Do Christians need to be patriotic in order to be godly?

[traveller]

So why not be homeless?

And this relates how?

I fail to see how this progresses the conversation . . .

makes sense to me... He's saying there's no more point in him becoming Amish than there is in becoming homeless...both would achieve the end of not feeling pressure to vote or to be involved in political matters, but don't you think a person needs a better reason than that to do either? I sure as heck do.

I not the one making the statement.

Should a Christian feel "pressure to vote or to be involved in political matters?"

Yes. We are called to redeem culture. Part of our culture, whether we like it or not, is in the political process. Though politics cannot change a culture, a culture has a much more difficult time obtaining change if the politics are decidedly anti-God.

I think every Christian would do much better with this issue if he/she studied Western Europe from about 1500 to present day. You'll see that the downfall of Christianity in Western Europe began to take place in the political spectrum and slowly moved to the colleges, the schools, and then the masses....when Christians remove themselves from any aspect of influence in society, be it educational, political, or common, then Christianity in that nation begins to die.

Or, can it be that as Christianity dies, they begin to remove themselves from the educational, political, etc?

[Gerioke]

Christians should vote, however being active in politics could cause a Christian to compromise his beliefs.

[BlindSeeker]

Yes. We are called to redeem culture. Part of our culture, whether we like it or not, is in the political process. Though politics cannot change a culture, a culture has a much more difficult time obtaining change if the politics are decidedly anti-God.

I think every Christian would do much better with this issue if he/she studied Western Europe from about 1500 to present day. You'll see that the downfall of Christianity in Western Europe began to take place in the political spectrum and slowly moved to the colleges, the schools, and then the masses....when Christians remove themselves from any aspect of influence in society, be it educational, political, or common, then Christianity in that nation begins to die.

So Christians are responsible for the decline of the

[BlindSeeker]

Christians should vote, however being active in politics could cause a Christian to compromise his beliefs.

• 1Ti 5:22 Lay hands suddenly on no man, neither be partaker of other men's sins: keep thyself pure.
  

We need to be careful of whom we endorse . . .

[BlindSeeker]

So why not be homeless?

And this relates how?

I fail to see how this progresses the conversation . . .

makes sense to me... He's saying there's no more point in him becoming Amish than there is in becoming homeless...both would achieve the end of not feeling pressure to vote or to be involved in political matters, but don't you think a person needs a better reason than that to do either? I sure as heck do.

I not the one making the statement.

Should a Christian feel "pressure to vote or to be involved in political matters?"

Yes. We are called to redeem culture. Part of our culture, whether we like it or not, is in the political process. Though politics cannot change a culture, a culture has a much more difficult time obtaining change if the politics are decidedly anti-God.

I think every Christian would do much better with this issue if he/she studied Western Europe from about 1500 to present day. You'll see that the downfall of Christianity in Western Europe began to take place in the political spectrum and slowly moved to the colleges, the schools, and then the masses....when Christians remove themselves from any aspect of influence in society, be it educational, political, or common, then Christianity in that nation begins to die.

Or, can it be that as Christianity dies, they begin to remove themselves from the educational, political, etc?

Christianity cannot die. Rather due to the deterioration of society it ignores the redemption that Christ secured and they "wax worse and worse."

(Hey sweet sister )

[Smalcald]

So why not be homeless?

And this relates how?

I fail to see how this progresses the conversation . . .

makes sense to me... He's saying there's no more point in him becoming Amish than there is in becoming homeless...both would achieve the end of not feeling pressure to vote or to be involved in political matters, but don't you think a person needs a better reason than that to do either? I sure as heck do.

I not the one making the statement.

Should a Christian feel "pressure to vote or to be involved in political matters?"

Yes. We are called to redeem culture. Part of our culture, whether we like it or not, is in the political process. Though politics cannot change a culture, a culture has a much more difficult time obtaining change if the politics are decidedly anti-God.

I think every Christian would do much better with this issue if he/she studied Western Europe from about 1500 to present day. You'll see that the downfall of Christianity in Western Europe began to take place in the political spectrum and slowly moved to the colleges, the schools, and then the masses....when Christians remove themselves from any aspect of influence in society, be it educational, political, or common, then Christianity in that nation begins to die.

Hi Apothanian,

I would have to go with the inverse. What I mean is that in Europe Christianity through the Catholic Church was totally integrated into the state. The state forced Mass attendance, the state sanctioned the Church, the state tried people for heresy, and they were totally integrated. What it did was destroy the true faith through total hypocrisy, and end up essentially being all about power, control and money. From my perspective every time the Christian Church has sought as an organization to seek worldly power and control it has gone horribly wrong.

Which would make sense, what was the model Christ gave us for the Church? If anyone could have taken power and control over the political world it would have been Christ, did He? No, in fact He let them kill Him in an ignoble horrible and humiliating way, for all practical and worldly purposes, Jesus Christ would be called a loser. So He turns our whole idea of what is important on its head.

Now I do think individual Christians should be involved in politics if they are called to that field I don't have a problem with that. By its very nature however, politics will be hard for a Christian, particularly today when there are so many issues that he or she may be asked to compromise on, in fact politics is the art of compromise. But I think it would be healthy to have Christians in political positions, and I think we agree on that.

But I think one of the roles of the Christian Church however is to stand apart from government to challenge government, and to be a witness to and counter balance to the power of the worldly government and the state itself. If our Christian leaders are also the political leaders we have a real problem. The US has done a good job historically until very recently, of keeping these two separate, while Europe has not.

[apothanein kerdos]

So why not be homeless?

And this relates how?

I fail to see how this progresses the conversation . . .

makes sense to me... He's saying there's no more point in him becoming Amish than there is in becoming homeless...both would achieve the end of not feeling pressure to vote or to be involved in political matters, but don't you think a person needs a better reason than that to do either? I sure as heck do.

I not the one making the statement.

Should a Christian feel "pressure to vote or to be involved in political matters?"

Yes. We are called to redeem culture. Part of our culture, whether we like it or not, is in the political process. Though politics cannot change a culture, a culture has a much more difficult time obtaining change if the politics are decidedly anti-God.

I think every Christian would do much better with this issue if he/she studied Western Europe from about 1500 to present day. You'll see that the downfall of Christianity in Western Europe began to take place in the political spectrum and slowly moved to the colleges, the schools, and then the masses....when Christians remove themselves from any aspect of influence in society, be it educational, political, or common, then Christianity in that nation begins to die.

Hi Apothanian,

I would have to go with the inverse. What I mean is that in Europe Christianity through the Catholic Church was totally integrated into the state. The state forced Mass attendance, the state sanctioned the Church, the state tried people for heresy, and they were totally integrated. What it did was destroy the true faith through total hypocrisy, and end up essentially being all about power, control and money. From my perspective every time the Christian Church has sought as an organization to seek worldly power and control it has gone horribly wrong.

Which would make sense, what was the model Christ gave us for the Church? If anyone could have taken power and control over the political world it would have been Christ, did He? No, in fact He let them kill Him in an ignoble horrible and humiliating way, for all practical and worldly purposes, Jesus Christ would be called a loser. So He turns our whole idea of what is important on its head.

Now I do think individual Christians should be involved in politics if they are called to that field I don't have a problem with that. By its very nature however, politics will be hard for a Christian, particularly today when there are so many issues that he or she may be asked to compromise on, in fact politics is the art of compromise. But I think it would be healthy to have Christians in political positions, and I think we agree on that.

But I think one of the roles of the Christian Church however is to stand apart from government to challenge government, and to be a witness to and counter balance to the power of the worldly government and the state itself. If our Christian leaders are also the political leaders we have a real problem. The US has done a good job historically until very recently, of keeping these two separate, while Europe has not.

Though this may have been true for 1000-1550, this does an injustice to the reofrmation period and beyond, specifically to English reformers and German reformers. By the time this occured, the Catholic church was certainly not as powerful as it once was. In fact, it held absolutely no influence in England or Germany. In these two nations we see that governments began to run their nations loosely off certain biblical principles. Around the 1700's we see in England where the king begins to be held accountable by Christians in the Parliment. It was also a Christian who became a politician for the sole purpose that he felt God leading Him to it that was able to convince Parliment to end slavery in British territories. Now, had he instead chose to ignore politics becuase "Christ didn't call us to it," then how would slavery had ended in England? Likewise, in America, politicians called for an end to slavery solely on biblical principles. If they pursued "higher callings" then where would we be today? YOu cannot challenge government unless you are involved in the government. Eventually, Christians in Europe began to leave the political spectrum because they pursued "higher callings." This lead to the government being without true Christians...which only lead to a downfall...

The US has never kept church and state seperate, and that is a recent modification. We have, in many cases, based our policies off Christian principles. At the same time, you bring up an extremely valid point that if the Christian Church gets too involved in politics, it only opens us up for corruption. However, I think this speaks more towards our fallen nature and quest for power than it does towards our necessity to stay out of politics. I think it is okay for Christianity to get involved in politics, for us to support local and national canidates if they hold to a Christian position in most everything they do. We should likewise keep these people accountable when they are in office, lest they sell out.

[apothanein kerdos]

So why not be homeless?

And this relates how?

I fail to see how this progresses the conversation . . .

makes sense to me... He's saying there's no more point in him becoming Amish than there is in becoming homeless...both would achieve the end of not feeling pressure to vote or to be involved in political matters, but don't you think a person needs a better reason than that to do either? I sure as heck do.

I not the one making the statement.

Should a Christian feel "pressure to vote or to be involved in political matters?"

Yes. We are called to redeem culture. Part of our culture, whether we like it or not, is in the political process. Though politics cannot change a culture, a culture has a much more difficult time obtaining change if the politics are decidedly anti-God.

I think every Christian would do much better with this issue if he/she studied Western Europe from about 1500 to present day. You'll see that the downfall of Christianity in Western Europe began to take place in the political spectrum and slowly moved to the colleges, the schools, and then the masses....when Christians remove themselves from any aspect of influence in society, be it educational, political, or common, then Christianity in that nation begins to die.

Or, can it be that as Christianity dies, they begin to remove themselves from the educational, political, etc?

Christianity cannot die. Rather due to the deterioration of society it ignores the redemption that Christ secured and they "wax worse and worse."

(Hey sweet sister )

Christianity can die within a certain culture. Now it can be "resurrected," but it can suffer a death, we have seen this time and unfortunate time again.

As for Travellar's question, I really don't know. It really is a question of "which came first, the death that lead to a lower society, or a lower society that lead to a death." I happen to believe that the problem began within Christianity and manifested itself when Christians began to remove themselves from politics, education, and social matters. Does that make sense or did I completely miss what you were saying?

[Smalcald]

AMEN, this person came seeking the knowledge and i believe he found what he was looking for. i think we could leave it at that........

food for thought, i asked my father in law, who's father is also a mason, and a lot of the older father figures in his life also (like me), why he had never considered joining. he told me that you can get the same from a good church. when someone asks me what the masons are or what they are about, i tell them a story.

me, my brother and my dad once were somewhat far from home, in the winnebego going to go camping, my dad is a mason. we break down in the middle of no where, dad leaves me with my brother, goes to get parts, (car was with us, jsut passed parts store) comes back, can't get it going. we were there all day, night came, and someone came down the lane. i watched my dad talk to this man, 5 min later, they were shaking hands, 20 min later the guy was back with tow lines, we were in his truck, towing our camper to his house, we left it there for the night, took our car home, dad got more parts, we went back the next day and the guy helped him fix the camper.

and thats the masons

Jesus or no Jesus they are good guys, we need good guys around, need Jesus to get to heaven, no exceptions, they don't teach Jesus, but they are good people.....bottom line i think.

crabs

><>

So why not be homeless?

And this relates how?

I fail to see how this progresses the conversation . . .

makes sense to me... He's saying there's no more point in him becoming Amish than there is in becoming homeless...both would achieve the end of not feeling pressure to vote or to be involved in political matters, but don't you think a person needs a better reason than that to do either? I sure as heck do.

I not the one making the statement.

Should a Christian feel "pressure to vote or to be involved in political matters?"

Yes. We are called to redeem culture. Part of our culture, whether we like it or not, is in the political process. Though politics cannot change a culture, a culture has a much more difficult time obtaining change if the politics are decidedly anti-God.

I think every Christian would do much better with this issue if he/she studied Western Europe from about 1500 to present day. You'll see that the downfall of Christianity in Western Europe began to take place in the political spectrum and slowly moved to the colleges, the schools, and then the masses....when Christians remove themselves from any aspect of influence in society, be it educational, political, or common, then Christianity in that nation begins to die.

Hi Apothanian,

I would have to go with the inverse. What I mean is that in Europe Christianity through the Catholic Church was totally integrated into the state. The state forced Mass attendance, the state sanctioned the Church, the state tried people for heresy, and they were totally integrated. What it did was destroy the true faith through total hypocrisy, and end up essentially being all about power, control and money. From my perspective every time the Christian Church has sought as an organization to seek worldly power and control it has gone horribly wrong.

Which would make sense, what was the model Christ gave us for the Church? If anyone could have taken power and control over the political world it would have been Christ, did He? No, in fact He let them kill Him in an ignoble horrible and humiliating way, for all practical and worldly purposes, Jesus Christ would be called a loser. So He turns our whole idea of what is important on its head.

Now I do think individual Christians should be involved in politics if they are called to that field I don't have a problem with that. By its very nature however, politics will be hard for a Christian, particularly today when there are so many issues that he or she may be asked to compromise on, in fact politics is the art of compromise. But I think it would be healthy to have Christians in political positions, and I think we agree on that.

But I think one of the roles of the Christian Church however is to stand apart from government to challenge government, and to be a witness to and counter balance to the power of the worldly government and the state itself. If our Christian leaders are also the political leaders we have a real problem. The US has done a good job historically until very recently, of keeping these two separate, while Europe has not.

Though this may have been true for 1000-1550, this does an injustice to the reofrmation period and beyond, specifically to English reformers and German reformers. By the time this occured, the Catholic church was certainly not as powerful as it once was. In fact, it held absolutely no influence in England or Germany. In these two nations we see that governments began to run their nations loosely off certain biblical principles. Around the 1700's we see in England where the king begins to be held accountable by Christians in the Parliment. It was also a Christian who became a politician for the sole purpose that he felt God leading Him to it that was able to convince Parliment to end slavery in British territories. Now, had he instead chose to ignore politics becuase "Christ didn't call us to it," then how would slavery had ended in England? Likewise, in America, politicians called for an end to slavery solely on biblical principles. If they pursued "higher callings" then where would we be today? YOu cannot challenge government unless you are involved in the government. Eventually, Christians in Europe began to leave the political spectrum because they pursued "higher callings." This lead to the government being without true Christians...which only lead to a downfall...

I totally disagree; you cannot effectively challenge government if you are a part of it, not really. Christian politicians in the US did not end slavery nor were they the leaders of the civil rights movement in the 20th century. Both of these movements were sparked, stoked and started by Christian groups OUTSIDE of government, doing what they needed to do to challenge the force of the status quo, to stand as witness against the law at that time. The abolitionist movement was a fundamentalist Christian movement started far from government. Now they did influence government, which was their role. The civil rights movement, led by African American Christians did the same thing, also outside of government. What elected government office did Martin Luther King hold? Neither was part of government. I respect Christians who choose to be separate from both the government and this world; I also respect Christians who are called to serve in government roles.

But even after the Reformation, Europe continued to sanction Churches. The Christian Church was largely destroyed in Europe because it simply became and was another part of government. It was co-opted into being totally compromised by being just another government entity. Consider that Prince Charles is today the official Head and leader of the Church of England. The Church of England is the "official" Church of that nation and is sanctioned by their government, and guess what, nobody goes. Prince Charles has said he does not even really believes in Christ, you see where this Church State mix takes us, into hypocrisy and death for the Church. I don

[tah]

Ok, to those of you Christians who feel you should have no involvement in government....

voting standing up for Christian values in society...etc

why do you think you can complain about what the government is or is not doing..

seems to me that only those who are involved have that right ....

You should be completely and totally emotionally neutral to what the government does...

If I go to a restaurant and tell them "whatever" they have to offer I cannot complain about what I am brought to eat...