Can Politicians be Followers of Jesus?

[JohnH]

I suppose it depends on whether you have a reputation for consistently doing this across the political spectrum, or if your desire to do so essentially only exists for one specific politician/political party.

Yes, if you don't want to be labeled as partisan, then it is important to be "consistently doing this across the political spectrum", making sure that the ratio stays within the 49-51% range. A 45/55 ratio will probably get you labeled and a 40/60 will definitely get you labeled.
(This last point could be discussed further in the "partisan indications" thread. viewtopic.php?f=6&t=7695)

But if one's goal is to call out the actions of those who profess to be followers of Jesus, as concerns manifest themselves, and to lament injustices to humanity, and to expose hindrances to the kingdom of God, and if one does not care about being labeled partisan, then there is no need to aim for the 49-51% range, but rather one can focus on the issues at hand. In one era, a person may appear to lean left, in another era a person may appear to lean right, but their consistent message over the decades will remain stable, regardless of the political winds.

Ernie,

With respect, you’ve been sucked into the liberal-progressive political world that I had to make a difficult decision to leave if I wanted to be a Christian. I would implore you to consider why you are choosing a path of spiritual darkness.

Your message is not “stable”, but has become one that simply mirrors what worldly voices are saying. This is not the path for followers of Jesus.

[joshuabgood]

I suppose it depends on whether you have a reputation for consistently doing this across the political spectrum, or if your desire to do so essentially only exists for one specific politician/political party.

Yes, if you don't want to be labeled as partisan, then it is important to be "consistently doing this across the political spectrum", making sure that the ratio stays within the 49-51% range. A 45/55 ratio will probably get you labeled and a 40/60 will definitely get you labeled.
(This last point could be discussed further in the "partisan indications" thread. viewtopic.php?f=6&t=7695)

But if one's goal is to call out the actions of those who profess to be followers of Jesus, as concerns manifest themselves, and to lament injustices to humanity, and to expose hindrances to the kingdom of God, and if one does not care about being labeled partisan, then there is no need to aim for the 49-51% range, but rather one can focus on the issues at hand. In one era, a person may appear to lean left, in another era a person may appear to lean right, but their consistent message over the decades will remain stable, regardless of the political winds.

Another path is to just not worry about what the percent is or what people think and accuse. It seems likely that at times, if that is done, political partisan people will in certain decades think you are, leftist neomarxists (as Anabaptist Perspectives is finding out) and in other decades will consider you theocratic Chrsitian moralists.

If Herod needs called out, call him out.

The bottom line is, in my view, the political parties should feel a measure of threat from the kingdom of God if our faith, that is allegiance, is actually with the Kingdom of God.

[JohnH]

I suppose it depends on whether you have a reputation for consistently doing this across the political spectrum, or if your desire to do so essentially only exists for one specific politician/political party.

Yes, if you don't want to be labeled as partisan, then it is important to be "consistently doing this across the political spectrum", making sure that the ratio stays within the 49-51% range. A 45/55 ratio will probably get you labeled and a 40/60 will definitely get you labeled.
(This last point could be discussed further in the "partisan indications" thread. viewtopic.php?f=6&t=7695)

But if one's goal is to call out the actions of those who profess to be followers of Jesus, as concerns manifest themselves, and to lament injustices to humanity, and to expose hindrances to the kingdom of God, and if one does not care about being labeled partisan, then there is no need to aim for the 49-51% range, but rather one can focus on the issues at hand. In one era, a person may appear to lean left, in another era a person may appear to lean right, but their consistent message over the decades will remain stable, regardless of the political winds.

Another path is to just not worry about what the percent is or what people think and accuse. It seems likely that at times, if that is done, political partisan people will in certain decades think you are, leftist neomarxists (as Anabaptist Perspectives is finding out) and in other decades will consider you theocratic Chrsitian moralists.

If Herod needs called out, call him out.

The bottom line is, in my view, the political parties should feel a measure of threat from the kingdom of God if our faith, that is allegiance, is actually with the Kingdom of God.

If one pays attention to political messaging at all, it’s quite easy to see when a group claiming to represent the kingdom of God is just repeating partisan political messaging.

An example of this problem is from our friends at Anabaptist ViewPoint:

https://anabaptistviewpoint.org/wp-cont ... wPoint.pdf

This has an identical worldview to mainstream sources, including handwaving away the evil of stem cells with the bogus argument “Tylenol uses stem cells too!” (which it doesn’t and didn’t, being invented long before anyone even knew what stem cells were). Such an embrace of the world leaves the Anabaptist with no power to actually combat the shifting political winds.

One of my strongest arguments I make with conservative Anabaptist people being seduced by Trumpism was his stance on the Covid vaccine, stem cells, and IVF, all of which I consider serious restless evils. Most people attracted to right wing politics haven’t even really thought of that and aren’t aware Operation Warp Speed depending on ground up aborted baby parts. I have credibility to say this, since anyone who knows me I would gladly level the same accusations at Biden or Harris.

In the real world of actual plain Anabaptism, the acceptance rate of COVID vaccines amongst Amish was 1.7% (see https://plainanabaptistjournal.org/inde ... /view/8310 ). Amish may not know the particular details of stem cells, but overall have a belief in trusting God, and have in a large part stayed free of this grave sin.

[GaryK]

So back to this topic...

I understand your position, and that you think it is better if Christians do not publicly call out politicians, particularly if it is a current hot button topic, and especially if it might appear to favor one political party.

What about defending particular politicians, or the stances of certain parties?

As I think back to the people/party stances you have defended at length on MennoNet, I can't remember a defense of someone or some stance other than those of one party. I don't particularly care that you only defended one party (if I indeed remember correctly) but wonder how this fits into your ideal world?

I'm guessing you are not the only one who perceives me as being a defender of only one party and I think I understand why that perception may be there. I think however, if you go back and read what I've posted, you will find that I have seldom defended particular political stances or politicians but have rather posted what I saw as inconsistencies in arguments being made and how those inconsistencies are emblematic of the inherent hypocrisy within earthly politics. I think one of the most consistent complaints I have received on MN is that I don't discuss the actual topics being discussed and that I tend to derail threads by posting about the inconsistencies I see in posts.

I think you will also find that most of my posts and pushback are in response to the idea that we should look at and discuss earthly political issues from a Kingdom of Jesus perspective. To me, that idea suggests that Jesus, the King of His Kingdom, sides with Democrats on some issues and with Republicans on others and that He expects earthly politicians to live by the morals and ethics of His Kingdom. I don't believe He does. His Kingdom is not of this world. If He has preferences as it relates to earthly political issues and expects politicians to be Christlike, then I see no reason at all for His followers not to become earthly politicians who promote His preferences and live by His Kingdom's ethics and morality.

This is why I very seldom push back on political posts that do not claim to be coming from a Kingdom of Jesus perspective. I think I remember some recent posts where you said something like "from an earthly kingdom perspective I can see why..." I really don't see a problem with that.

Your comments in blue above are probably correct.

But I think the case you are making for why we should not be singling out politicians and calling them out publicly, because it may make us as Christians appear partisan, could also apply to addressing inconsistencies in arguments that end up favoring one party. This also makes a person appear partisan.

I have been resigning myself to the fact that calling leaders out publicly for their sins and errors in judgment, will result in people believing that I am partisan.
I've also been resigning myself to the fact that if I call out professing Christians who claim to be following Jesus and claim to be following His inspired Word, and who are supporting politicians or political viewpoints, that I may be viewed as partisan.
I don't know any way to get around this other than to be very vague and so generalized that whatever I say doesn't have any salt effect.

I think calling out inconsistencies in the arguments of those who are defending certain politicians or political viewpoints, will also make people think that a person is partisan.
I don't have any interest in doing this on MN, because soon the consistency debate gets lost in the weeds and the only thing that is remembered is the long conversation about nuances and consistency, and that I seem to favor a particular party.

I certainly don't view it as partisan to call out those who claim to be following Jesus and His inspired Word who are supportive of politicians or political viewpoints. That is a call to "come out from among them and be separate, says the Lord". And I certainly don't view it as partisan to call all politicians to leave the kingdom of the world and to join forces with the Kingdom of Jesus. To me, those calls are full of salt because they are Jesus' calls.

I agree that pointing out inconsistencies in arguments that always favor one side can appear partisan. But I don't think that is what I have been doing, which is evidenced by consistently being accused of derailing actual political discussions by pointing out inconsistencies and hypocrisy that stems from the idea that we should view and discuss earthly politics from a Kingdom of Jesus perspective.

For example, Ken, Josh and Grace very seldom, if ever, suggest that their political opinions are guided by a Kingdom of Jesus perspective. That doesn't mean that there aren't inconsistencies in their arguments. I don't think it's possible for politics to be without inconsistencies and hypocrisy, therefore any opinions expressed about political issues will always appear to be just that, political, inconsistent, and hypocritical.

I think the ideal position for followers of Jesus would be to never express opinions on political issues or to be directly/functionally involved in politics and is an ideal worth striving for. But, if political opinions are going to be expressed, the less than ideal way to do so would be to make sure people know that it is a political opinion and not one that we think Jesus would side with or against.

I don't believe Jesus sides with one side or the other on political issues but that's not to say that at times political issues don't side more or less with Jesus' Kingdom. But it should always be in that order. Jesus' Kingdom is leading the way in changing people's hearts and lives and regardless what politics is doing, whether it aligns with the Kingdom or not, the Kingdom of Jesus will not be swayed or deterred from its mission. The nature of Jesus and His desire for His Kingdom is to be without inconsistency and hypocrisy, which I believe includes the appearance of these as well.

[JohnH]

I certainly don't view it as partisan to call out those who claim to be following Jesus and His inspired Word who are supportive of politicians or political viewpoints. That is a call to "come out from among them and be separate, says the Lord". And I certainly don't view it as partisan to call all politicians to leave the kingdom of the world and to join forces with the Kingdom of Jesus. To me, those calls are full of salt because they are Jesus' calls.

Is it partisan if these calls out are only ever directed at a specific party or supporters of a specific politician, such as what David French frequently does?

[GaryK]

I suppose it depends on whether you have a reputation for consistently doing this across the political spectrum, or if your desire to do so essentially only exists for one specific politician/political party.

Yes, if you don't want to be labeled as partisan, then it is important to be "consistently doing this across the political spectrum", making sure that the ratio stays within the 49-51% range. A 45/55 ratio will probably get you labeled and a 40/60 will definitely get you labeled.
(This last point could be discussed further in the "partisan indications" thread. viewtopic.php?f=6&t=7695)

But if one's goal is to call out the actions of those who profess to be followers of Jesus, as concerns manifest themselves, and to lament injustices to humanity, and to expose hindrances to the kingdom of God, and if one does not care about being labeled partisan, then there is no need to aim for the 49-51% range, but rather one can focus on the issues at hand. In one era, a person may appear to lean left, in another era a person may appear to lean right, but their consistent message over the decades will remain stable, regardless of the political winds.

Ernie,

With respect, you’ve been sucked into the liberal-progressive political world that I had to make a difficult decision to leave if I wanted to be a Christian. I would implore you to consider why you are choosing a path of spiritual darkness.

Your message is not “stable”, but has become one that simply mirrors what worldly voices are saying. This is not the path for followers of Jesus.

Josh, If this is true of Ernie and I do not think it is, then why is it not also true that you have been sucked into the conservative political world? Your message seems to pretty consistently mirror what the conservative worldly voices are saying?

I don't think the goal for followers of Jesus is to get to 50-50 in politics but rather to get to 100-0 as it relates to Kingdom loyalty.

[GaryK]

I certainly don't view it as partisan to call out those who claim to be following Jesus and His inspired Word who are supportive of politicians or political viewpoints. That is a call to "come out from among them and be separate, says the Lord". And I certainly don't view it as partisan to call all politicians to leave the kingdom of the world and to join forces with the Kingdom of Jesus. To me, those calls are full of salt because they are Jesus' calls.

Is it partisan if these calls out are only ever directed at a specific party or supporters of a specific politician, such as what David French frequently does?

That certainly makes it appear more partisan. But that is true when it's the other way around as well.

[Bootstrap]

I certainly don't view it as partisan to call out those who claim to be following Jesus and His inspired Word who are supportive of politicians or political viewpoints. That is a call to "come out from among them and be separate, says the Lord". And I certainly don't view it as partisan to call all politicians to leave the kingdom of the world and to join forces with the Kingdom of Jesus. To me, those calls are full of salt because they are Jesus' calls.

This is more concrete than what I have understood about your position up to now. I think you are saying the way to avoid being political is:

1. Do not support politicians.
2. Do not support political viewpoints.
3. Call politicians to leave the kingdom of the world and join forces with the Kingdom of Jesus.

When people are using the same word in different ways, it can sometimes be helpful to use a notation like Political(GaryK), Political(Bootstrap), etc. Let me see if I understand you here:

Political (GaryK)

1. Supporting politicians.
2. Supporting political viewpoints.
3. Failing to call politicians to leave the Kingdom of the world and join forces with the Kingdom of God.

Is that accurate? If not, can you help me get it right? We can always change our definitions as the conversation progresses ...

[GaryK]

I certainly don't view it as partisan to call out those who claim to be following Jesus and His inspired Word who are supportive of politicians or political viewpoints. That is a call to "come out from among them and be separate, says the Lord". And I certainly don't view it as partisan to call all politicians to leave the kingdom of the world and to join forces with the Kingdom of Jesus. To me, those calls are full of salt because they are Jesus' calls.

This is more concrete than what I have understood about your position up to now. I think you are saying the way to avoid being political is:

1. Do not support politicians.
2. Do not support political viewpoints.
3. Call politicians to leave the kingdom of the world and join forces with the Kingdom of Jesus.

When people are using the same word in different ways, it can sometimes be helpful to use a notation like Political(GaryK), Political(Bootstrap), etc. Let me see if I understand you here:

Political (GaryK)

1. Supporting politicians.
2. Supporting political viewpoints.
3. Failing to call politicians to leave the Kingdom of the world and join forces with the Kingdom of God.

Is that accurate? If not, can you help me get it right? We can always change our definitions as the conversation progresses ...

I don't think I understand what you mean by Political (GaryK) and the 3 points following. Are you saying that is how you view my positions?

[Bootstrap]

I have been resigning myself to the fact that calling leaders out publicly for their sins and errors in judgment, will result in people believing that I am partisan.
I've also been resigning myself to the fact that if I call out professing Christians who claim to be following Jesus and claim to be following His inspired Word, and who are supporting politicians or political viewpoints, that I may be viewed as partisan.
I don't know any way to get around this other than to be very vague and so generalized that whatever I say doesn't have any salt effect.

Politics and the Kingdom of God both involve justice, mercy, and the weightier matters of the law. I don't think there's an easy way around that.

Political partisans will always see criticism of their side as partisan because ... well ... if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail, and modern American politics is highly polarized. If at least some of what we are doing does not look wrong to political partisans, I suspect we are not being salt and light.