Religion and Politics


For you always have the poor with you, but you do not always have Me (John 12:8).

The Conservative Ledger is my dormant political blog. Suspended in 2010, it now previews only a sampling of the hundreds of articles that were posted over the many years that I wrote political commentary. I like to say that the LORD healed me of the sin of politics.

However, the current state of our Union demands that Christians stand firm to resist a society and culture that is becoming increasingly hostile towards a Biblical worldview.

There are a good number of Christians — enough to turn an election — who have made a faithful decision to not participate in the political system. There are a smaller number — like the six million so-called evangelicals who voted Democrat in 2012 — who denied the presidency to Mitt Romney.

How can a Christian vote for a party that unequivocally supports policies that are anti-Christian? It is most likely that these voters see the Democrat Party as the champion of the poor and downtrodden. If these were of the greatest concern to Jesus Christ shouldn’t they also be the burden of His church?

I submit that the state has co-opted what God ordained to be the sole responsibility of the church.

The state confiscates trillions of dollars from hard-working citizens who need that money to support their own families and charities; while the church, operating like a corporation, has failed to be a faithful steward of the resources it collects. Understand that it is false idealism to believe that either institution can heal the disease of poverty.

What did James, Peter and John instruct Paul?

… to remember the poor (Galatians 2:10).

Paul had previously sent money, collected from the Gentile churches, to the saints in Jerusalem. In his letter to the Romans, Paul makes note of the churches in Macedonia and Achaia that raised money for the Jewish Christians (Romans 15:26–27). The Corinthians and Galatians were asked to take up a collection as well (1 Corinthians 16:1–3).

It seems as if the Apostle’s missionary journeys were of two-fold purpose — to spread the Gospel, and collect money for the poor.

James wrote that pure religion is to visit the widows and orphans (James 1:27) But even this was means-tested.

If any believing woman has relatives who are widows, let her care for them. Let the church not be burdened, so that it may care for those who are truly widows (1 Timothy 5:16).

Paul wrote, If anyone is not willing to work, let him not eat (2 Thessalonians 3:10). His instructions to Timothy would seem to uphold the idea that charity begins at home. If families were responsible to one another they would not be a burden to the state, nor the church. Imagine, no homeless problem.

The family unit is the bedrock of God’s creation, but social policies by design have constructed a society that is dependent not on God and family, but the binding tentacles of an all-powerful state. In exchange for this dependency we have forfeited a measure of our rights and liberties. Government assistance is not free. It comes at a cost, and with strings attached.

The welfare state has decimated the poorest families. Benefits are reduced or withheld if there is an able-bodied person living in the home. This has caused fathers to abandon their families, or women to have children out-of-wedlock. Welfare was especially destructive of black American families who became a subjugated class in bondage to inter-generational dependence on government assistance. The state contributed to the underclass growth of single-parent households who have suffered disproportionately the social ills of drugs, violence and incarceration.

Called transfer payments by policy wonks, the confiscation of trillions of dollars from those who work has created a stagnant middle class that carries the load of burdensome taxation.

Just what is the primary role of government? To protect its citizens according to Paul (Romans 13:1–7); and that is why we pay taxes — for protection, not social engineering.

At its core the social welfare state is built upon a Marxist worldview. The Progressive movement of the 1920’s was essentially an adoption of European socialism. It became fully entrenched as official government policy with the enactment of FDR’s New Deal program in the 1930’s. Senator Harry Reid (D-Nev) said, “There was no God, there was only FDR.”

See our post, The Progressive Deception.

Liberal Christians, believing that these programs fulfilled the teachings of Jesus, were wholly supportive. They began preaching what was then called The Social Gospel. It read like a copy of Das Kapital in that it supported the Marxist ideal of economic justice. This gospel taught that economic equality would bring about the kingdom of God on earth. The movement attracted a myriad of social activists (including feminists and environmentalists) who were otherwise predisposed not to a Biblical worldview, but the establishment of a socialist utopian state.

[My socialist professor of Environmental Ecology taught in 1974 that the United States had to de-industrialize, or else the world’s oceans would be dead in 25 years.]

The Social Gospel thrives in the liberal church. It is known by its fruit — the celebration and acceptance of policies that undermine the God-centered traditions of marriage and family.

Joseph Stalin was quoted:

Destroy the family, you destroy the nation.

Wake up people.

Those of you who say that Christians should not be politically active make very good arguments. I have the utmost respect for the brethren who cite Scripture to support their stance. Jesus and His disciples were not politically active — My kingdom is not of this world (John 18:36) — I get it.

I would only ask that you consider this — would Jerusalem have voted to be free of her Roman oppressors? We have an obligation as citizens of this country to exercise our Constitutional rights — liberties that have been granted by God. Peter, James and John could not enter a ballot box. You can. I will grant that the kingdom of God will not arrive by election, but fervent prayer. However, the church (empowered by the Holy Spirit) is a restraining force in this world, and we must present ourselves as salt and light even in the arena of politics.

Bottom line: Jesus Christ was not a Marxist — Karl Marx was an atheist. According to the Bible, the state exists to keep us safe, and Christians are exhorted to assist the poor. The world system is turned upside down, and who has dominion over this world?

Socialism demands that citizens surrender their freedom to a burgeoning state that systematically consolidates power. A constituent, dependent class will always vote its self-interests. Forty percent of the electorate is bought and paid for. Christian liberals, more than anyone, have been deceived by this political shell game. Again, I ask, who is the pawn master?

Christian, if you do nothing the body of Christ will suffer ever-increasing persecution as the state exercises unchallenged authority over God and men. And don’t expect favorable judgment from the Supreme Court if Democrats retain power. The culture is trending towards defining the Bible as hate-speech.

As when Elijah thought he could hide in a cave to escape the distress, I would not want my conscience so burdened by inaction.

Visit Us at Blogspot

Copyright © 2016 Messiah Gate


2 thoughts on “Religion and Politics

  1. “Jesus and His disciples were not politically active.”

    Being politically active was not an option for them. Living under the dictates of Roman occupation, the only “political” options available back then were to either plead your case before the Roman governor and pray for his benevolence, or engage in armed insurrection.

    Under our representational political system, the principle of “render unto Caesar” is applied to the people, since our government is “of the people”. Yes, we are to submit to the authority and rule of law. But that also requires that we participate in our own governance, which requires that citizens vote, do jury duty, inform their representatives of their concerns and serve as public servants in all capacities, up to and including the office of President. In short, “We The People” are Caesar.

    “According to the Bible, the state exists to keep us safe.”

    In addition, from chapter 3 of Baldwin & Baldwin’s “Romans 13, The True Meaning Of Submission”, government is God-ordained for the purpose of applying justice. 1 Peter 2:14 says government is to “punish those who do evil and praise those who do good”. 1 Peter 2:16 instructs us to “live as people who are free”.

    Christians cannot hope to see evil punished and good praised if they leave their self-governance up to godless people in positions of authority. We cannot live as people who are free if we relinquish our own responsibilities of citizenship.

    But many have grown to accept the practice of turning over our responsibilities to someone else and letting them make the decisions that affect our lives. They don’t understand that freedom requires responsibility. And they won’t understand until it is too late that surrendering your responsibility means surrendering your freedom.

    “Render unto Caesar” minimally means it is the duty of every Christian to vote.


  2. I forgot the main thing I wanted to say, that your point, “…the state has co-opted what God ordained to be the sole responsibility of the church,” is spot-on. When Christians see that the poor (or anyone) needs help, then they should take responsibility for doing just that. And the church is the perfect instrumentality for doing that.

    Equally, when Christians expect the government to provide for the poor and needy, the church is abrogating its own responsibility to do just that. The “chicken in every pot” philosophy that permeates political thinking today is not a Biblical perspective, but a utopian and socialist perspective, which means it does not work in the real world.

    The Bible teaches that poor people will always exist. That means there isn’t going to be a chicken in every pot, and not everyone will even have a pot. The Christian faith, and the Jewish faith, which was around long before the advent of Christ, teaches that it is virtuous and desirable for those who have the means to share with those who are needy. That’s part of what “love one another” means. I think it’s interesting that love and charity are translations of the same word.

    While it is the Lord who provides us with everything we need, it is equally demonstrated in Scripture that human beings are to work for (put concerted effort into obtaining) those needs. Therefore the fruit of our labor is God’s provision to us. Granted, in his mercy he still works supernaturally to provide for us things beyond our resources.

    Nevertheless, in the United States of America, we have opportunity and the possibility to work to better our lives. But that opportunity and possibility are robbed from the people when government is designed to make provision for us. Star Parker’s life illustrates this point. When government welfare was taking care of her, her life was stagnant. She had no hope that anything would ever get better. It was only by following Christ and getting off welfare that she could help herself.

    Christians, when you think about what the government should do, don’t confuse it with what the church should do. And certainly don’t confuse it with what you personally should do. Do the right thing. Learn what you need to know, then vote. God’s watching.


Comments are closed.