Tuesday, October 22, 2019

Do you dislike “politics” being discussed in church?

Do you believe it is inappropriate for “politics” to enter into sermons, announcements from the pulpit, or Christian prayer?  Most churches avoid such topics like the plague.  And in the rare church that mentions anything that can be construed as “politics” there will invariably be those who are put off by such mention, believing that any reference to anything related to politics is inappropriate inside a church.

There are two problems with this intolerance of political talk in the church.

One problem is the definition of “politics.”  The other is a lack of understanding of the content, context, and message of the Bible.

First, the definition:

No, it does not mean “many blood sucking insects fastened to the body”, as in “many ticks”, although politicians can come very close to that definition.

Webster defines politics as “the art or science of government.”  A broader definition is “actions or activities concerned with achieving and using power in a country or society.”  (Collins English Dictionary)  Closely related to politics is power and authority: Who has the power and authority over whom.

These definitions are much different than popular usage of the term which too often includes name calling, lies, and greedy agendas of politicians, special interests, and yes, voters.  These popularized examples of “politics” are as much a perversion of the term as “homosexual” is a perversion of the word “gay.”

With the Webster and Collins definitions in mind, lets look at politics in the context of the Bible.

First of all, the Old Testament is full of concepts relating to governance.  First it was governance by judges, then by kings.  The goodness and faithfulness of the subjects that sanctioned those judges and kings waxed and waned throughout the Old Testament history of Israel.  The major themes revolved around the extent that both the leaders and the people were faithful to or rebelled against God.  Should we be unconcerned about how faithful or faithless our leaders and fellow voters are today?

And then we have Bible prophecy.  The biggie that comes to mind is Isaiah 9:6-7:  “For unto us a Child is born, Unto us a Son is given; And the government will be upon His shoulder.  And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.  Of the increase of His government and peace There will be no end, Upon the throne of David and over His kingdom, To order it and establish it with judgment and justice From that time forward, even forever.”

There are dozens more examples like this.

And in the New Testament (and in the Old), we have the dynamic tension between obeying government versus obeying God. “Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.”  The problem is, we ignore what belongs to God.  Acts 4:18-20 speaks to this problem by saying: “So they called them and commanded them not to speak at all or teach in the name of Jesus. But Peter and John answered and said to them, "’Whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you more than to God, you judge. For we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard.”

The whole Bible, the whole function of God, is to teach us who has power and authority over whom; who governs whom; what is the ideal nature of that government.  The Bible is a book of governance.

Benjamin Franklin, addressing the President of the Constitutional Convention, declared: "I have lived, Sir, a long time; and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, That God governs in the affairs of men!” Dang politics!  There it is again – God “governing” in the affairs of men.  Too bad we don’t have more of that – the “God governing” part.

But discuss the failures of our culture or problems with our government during church and all hell breaks loose, or at least, a few whispers about “oh, here he goes again with ‘politics’.”

If there is any problem in the Church, it is discussing too little politics, not too much.  And no, the excuse about losing the church’s tax exempt status is bogus.  We are so far from crossing that line that the danger is irrelevant and such thought foolish.

____________________

Coming soon:  What “political” topics are ripe for discussion in Christian Churches.

4 comments:

Brother Michael said...

There are two (out of many) problems with this situation. First, "politics" as a subject in our society has become toxic. Reality is, the word itself has become so bastardized; polarized; emotionalized, that in the context of this discussion the definitions are irrelevant. It's an impossible leap to overcome it. Secondly, trying to interpret the bible for the sake of governance is nebulous, for the bible is written with many interpretations. Those interpretations can be as diverse as the "political" viewpoints of the interpreter. Case in point is the US/Mexico border situation. The bible says (in essence) welcome all refugees fleeing from whatever. So; no border wall. But the bible also asserts we should provide safe haven for our families. So...a wall against possible criminals? Welcome refugees selectively? Politics. Ugh! Back to point #1 above: Reality is, the introduction of the politics of governance in the church may not even be the business of the church. If God's word is taught and understood, the members of the congregation can form their own interpretations. All we can do is have faith (remember "faith?") all we can do is have faith that the outcome will be God's will. That's democracy. Informed decisions by the citizens. Preach God's word; leave the interpretation to the privacy of each individual. Leave political interpretations and viewpoints out of it. Amen?

Gerardo Moochie said...

Your opening comment is exactly the problem this blog addresses. The word "politics" has not only become "bastardized" as you say, but also weaponized. The word "politics" is used as a weapon against discussing and learning virtually everything the Bible (God) has to say about governance. And it says a lot! That is precisely the problem most churches ignore. "Don't point out what the Bible says because it may offend someone - or someone may disagree" goes the thinking. And they certainly don't want to "offend" and lose attendees or revenue.

On your second point, the Bible is much less "nebulous" than the casual observer may assume. Just as in addressing any problem there are various ways to address it. Some ways should be avoided, some ways are iffy, some ways may work. And some ways are essential. These options are available for every mundane decision we make: How to raise a child, how to invest your money, what to have for lunch. That does not mean we avoid learning and discussing such things with other people who are impacted by that decision.

When it comes to running your life, your family, a community, city, county, state, or nation, there is the same assortment of approaches to address the best ways to govern.

The point I tried to make is that the Bible has much more to say about these things than the exposure it has been given in the Churches. Sure there is a diversity of opinion of interpretation. But that does not mean there is no right way. And there are most certainly a number of wrong ways. That does not mean the topics should be ignored. That does not mean that those who are well versed in the Bible (pastors and teachers) without imposing their own agenda, should avoid teaching and promoting God's words about governance to their congregations.

Using your example of immigration, two competing arguments have been cited: Obey the laws of the land and be gracious to the sojourner. There are other principles in the Bible as well, such as the idea of national sovereignty, no work/no eat, personal responsibility, and many others.

For example, those with an "open borders" agenda will equate "sojourner" with "illegal immigrant." And they stop right there. End of argument. Let in all the sojourners because that is what the Bible says. In fact, there is no equivalency whatsoever between those terms "illegal immigrant" and "sojourner." Add in the social justice's failure to consider the other relevant Bible principles and their failed interpretation becomes even more blatant.

So yes, a superficial look at a couple of verses will appear to create contradictions. That does not abrogate the fact that there are solid lessons on governance that the Bible teaches, but are suppressed in the Churches.

The founders of this nation and signers of the Constitution were comprised of pastors, devout Christians, and those otherwise heavily influenced by the Bible. The principles of governance contained in the Bible were a primary influence on the system of government we currently have. But that history is nowhere taught today: Not in civics classes in public schools; not even in our churches.

In the next few blogs, I will list several of the areas of governance the Bible promotes that relate to the "political" hot buttons of today. Not everyone will agree. But despite that, they should be made known and discussed - at the very least.

After the preachers and Bible teachers are finished giving their very best interpretation of what the Bible says about governance, then each churchgoer can reach his own conclusion. But the churchgoers should not be left in the dark to come to their own, blind, conclusions. But as things now stand, most of us are making blind decisions in the dark - and reaping the consequences due, in part, to a silent Church.

Amen.

Gerardo Moochie said...

The following was provided by a good friend, but for some reason it failed to post, so here it is:

1SA10.19 “And ye have this day rejected your God, who himself saved you out of all your adversities and your tribulations; and ye have said unto him, Nay, but set a king over us.”

I Believe God wanted us to exercise self-control in following laws such as the 10 Commandments. When we “outsource” self control to government control, we abnegate some of our personal responsibility to do the right thing. In this verse, Samuel goes on to anoint Saul as king over Israel only after the people ask to have a king “as other nations do.“ God entrusted us with free will to govern ourselves. God made it our responsibility to govern ourselves. Whenever we say “there oughta be a law,” we are avoiding our responsibility to govern ourselves. We are asking God to set a king over us because we don’t trust ourselves to use our free will responsibly. This is the theme of my new book The Timshel Option, now out on Amazon. https://www.amazon.com/dp/1697589251/ref=cm_sw_r_sms_c_api_i_UPdSDb35ZBR5K

Gerardo Moochie said...

"Preach God's word." The essence of this blog is that only a portion of God's word is being preached. Much of the Bible that applies to our nation and culture today is NOT being preached. Why? Because too many pastors and churchgoers have poisoned what the Bible says about governance by calling it "politics." So, when someone says "preach God's word", I suggest PREACH ALL OF IT. When a pastor preaches God's word, he is not just reading the Bible and leaving interpretation to the listener's imagination. He is interpreting it for the listener. He is providing the context, culture, related verses, etc. So, the pastor should not only PREACH the ENTIRE Bible. He should also interpret and teach the ENTIRE Bible. This is not being done, but it should be.