Is faith supposed to judge politics?

[Bootstrap]

Jesus' message centered on the Kingdom he established, and he apparently thought his Kingdom would need an Ecclesia to keep it in order while he is away.

Very good post, P&T. I'm quoting just the last sentence, but I agree with the entire post. I think most of what I write below is just a different way of saying what you said.

Our witness isn’t to take over the government or hitch ourselves to political parties. It’s to live as the people of God under Christ’s reign. Our worldview is biblical, not politically partisan. That puts us in the political sphere, but on very different terms than the parties of this world. Our politics are based in the Sermon on the Mount.

The heart of Christian politics is the confession “Jesus is Lord,” above any other ruler who makes that claim. In the Sermon Jesus blesses the poor, the meek, and the merciful. This is a kind of power that looks nothing like Caesar’s. Paul could lean on his Roman citizenship when it served the gospel, but he also said, “our citizenship is in heaven.” Jesus calls us a city on a hill, shining for all to see. We may hold earthly citizenship and some of us vote, but our true homeland is God’s kingdom.

Romans 13 says earthly authority is ordered by God, Revelation 13 shows how earthly authority can become beastly. Jesus tells us to love our enemies and pray for those who persecute us. So we submit to rulers when we can, but when they demand what belongs to God, we obey God instead. Jesus didn’t build a sect, a synagogue, or a resistance movement. He built an ekklesia, a people who are salt and light in the world, whose identity transcends tribe, nation, or party.

And the way this community lives is itself a blessing: reconciling quickly, forgiving freely, serving one another in love, giving to those who ask, caring for the poor, refusing to store up treasures on earth, seeking first God’s kingdom and his righteousness. That kind of life embodies justice, peace, mercy, and love. It’s profoundly political.

But it’s not the politics of seizing power. The world’s politics so often runs on outrage, enmity, and hate. Kingdom politics runs on mercy, peacemaking, and love. Jesus blesses the meek, calls us to turn the other cheek, to give to the one who asks, to love our enemies and pray for those who persecute us.

That kind of politics doesn’t try to dominate opponents. It serves neighbors, lifts up the poor, forgives offenses, and seeks first God’s kingdom. It’s not the politics of grasping for control, but the politics of a crucified and risen Lord, lived out in public for the good of the world.

[Robert]

Whatever "conservative" means in political circles, it's not the same thing as biblical Christianity. And I think it's important to avoid muddling our identity with a secular political one.

Just like the brand stroke of the word politics. What politics are you talking about? Any time a group of people gather, there is some politics.



"Favoring traditional views and values; tending to oppose change"

[Bootstrap]

Boot, he got kicked out of his church for holding a political opinion that we shouldn't have more H1-B visa holders entering the country. That's a political opinion I happen to hold too. Should churches excommunicate people for holding that opinion?

In this particular case, they wanted him to issue a public statement to the contrary - basically dictating that he had to hold certain political views.

Well, that's what he said to the toxic media soup, directing political outrage at his church. Is that the right way for Christians to handle these things?

Suppose your church forbade members from debating politics on Twitter/X, or from engaging in culture war debates on Twitter/X. Would you consider that religious persecution? I wouldn't. I think churches can reasonably ask people not to fan the flames of political outrage.

6 If any of you has a dispute with another, do you dare to take it before the ungodly for judgment instead of before the Lord’s people? 2 Or do you not know that the Lord’s people will judge the world? And if you are to judge the world, are you not competent to judge trivial cases? 3 Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more the things of this life! 4 Therefore, if you have disputes about such matters, do you ask for a ruling from those whose way of life is scorned in the church? 5 I say this to shame you. Is it possible that there is nobody among you wise enough to judge a dispute between believers? 6 But instead, one brother takes another to court—and this in front of unbelievers!

... he didn't take it before a secular court?

He just told his story, publicly. What's wrong with that?

If his church wants to, they can share their side of the story, too.

Well, that's just it. He wants his former church to be tried in the court of the toxic media soup. His church doesn't want to play that game. Why would they? And what has he exposed his former church to now? To me, that probably looks more like religious persecution: subjecting churches to the secular political outrage machine.

I think 1 Corinthians 6 speaks directly to this kind of situation. So do Matthew 18 and 1 Thessalonians 4:11-12.

[Bootstrap]

Whatever "conservative" means in political circles, it's not the same thing as biblical Christianity. And I think it's important to avoid muddling our identity with a secular political one.

Just like the brand stroke of the word politics. What politics are you talking about? Any time a group of people gather, there is some politics.

And I've been making precisely that same point in this thread. I even gave names to some things people mean by politics.

Do you think any of the dictionary senses in your definition are the same thing as faithful discipleship to the Bible as Christians?

"Favoring traditional views and values; tending to oppose change"

[Bootstrap]

Just like the brand stroke of the word politics. What politics are you talking about?

I just updated this list of ways we use that term, learning some things from the conversation with P&T and barnhart, bringing in some Scripture.

Our witness isn’t to take over the government or hitch ourselves to political parties. It’s to live as the people of God under Christ’s reign. Our worldview is biblical, not partisan politics. That puts us in the political sphere, but on very different terms than the parties of this world — terms shaped by the Sermon on the Mount.

• Politics of Allegiance — The heart of Christian politics is “Jesus is Lord.” That claim relativizes every other ruler. In the Sermon, Jesus blesses the poor, the meek, and the merciful (Matt 5:3–12) — a vision of power nothing like Caesar’s.
• Politics of Citizenship — Paul leaned on his Roman citizenship when it served the gospel, but also wrote, “our citizenship is in heaven” (Phil 3:20). Jesus calls his people a city on a hill (Matt 5:14–16). We may hold earthly citizenship and even vote, but our true homeland is God’s kingdom.
• Politics of Authority — Romans 13 says earthly exousia is ordered by God, while Revelation 13 shows it can turn beastly. In the Sermon, Jesus tells us to love enemies and pray for persecutors (Matt 5:38–48). We submit to rulers, but when they demand what belongs to God, we obey God instead (Acts 5:29).
• Politics of Identity — Jesus didn’t form a sect, a synagogue, or a resistance movement; he formed an ekklesia, a public people. In the Sermon he says we are salt and light (Matt 5:13–16), living in a way that points beyond nation or party to Christ.
• Politics of the Common Good — The ekklesia embodies justice, peace, and love. Jesus teaches us to reconcile quickly (Matt 5:23–24), forgive freely (Matt 6:14), and seek first God’s kingdom (Matt 6:33). That life blesses our neighbors — not through coercion, but through service in love.

That’s the politics of Jesus: not grabbing power, but forming a people who live the Sermon on the Mount together as a sign of God’s reign.

[JohnH]

Suppose your church forbade members from debating politics on Twitter/X, or from engaging in culture war debates on Twitter/X. Would you consider that religious persecution? I wouldn't. I think churches can reasonably ask people not to fan the flames of political outrage.

If my church told me I had to hold a particular, partisan position on visa and migration policy, I'd leave. That's what his church did here.

Well, that's just it. He wants his former church to be tried in the court of the toxic media soup. His church doesn't want to play that game. Why would they? And what has he exposed his former church to now? To me, that probably looks more like religious persecution: subjecting churches to the secular political outrage machine.

Boot, I can't imagine a more ridiculous stance. I'm sorry.

I think 1 Corinthians 6 speaks directly to this kind of situation. So do Matthew 18 and 1 Thessalonians 4:11-12.

No, it doesn't. They turned him for holding a political view they disagreed with. He has every right to speak out about that.

[Bootstrap]

Suppose your church forbade members from debating politics on Twitter/X, or from engaging in culture war debates on Twitter/X. Would you consider that religious persecution? I wouldn't. I think churches can reasonably ask people not to fan the flames of political outrage.

If my church told me I had to hold a particular, partisan position on visa and migration policy, I'd leave. That's what his church did here.

I have no way of knowing that. I don't trust The Blaze to report accurately on this kind of thing.

Well, that's just it. He wants his former church to be tried in the court of the toxic media soup. His church doesn't want to play that game. Why would they? And what has he exposed his former church to now? To me, that probably looks more like religious persecution: subjecting churches to the secular political outrage machine.

Boot, I can't imagine a more ridiculous stance. I'm sorry.

We're miles apart on this one. You trust The Blaze in ways I just don't. You are less concerned about the ability of a church to practice its faith without persecution than I am. I think politicized outrage and hostility are boiling over in very dangerous directions. I worry about people feeling safe to express their views, including religious views.

I think 1 Corinthians 6 speaks directly to this kind of situation. So do Matthew 18 and 1 Thessalonians 4:11-12.

No, it doesn't. They turned him for holding a political view they disagreed with. He has every right to speak out about that.

You assume that he is telling the truth. Even if he IS telling the truth, 1 Corinthians 6 would tell him not to pursue it this way.

Therefore, if you have disputes about such matters, do you ask for a ruling from those whose way of life is scorned in the church? I say this to shame you. Is it possible that there is nobody among you wise enough to judge a dispute between believers? 6 But instead, one brother takes another to court—and this in front of unbelievers!

Some of those might have been perfectly valid lawsuits from a secular perspective. But Paul is pretty clear about what is wrong with this.

And I think "those whose way of life is scorned in the church" should include the toxic media soup and the kind of politics that uses outrage and offense as weapons of power.

[Bootstrap]

If my church told me I had to hold a particular, partisan position on visa and migration policy, I'd leave.

Me too.

But I wouldn't feel like a victim of religious persecution. And I wouldn't report my church to the toxic outrage machine. I would just leave.

[JohnH]

I don’t trust the Blaze very much. I do trust the person himself who issued his own statements on the matter. I provided a Blaze link instead of a half dozen individual tweets.

[JohnH]

Corinthians 6 doesn’t say, “When you’re spiritually abused by your church’s leadership, shut up about it.”