Is it possible to choose without being biased? Are fair-minded choices possible? I think these questions are equivalent. It is certainly possible to vote without joining a party, and to choose candidates regardless of party affiliation.mike wrote:Is it possible to vote without being partisan?Bootstrap wrote:I'm more concerned about the dangers of (1) partisanship
Voting without warring
Re: Voting without warring
0 x
Is it biblical? Is it Christlike? Is it loving? Is it true? How can I find out?
Re: Voting without warring
Thank you for recommending the book. I bought it and have started reading. Here is an interesting paragraph.Martin wrote:Quoting the from the book on page 13, "This books details the story of negotiating nonresistant citizenship. The political implications were complex-whether in conversation with the state or in relations with neighbors or fellow church members. The scale and scope of the Civil War only increased the intensity of such matters, reaffirming convictions while often reformulating the old approaches."Bootstrap wrote:Could you summarize it?Martin wrote:A good book on how Mennonite beliefs changed in regards to voting and the separation of church and state is "Mennonites, Amish, and the American Civil War" by James O. Lehman.
Prior to the Civil War the Old Mennonites (Franconia, Lancaster, Washington-Franklin, and Virginia) voted and served in civic roles such as tax collectors and township trustees. One example is Joseph Snively Jr., (1786-1872), a Franklin County, PA delegate to the State Constitutional Convention in 1837. However, the Reformed Mennonite founder John Herr, along with a fellow Reformed Mennonite physician Daniel Musser objected to serving in a political role. Musser had this say in regards to Mennonites who voted for Governor Curtin and then refused his call to arms, "Those who cast their suffrage for the President placed him in office and put the sword into his hands; and I do not see how anyone can contend that it is sin for him to use it, and not for them to give him power to do so."
I will conclude with a sentence from the book that summarized Musser's convictions. "In short, the truly converted nonresistant Christian was apolitical, condemning neither Republican nor Democrat, judging neither North or South, but humbly submitting to God's sovereign will and living faithfully in a parallel universe that was the kingdom of God."
I very much appreciate and respect the fact that although their views on slavery aligned them more with the Union, they did not join the abolitionist movement or take sides in the political debate.
I view this as being similar to the immigration/refugee debate.
1860: Yes, I will not own slaves. Yes, I will harbor runaways that come in my way, at least to the extent of providing basic needs such as food and shelter, even if it means breaking the law. No, I will not join the abolitionist movement or participate in the public political debates.
2017: Yes, I will help and support immigrants that come in my way, at least to the extent of providing basic needs such as food and shelter, even if it means breaking the law. No, I will not hold signs protesting government immigration and border policies or participate in the public political debates.
0 x
Remember the prisoners, as though you were in prison with them, and the mistreated, as though you yourselves were suffering bodily. -Heb. 13:3
Re: Voting without warring
That sounds a lot like the approach the Sanctuary Movement of the 1980s took, at least according to these podcasts.mike wrote:I view this as being similar to the immigration/refugee debate.
1860: Yes, I will not own slaves. Yes, I will harbor runaways that come in my way, at least to the extent of providing basic needs such as food and shelter, even if it means breaking the law. No, I will not join the abolitionist movement or participate in the public political debates.
2017: Yes, I will help and support immigrants that come in my way, at least to the extent of providing basic needs such as food and shelter, even if it means breaking the law. No, I will not hold signs protesting government immigration and border policies or participate in the public political debates.
I don't know whether they would extend that to all immigrants, I think they did this just for refugees with reasonable fears.
0 x
Is it biblical? Is it Christlike? Is it loving? Is it true? How can I find out?
Re: Voting without warring
The area of political involvement is one that easily can get my old nature's attention as I find it very entertaining. It also is such a display of lies and hatred and so much the opposite of a Kingdom approach to life. To see such support coming from Evangelicals as well as others for a certain party imo, really distorts what Christianity is about. One of the areas I really appreciate in Greg Boyd's ministry is the stand he takes to stay out and to warn believers to not get sucked into politics. Greg points out how we don't have dual citizenship in God's eyes. We are foreigners, aliens and ambassadors here. That is why Greg and myself and others do not vote.
Here is a couple short youtube clips I like where Greg talks about our involvement with politics -
Here is a couple short youtube clips I like where Greg talks about our involvement with politics -
0 x
Pursuing a Kingdom life in the Spirit
-
- Posts: 16796
- Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2016 12:09 pm
- Location: U.S. midwest and PNW
- Affiliation: Christian other
Re: Voting without warring
This thread, Page 5:
key to "Voting without warring," or, "not voting without warring," is respect of the results, AFTER the election.
with all that i did not appreciate in George W., his magnanimous treatment of obama as POTUS, in 2008, and ever-after (it was not temporary political lip-service) was admirable. it was above+beyond requirement.
W sent a message about: how to behave after an election in a civilized country.
this is one W choice i've never heard criticism of, by anyone.
that's how Jesus did it.mike wrote:The argument for Christians being apolitical does not at all require disregard for and inaction on behalf of the needy.
In fact, it may free us to do more, not encumbered by the trappings of political entanglement.
Nothing stands in the way of our going into prisons, donating to food banks, distributing to charity, volunteering for disaster relief and humanitarian aid missions, preaching the good news, helping our neighbors, visiting the sick and elderly, etc, etc. Let's do it, folks.
key to "Voting without warring," or, "not voting without warring," is respect of the results, AFTER the election.
with all that i did not appreciate in George W., his magnanimous treatment of obama as POTUS, in 2008, and ever-after (it was not temporary political lip-service) was admirable. it was above+beyond requirement.
W sent a message about: how to behave after an election in a civilized country.
this is one W choice i've never heard criticism of, by anyone.
a sentiment repeated on this forum, deserving repetition.Martin wrote:
I will conclude with a sentence from the book that summarized Musser's convictions.
"In short, the truly converted nonresistant Christian was apolitical, condemning neither Republican nor Democrat, judging neither North or South, but humbly submitting to God's sovereign will and living faithfully in a parallel universe that was the kingdom of God."
0 x
Most or all of this drama, humiliation, wasted taxpayer money could be spared -
with even modest attempt at presenting balanced facts from the start.
”We’re all just walking each other home.”
UNKNOWN
with even modest attempt at presenting balanced facts from the start.
”We’re all just walking each other home.”
UNKNOWN
Re: Voting without warring
I'm curious which paragraph you liked. Could you post the page number along with first and last words of the paragraph? I'm unable to view the image. Thank-youmike wrote: Thank you for recommending the book. I bought it and have started reading. Here is an interesting paragraph.
I very much appreciate and respect the fact that although their views on slavery aligned them more with the Union, they did not join the abolitionist movement or take sides in the political debate.
I view this as being similar to the immigration/refugee debate.
1860: Yes, I will not own slaves. Yes, I will harbor runaways that come in my way, at least to the extent of providing basic needs such as food and shelter, even if it means breaking the law. No, I will not join the abolitionist movement or participate in the public political debates.
2017: Yes, I will help and support immigrants that come in my way, at least to the extent of providing basic needs such as food and shelter, even if it means breaking the law. No, I will not hold signs protesting government immigration and border policies or participate in the public political debates.
0 x
Re: Voting without warring
I don't have the book handy here at work but I OCR'd the image:Martin wrote:I'm curious which paragraph you liked. Could you post the page number along with first and last words of the paragraph? I'm unable to view the image. Thank-you
But an account of Mennonites and Amish in the Civil War does not support that conclusion. Although they refused to own slaves (by some measures they had clearer record on this point than the better-known Quakers), their beliefs also kept them out of activist abolitionist circles, and—again, for theological reasons—they seldom thought they had to choose between peace principles and political goals. Even in war societ-ies that deployed religion to mobilize a common cause, large majorities of Mennonites and Amish found resources in their faith to resist complete identification with Union or Confederate causes.21 Yet even with regard to such resistance, the Mennonite and Amish...
0 x
Remember the prisoners, as though you were in prison with them, and the mistreated, as though you yourselves were suffering bodily. -Heb. 13:3
- Dan Z
- Posts: 2667
- Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2016 11:20 am
- Location: Central Minnesota
- Affiliation: Conservative Menno
Re: Voting without warring
Sadly...in this regard these folks were more virtuous than their 21st century spiritual progeny. I doubt strongly that a "large majority" of Mennonites and Amish here in the US are finding resources in their faith to resist complete identification with Republican or Democrat causes.*Even in war societies that deployed religion to mobilize a common cause, large majorities of Mennonites and Amish found resources in their faith to resist complete identification with Union or Confederate causes.21 Yet even with regard to such resistance, the Mennonite and Amish...
*Mike - if I might add - you're modeling this commitment quite well in my opinion!
0 x
- Josh
- Posts: 24912
- Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 6:23 pm
- Location: 1000' ASL
- Affiliation: The church of God
Re: Voting without warring
I can't really think of any Mennonites I know who would withhold food and shelter from any person who needs it.mike wrote:2017: Yes, I will help and support immigrants that come in my way, at least to the extent of providing basic needs such as food and shelter, even if it means breaking the law. No, I will not hold signs protesting government immigration and border policies or participate in the public political debates.
Of course, someone might find themselves put to work after a few days, and they would not be tolerated if they were a danger or violent towards other people in the household.
That's part and parcel different from arguing I am being inhospitable simply because I do not take effort to promote left-wing political causes.
0 x
Re: Voting without warring
I found this on a Baptist forum that I thought was interesting regarding voting for a particular person -
Underlining mine. I guess calling oneself a Christian or an Evangelical really doesn't say much today, does it ?Over the past decade, pollsters charted something remarkable: Americans—long known for their piety—were fleeing organized religion in increasing numbers. The vast majority still believed in God. But the share that rejected any religious affiliation was growing fast, rising from 6 percent in 1992 to 22 percent in 2014. Among Millennials, the figure was 35 percent.
When pundits describe the Americans who sleep in on Sundays, they often conjure left-leaning hipsters. But religious attendance is down among Republicans, too. According to data assembled for me by the Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI), the percentage of white Republicans with no religious affiliation has nearly tripled since 1990. This shift helped Trump win the GOP nomination.
During the campaign, commentators had a hard time reconciling Trump’s apparent ignorance of Christianity and his history of pro-choice and pro-gay-rights statements with his support from evangelicals. But as Notre Dame’s Geoffrey Layman noted, “Trump does best among evangelicals with one key trait: They don’t really go to church.”
A Pew Research Center poll last March found that Trump trailed Ted Cruz by 15 points among Republicans who attended religious services every week. But he led Cruz by a whopping 27 points among those who did not.
0 x
Pursuing a Kingdom life in the Spirit