to judge and punish evildoers.
We are told to pay our debts (to the ruling authorities) and love each other (each other being defined as everybody). I'm glad he wrote that in right after talking about destroying evil people. It'd be so easy to say "Well, I'm a part of the government, so I can now kill/punish people that sin." Uh, no. Individually speaking, that's not the way it is. We are called to pay our dues and love our neighbor. If there's any bloodletting to do, it is the responsibility of our judicial system and federal government (and the people that work in it) to do so.
What about the War on Terror? Hmmm...who thinks bin-Laden deserves to be punished? What about Hussein? Those things are easy (as long as you aren't afraid to see the truth). What about people in the government that use their authority for selfish gain (say, Bill Clinton)? What about people in authority that use the influence of office to avoid punishment (Kennedy)?
This is what I believe: Regardless of what people do, whether their actions be good, pleasant, inconvenient or just plain evil, our job is to love them. (Insert sermon about it being true love and not fake.) Our job is to serve them. Ultimately, it's not going to matter if I (or you, or the next guy, or whatever) never get to enact vengeance on a dirty politician for taking all of our money, or for betraying our country (certainly isn't his anymore), or whatever. They may be hurting us, but they are breaking God's commandments, not ours. He's the one that will take care of it when someone lies, cheats, steals, murders, etc. Doesn't mean we are excused from defending the defenseless or from standing up for what is right; just that in the end, judgement is His job. Not ours.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Hello Dan,
This is slightly off-topic, but it addresses the nature and purpose of a theocracy and the purpose of religion in governance. I also want to preface this by clarifying that I think the term theocracy is a misnomer, since these people are not basing their actions on the Creator, but on a religion that claims to represent a specific (false) image said by them to be the Creator. Understanding the difference is vitally important to discerning the truth. Isn't it awfully convenient that Rome imposed a religion that dictates that you support and forgive them, even when they are doing evil? There are many ways to end evil deeds and establish truth and justice without resorting to evil yourself or permitting it to continue.
David Kuo's book, Tempting Faith, does nothing to dispel claims of an American theocracy as some are asserting. In fact, he has inadvertently provided stunning insights into their true nature and purpose. No leader of an empire ever truly believes the religions used to manipulate subjects. That would be like a drug dealer hooked on his product; its bad for business...
Understanding why religion is strong delusion
Christians often quote things like "know them by their fruits," yet after millennia of being duped into abetting blatantly evil scoundrels, many still don't understand the meaning or import of much of what they read. The same canon paradoxically propounds "faith," which means the complete opposite of "know them by their fruits," i.e., to discern the truth by analyzing deeds and results (works) and to weigh actions instead of merely believing what is said.
The deceptive circular logic of posing a fantasy messiah who urges both discernment of the truth and faith (belief without proof) clearly represents a skillful and purposeful effort to impose ignorance and confusion through "strong delusion." Any sage worth his salt could understand the folly of this contradictory so-called wisdom. This and mountains of evidence demonstrate that faith and religion are the opposite of truth and wisdom. It is no wonder charlatans like Rove, Bush, and others have marked Christians as dupes to be milked as long and as hard as possible. Any accomplished con artist easily recognizes religion as the ultimate scam and fervent followers as ready-made marks and dupes.
We now live in an era where science has proven so much about the vastness, rationality, mathematical preciseness, and structural orderliness throughout every level of our 11-dimension universe. Nonetheless, large percentages of people still conclude that these flawed and contradictory religious canons are the unmodified and infallible "word of God." People who can't (or won't) discern the difference between truth and belief are easily misled about the differences between good and evil, wisdom and folly, perfection and error, reason and irrationality, and right and wrong.
The fact that political leaders have always had close relationships with religious leaders while cooperating to manipulate followers to gain wealth and power is overwhelming evidence that the true purpose of religion is deception and delusion. People who are unable to effectively discern basic moral choices or to reason accurately are easily indoctrinated to follow the dictates of national and imperial leaders who wrap themselves in religious pretense. Truth and wisdom are direct threats to the existence and power of empires. That is why imperial leaders always strive to hide so-called secret knowledge and impose deception and ignorance upon their subjects.
What then is the purpose of "faith" but to prevent otherwise good people from seeking to understand truth and wisdom?
Read More...
Peace...
Seven Star Hand,
I can empathize with you over the delusion of religion. Religions have by-and-large done nothing better than con people into wasting their lives. Christianity, like all the others has had a rough history. As vast number of "Christians" have no "fruit" to demonstrate their faith. I often wish I could apologize to the world for this.
Unfortunately, the "strong delusion" of religion that you speak of doesn't stop with traditional religions. Religion could be defined as the practice or "works" of one's faith. In this respect, everyone is religious - even yourself. Belief is so universal it cannot be escaped short of death. Let me explain: has science really "proven so much?" Have you personally verified all of these "proofs?" Does the Universe really have 11 dimensions (this is hardly agreed upon among scientists). Like it or not, we exercise some degree of faith in everything we accept as true. It is impossible for us to verify every principle of science, so we must accept the testimony of scientists, teachers, etc. Even if we had the time to do everything ourselves we could not prove anything conclusively because our knowledge and abilities are finite. So even what you consider to be true is also belief. And belief in something is faith (faith does not equal "belief without proof" since all belief has more or less evidence or "proof" yet nothing has absolute proof from our perspective). Your religion then, is the working out of your faith. The big question is, which Faith is true? And unless we favor believing in contradictions, two different beliefs cannot be true.
Fortunately, biblical or Christian faith has much to commend it (However, we do not rest our belief on evidence - one must ultimately presuppose the truth of their faith, in the case of a Christian, we presuppose the truth of Scripture). Contrary to your post, Rome did not "impose" the Christian religion. Rome had it's own pagan religion that it tried to impose on Christians, Jews, and everyone else in the empire. Contrary to liberal scholarship, Christianity was not Hellenized. Further, Christians did not see support from Rome until the 4th century. Until that point, Rome was often busy trying to kill Christians rather than trying to win their support and forgiveness. As for the reliability of Scripture, there is a great deal of "proof" for its reliability. It is the faithful "Word of God," though often misinterpreted. Christians (when correctly informed) do not believe Scripture to be "unmodified." We believe the original writings to be inspired and inerrant. Though we do recognize many modifications such as translation and minor copy errors (typos). The consistency and reliability of the text has been confirmed repeatedly by scholars for millennia. No other faith has both survived and undergone the intense persecution/criticism that Christianity has faced.
I do regret that those who call themselves Christians have not always produced fruit, but Scripture clearly tells us that "faith without works is dead." In other words, faith that does not manifest itself in good works, that is obedience to God, is not true Christian faith.
Unfortunately, if faith results in deception, you must join hands with the rest of the world. Because we all have faith in something. But thanks be to God who has shown us the Way, the Truth, and the Life in Jesus Christ our Lord!
Seven Star Hand,
Thanks for the comments!
If there was anything I could add to what Steve said, I would, but not right now. So I'll just leave it at 'ditto.'
Post a Comment