Christian Goodreaders discussion

A blog post by Brett McCracken of the Gospel Coalition, "We Need Prophets, Not Partisans," came to my attention today, and I thought it was worth sharing with this group: https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/ar... . (McCracken is a Goodreads author, of several books of Christian nonfiction, but for some reason this particular post isn't included in his blog link here on Goodreads.) It was posted last year, before the U.S. elections; but I believe it has continuing relevance.

Good article! Thanks for sharing.

You're welcome, Georgann!

I rely on The Briefing, Albert Mohler's daily podcast on current events from a Christian perspective, to keep me informed on a lot of US domestic goings-on. Mohler is a conservative evangelical in the Southern Baptist reformed tradition, and has a way of cutting through mainstream media reports to the moral issues facing Christians. On 21st April https://albertmohler.com/2021/04/21/b...
he covered a topic "The Rule of Law" as applied to the Chauvin trial and then to Russia's constitutional changes and Putin's length of time leading that nation, as evidence of no rule of law in Russia, and the Chauvin trial verdict as evidence of healthy rule of law in the US. I was surprised by this, and wrote the following letter to Mohler.

"...When treating domestic US issues you regularly take a Christian perspective at complete odds with the mainstream media editorial views you examine. But I've noticed that when it comes to international issues, you often treat that same mainstream media as a reliable source. Quoting the Washington Post regarding the 206 changes to the Russian constitution is one example. I am interested in the moral hierarchy your Christian worldview would allocate to perceived governmental overreach, e.g. a Dictatorship as you state Russia to be, compared to the domestic moral revolution you normally cover. Let's observe that Russia is pragmatic and honest about their system of government, and keen to improve the domestic situation for their 150million ish citizens, while reinstating and upholding freedom of religion and in fact supporting the Russian Orthodox church, and resisting LGBTQ+ agenda. Is this better or worse than the current US domestic situation for a Christian to live within? Is freedom (perceived or real) to be cherished above adherence to Biblical definitions of male, female, marriage and sexual expression?
Does the example provided by the Apostle in his epistle to Philemon apply here?
I was genuinely surprised by your treatment of Putin and Russia, but it absolutely echoes the Mainstream US media view. I discussed your opinion with a Russian blogger that I follow, Dmitry Orlov. Orlov has spent his life until age 12 in the USSR, then moved to the US and lived in Boston until about 2017, when he chose to relocate his family back to St Petersburg. He told me the Russian constitution before this comprehensive reform (206 changes as Washington Post reported) was basically a document produced by US consultants following Glasnost, and was designed from the ground up to strip any sovereignty from Russia and leave western nations with a lot of control. Your comment that avoiding a referendum to avoid international oversight of Russian constitutional changes seems to bear that out. Russians are reforming their constitution to benefit Russians and remove foreign influence is the view of this Russian citizen, and everyone he knows admires Putin's statesmanship and leadership."

I think this is particularly relevant for Christians in the US right now, with the current Democratic administration refocus on Russia as the "big bad". There was a 4 year Trump-hiatus of all that, but it's back now that Obama/Biden are back, as is fomented conflict in Ukraine. Should a Christian view perceived liberty over moral righteousness enshrined in their nation's law?

Nathan,
I also listen to Mohler, although I think I missed the podcast you ae referring to. Let me see if I got your point right: Is the state an enforcer of liberty or morality, first and foremost, in the Christian worldview? I would think based on my reading of Locke, Burke, and and other conservatives, it is about liberty, small government. But what the state allows, and the culture promotes, that is the resulting we live in. The Christian worldview is to change the culture through relationship with Christ. If we seek to change the world, as many Christian conservatives do, with state compunction, the result may be what the Left calls a theocracy, but is really just authoritarianism. Of course, that can, and is presently where we are headed but with the Left having the power.
Then there is the problem of what you see as opposing other states in their tendency toward immoral, by our standard, totalitarianism. Maybe we need to stop trying to see that as a moral battle, a libertarian perspective, but as a Christian, it is easy to see the unseen battle behind the geopolitical battles. The focus in international politics should be to keep evil at bay by resisting an overarching "one world government" that is opposition to God. But is that "our" responsibility as Christians? I mean, is it our focus to rule, to try to influence politics? I do think we need to preserve as the "salt of the world" but is that a political action or a cultural one? Of course, if our freedom of expression is prevented, then our ability to preserve is muted.
Okay, I'm rambling now. Just thought I'd respond, even if I'm merely thinking out loud. I may completely revise what I said, after I see this rant in print.

Hi Eclaghorn,
My point is, should Christians prefer to live in a culture where the govt may value morals Christians agree with over liberty, or vice versa? Mohler spends most of his podcasts pointing out the terrible aspects of the moral revolution occurring in the US, but then contrasts that environment favourably against Russia, where no such moral revolution is happening but where he perceives people are being governed by a dictator. Paul sent Onesimus the escaped slave back under Philemon's ownership, but encouraged them both to exhibit Christian love, forgiveness and righteousness towards each other.

The gospel’s power is not the power to win elections, legal protections, or economic prosperity. It is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes (Rom. 1:16).

Great article! Too may "Christians" align Christianity with politics and the two shall never meet. When Christians begin with politics, it's a turn-off and an indication that the message of the Gospel has been missed.

"Rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil ... " (Romans 13:3). So, it seems simple to me ... don't do evil.

Tyrone: were dietrich bonhoeffer, richard wurmbrand, the Christians in Nigeria and Sudan, the believers in China and the former ussr doing evil? Sometimes it is the state that does the evil. What are we supposed to do about that? Submit? Romans 13:3 does not condone submission to evil because God's law is supreme. So when it is the government that does evil, God raises up people, sometimes other nations, to remove them. It may be comfortable knowing I only got to not be evil, but fighting real evil aggressively attacking is hard work. But that is the Christian legacy. You and I are here now because God placed us here. And sometimes our purpose is to judge evil and remove it, to fight Nazis and Communists and Jihadists and others who would oppress. You are correct that the gospel was not about politics, but we are to be about justice which means we have to engage politics. Politics is power and power abhors a vacuum. If good people don't stand up and stand in the gap, someone evil will.

We do have to engage in politics. And, unfortunately, sometimes that means we must compromise - even when we do not want to. The US was founded on religious freedom. Now, arguably, the intent at the time was to follow Christianity in any form you desired, but that bar has been changed and the way it was written probably should have. As Christians in the US, we have always felt that this has protected us and that we were somehow a God's country. This is probably not so - but I don't think it changes the fact that we feel this way. So, during this current times, when laws are happening that blaspheme our faith it makes us question everything. The problem isn't religious freedom, it is that we are LOSING ours. Politics are changing church laws to make churches happier places. Is that what churches are supposed to do? I mean, they should welcome everyone? But, does that mean you accept and approve behaviors?

I believe that there needs to be Christians in politics and entertainment. I also believe that we need to cut them some slack when they make choices that we do not agree with. We do not know what their other choice was. And, they are also imperfect humans. But, for this world to be a better place, we need to be out there working on it. Politics and entertainment are ministries just like worship music and preaching. Who is out there finding new Christians? Who is out there being good examples? (or bad examples.) We need to be praying for them and standing strong for them. I couldn't do it. I could not do it.

Sorry - I am not as intellectual as the rest of you. I am not as educated nor maybe even as "thinking". I'm not a minister. I'm just a lover of God and Jesus. So, maybe I didn't read all this correctly. Today's world is frustrating me all to pieces and I pray and I pray and I pray. God keeps telling me "no". or "not now". Not sure which. I know His timing is perfect and His plan is perfect. But, I get discouraged and frustrated and I do not know what to do. I feel helpless and lost. And, I pray some more. And, it doesn't seem to be working.

Lots of good discussion here yesterday and today! It occurred to me that this is really a discussion dealing with what we think are the biblical principles that underlie our approach to government; so I've created a thread in the "Theological discussions" folder, here: https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/... , for "Christian theology of government." I'd invite those who've posted here to move the discussion there (and, if you want to, to use "copy-and-paste" to cross-post your comments there).

Snarktastic Sonia wrote: "Today's world is frustrating me all to pieces and I pray and I pray and I pray. God keeps telling me "no". or "not now". Not sure which. I know His timing is perfect and His plan is perfect. But, I get discouraged and frustrated and I do not know what to do. I feel helpless and lost. And, I pray some more. And, it doesn't seem to be working."

Sonia, I can certainly relate to what you wrote, and I think many of us can! I share your feelings of frustration and discouragement; and like you, I pray a lot for the world we live in. Even if we don't see it now, God IS working in response to our prayers, and in furtherance of His ultimate plan. The devil rages because he knows his time is short; but I've skipped to the end of the book (Revelation 21), so I already know how the story's going to come out. :-) We can find a remedy for our frustration and discouragement in that knowledge.

Eclaghorn wrote: "Tyrone: were dietrich bonhoeffer, richard wurmbrand, the Christians in Nigeria and Sudan, the believers in China and the former ussr doing evil? Sometimes it is the state that does the evil. What a..."

Generally speaking, I completely disagree with what you say. Your approach is a rationalization to do or justify what it is you want to do. It is political posturing and you do not offer any scripture to support your position.

However, you are right about the state. It does evil, frequently, daily, historically ... from the earliest of time. That will not change until Christ sits on His throne in the Millennial Period. Our mission or calling is not to live to fight that evil. It is to live to do good, according to the Bible.

As Christians, our responsibility is to spread the Gospel, live Christ-like, and do good works for the Kingdom of God, not politics. You may not like the platforms for some political parties; frankly, neither do I. However, I know the existence of these political parties is not to glorify God, but to ensure another term in office. Besides, the Bible specifically tells us not to judge others (Matthew 7:1; Romans 2: 1-2). It's not like we are perfect and have not committed wrong and done evil.

Tyrone wrote: "Your approach is a rationalization to do or justify what it is you want to do. It is political posturing and you do not offer any scripture to support your position.... Besides, the Bible specifically tells us not to judge others (Matthew 7:1; Romans 2: 1-2).

Tyrone, I'm sure it wasn't your intention; but when you dismiss a fellow believer's expression of an opinion as a rationalization for doing something he/she wants to do, you certainly give the impression that you're judging that person, and judging in a way that you can't credibly do unless you're a mind reader. The Bible also specifically tells us to treat others as we'd want to be treated (Matthew 7:12). If you'd be offended at having your opinion dismissed as a rationalization, that should tell you something. Disagreement in any of our discussions is fine; but let's refrain from personal aspersions on the people we disagree with.

Werner wrote: "Tyrone wrote: "Your approach is a rationalization to do or justify what it is you want to do. It is political posturing and you do not offer any scripture to support your position.... Besides, the ..."

Werner, you are right. My approach was inappropriate in that it prejudged another person motive.

Eclaghorn, I do apologize for my comments with regard to what your motive may or may not have been.

When it comes to Christian perspective on partisan politics (within the greater context of current events as this category was recently named, and certainly within the current issues name), the results from the US 2020 Census now being applied to true up the Congressional Seats is a prime example. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/census-2...
For the first time in the history of the US, California is shrinking. Mass exodus to Texas and Florida is happening, as people vote with their feet. It appears that the deeply liberal, deeply blue, big social big tax govt state of CA is hostile to productive business people and freedom of religion too. I don't know if any of you followed the recent US Federal Supreme Court victory awarded to Harvest Rock Church against the state of CA covid19 restrictions. https://www.christianpost.com/news/su...
This is a landmark case because it set a precedent that freedom of religion as explicitly enshrined in the constitution trumps temporary emergency powers even if those emergency powers are being applied to all businesses and not just targeting church groups. I don't expect this fighting back will much slow the increasing secular socialism in CA and other coastal states.
As Christians trying to live peacefully and in submission to govt, do any of you live in CA, WA or NY and are thinking of moving to escape ramping up persecution?

The topic of who can justly wield the sword is a very gnarly one for me. When is a revolution justified, vs becoming a refugee and leaving to seek a place that won't persecute you for your religious beliefs? As others have pointed out, the US was first colonised by Europeans hoping to leave persecution behind and establish their colonies with religious freedom front and centre.
The US (and to a lesser degree, Australia where I live) has become increasingly partisan over the years. Thus, traditions like the cooling saucer supermajority required in Senate, have led to efforts to eradicate fillibusters and return to a simply majority in both houses, either by legislation or by adding new states to tilt things further in the favour of one party or the other. (Think Washington Douglass Commonwealth state movement). The art of the political compromise is dying. And with it, culture follows suit, meaning more adversarial approaches to everyday life. How should Christians respond? We see how Colonialism itself has now become retconned into the great oppressor, when it first commenced as an attempt to escape persecution. I do not say that treatment of aboriginal peoples was right or godly, but moving to a bountiful continent with room for millions more was always going to happen once it was discovered.
Without getting too theological (and there's a thread for that waiting!) Daniel gave us an amazing illustration of how to live as a believer in a very evil culture. Daniel did not lead a revolution, nor did he attempt to escape Babylon ahead of God's appointed 70 years of Sabbath for the land of Israel. Daniel remained and was kept by God. He submitted to those laws which did not require sin against God, and he trusted God to ensure eventual good would come from any situation where he could not obey specific laws. The Jews' biggest stumbling block when it came to rejecting Jesus as their Messiah, was that they had expected Messiah to liberate them from Roman oppression and Jesus did nothing of the sort. Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's, he said, but finished that thought with the hardest and most important part of all - BUT render unto God that which is God's.
OK maybe this is borderline theological here. But Daniel is a type of Christ. Christ led by example, and the church is expected to remain in the world, but not be of the world. We are not to stand around gazing up into the sky to where Jesus ascended, waiting for him to return and whisk us away, not to look for a secret rapture that will spare us from times of tribulation before the last day. We are to carry on our work and lives, sharing the good news we have and living peacably, turning the other cheek and submitting to God's appointed govt without sinning.
[John 17:15, 20 NKJV] 15 "I do NOT pray that You should TAKE them out of the world, but that You should KEEP them from the evil one. ... 20 "I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word;" (emphasis mine)

Tyrone wrote: "Eclaghorn wrote: "Tyrone: were dietrich bonhoeffer, richard wurmbrand, the Christians in Nigeria and Sudan, the believers in China and the former ussr doing evil? Sometimes it is the state that doe..."

The Bible talks constantly about politics. Who was in power, who was taking over or fighting who, what life was like for believers under various regimes, etc. It talks about the purpose of governments and how they are to operate. It gives all kinds of rules and ideals that leaders, of any kind including political, should follow. Yes, there are many sections in the Bible stating how believers are to live under the authority of those in power, but it does not necessarily follow that they are not to get involved in politics. 1 Timothy 2:1-2 teaches that we are to pray for kings and those in leadership positions, which is certainly a type of involvement. Numerous Biblical characters that we are meant to learn from, including many that were Christ types such as the already mentioned Daniel, were involved in the politics of Israel and other nations. For example: The books of Judges and Kings resolve entirely around political leaders in Israel, some good and others bad, but some were true devoted believers that God put in political power. Moses and Joshua are Christ types that were political leaders of the people of Israel and were specifically put in those positions by God, as were David and Samuel and many others. Esther served God by risking her life by getting involved in the politics of Persia. Joseph became a political leader in Egypt. Paul made use of his political rights as a Roman citizen on multiple occasions including to make appeals to the emperor of Rome (Acts 16:37-38, Acts 22: 22-29, Acts 25). Nehemiah was a political leader in Persia and appealed to the King of Persia to be allowed to rebuild the wall of Jerusalem and even ended up gaining the king’s political and financial support to do so. Numerous people in the Bible interacted with the elders of Israel, who were both the spiritual and political leaders of their time, to seek their incite and to influence them including Moses, Boaz, and others and later with the more formal spiritual and political leaders the Pharisees to contradict and reprimand them, including Jesus and the apostles. Leviticus and Numbers are focused almost entirely on rules of law (politics) set up for Israel as part of the Old Covenant. Deuteronomy and Exodus include political law as well. These are just examples that I was able to think of off the top of my head. The Bible is filled with believers and followers of God in both the Old and New Testaments who were involved in politics and held political power, almost always (I can’t think of an instance where this was not the case but leaving a little wiggle room here just in case) at the direct behest and actions of God and to serve God and His plans, purposes, and people. If we are looking to the Bible to see whether or not we as Christians should be involved in politics, I can’t see any other answer than to say, yes, we should be.

As for the idea that we are not to judge others being Biblical, this is a common misconception by many Christians and non-Christians alike usually arrived at by taking verses of the Bible out of context. Matthew 7:1 is the most common verse used to support this idea. But when put in context, it is not a call not to judge, but a call on how not to judge. It should at least be read within the context of Matthew 7:1-5 if not preferably within the context of the entire sermon Jesus was giving at the time. If read in context, it is clear that the meaning here is not to completely refrain from judging but rather to not judge in a hypocritical manner with the warning that if you do judge hypocritically, you will be judged in the same way. Romans 2:1-2 contains at the beginning of the sentence the word therefore, a clear indication that it needs to be understood in light of the proceeding passage. The end of Romans 1 talks about those who reject God and live sinfully. Romans 2:1-2 then says “You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge another, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things (emphasis mine). Now we know that God’s judgment against those who do such things is based on truth.” When put in context against Romans 1, this makes it clear that this passage is also referring to hypercritical judgement and how that type of judgement should be avoided. When looking at the Bible it should always be remembered that the Bible was not written with chapters and verses. Those were added in later as a navigation tool. Reading specific verses out of context can lead to a great deal of misinterpretation.

Jessica wrote: "The Bible talks constantly about politics. "

Thank you. You said it so much better than I could.

Jessica wrote: "As for the idea that we are not to judge others being Biblical, this is a common misconception by many Christians and non-Christians alike usually arrived at by taking verses of the Bible out of context.... Reading specific verses out of context can lead to a great deal of misinterpretation."

One approach that's been helpful to me, in understanding the command not to judge, is to see that in the context of Scripture as a whole, judging and judgment are ultimately eschatological --that is, they're about the judicial determination of a person's eternal fate: salvation or damnation. And it's not our prerogative to pass judgment on which individuals are going to be damned, because we don't know everything that God knows. (And of course it's also a command not to jump to conclusions, making the most unfavorable interpretation of another person's words or actions based on limited information and/or prejudice.) I don't know if that line of thought is helpful to anyone else, but it has been to me.

When it comes to judgment . . . I'd rather err on the side of caution - because I fail. ;) That being said, I tend to go by the mantra, you can't get people to care about God's judgment if they don't know about God's love. (That's my mantra, by the way, so don't blame anyone else.) So, to ME, teaching them about God's love is always first and foremost. And, I think that is taught differently to each individual and by each individual. I think He has give us all different sorts of methodologies to work on all sorts of personalities. Those gifts in Ephesians at work.

Jessica wrote: "Tyrone wrote: "Eclaghorn wrote: "Tyrone: were dietrich bonhoeffer, richard wurmbrand, the Christians in Nigeria and Sudan, the believers in China and the former ussr doing evil? Sometimes it is the..."

Jessica, I've resolved not to question how some view politics and political leaders. However, my position on applying a political motive to the biblical individuals you noted is quite different.

Moses and Joshua are spiritual leaders, not political leaders. And when Moses' position was challenged, God dealt severely with those who did so (Numbers 12 in the case of Miriam and Aaron, and Numbers 16 with Korath). Neither Moses nor Joshua campaigned for position or power. God named them and anointed them the lead His people. God used Esther to save His people from destruction and evil intent.

Also, most of the kings of Israel were evil, not good. It was their political posturing which led to the captivity of both kingdoms. They wanted to be like the Gentile nations around them and thus decided to reject God and chose their own king (1 Samuel 8). Rather than be the theocracy they were meant to be (Exodus 19:6), they chose to be political. That began their undoing. Factually, the Northern Kingdom (of 10 tribes) had virtually no good kings out of the 19 or 20 that ruled, which is why they went into captivity first and never recovered. The Southern Kingdom (Judah and Benjamin) had maybe 8 good kings out the 20 that ruled (that last 4 were evil). Manasseh was generally recognized as the worst and it was under his rule that God judged the nation because he led them all astray (2 Kings 21). Daniel was a captive serving at the digression of Nebuchadnezzar (Daniel 1) because he was among the best and brightest of those taken captive. Because he served the Lord with all his heart God greatly favored him in captivity. He did not decide to serve politically; he was made to serve because Nebuchadnezzar had the good sense to see his wisdom.

I'm not suggesting Christians should not exercise their rights, like Paul and Esther. But I do suggest they both did so in furtherance of advancing God's kingdom, which is not the case today in my opinion. If others think differently, so be it.

As for judging, Jesus made it clear we are not to judge (Matthew 7:1) as did the Apostle Paul (Romans 2:1-2). I do agree we are to judge within the Church to keep it pure and holy, which, to me is different that campaigning for non-spiritual issues which are subjective in my view.

Politics, by nature, is divisive because of its subjectivity. The only time this world will be unified is under the rule of Christ during the Millennial Kingdom reign (Revelation 20). That being said, the Millennial Kingdom, from a "political perspective", will be a dictatorship, but a righteous dictatorship according to the Word of God and ruled by the Son of God. As such, I agree with what was said at the beginning of this thread ... we need prophets, who espouse all things biblical; not partisanship, where all things are political and subjective.

Tyrone said: "I'm not suggesting Christians should not exercise their rights, like Paul and Esther. But I do suggest they both did so in furtherance of advancing God's kingdom, which is not the case today in my opinion."

Well said. Some empassioned and I believe valid points by all here. It is the focus of our efforts that God is most concerned with. Does it bring glory to Him? Does it share the good news of eternal life? My purpose in mentioning different aspects of morality when judging regimes is to point towards that overall goal for Christians.

Western Europe before and during the Reformation shows us some of the dangers of state-established religions, when implemented by people and not, as was the case in the Old Testament, by God in establishing all aspects of life for Israel.

As I said years ago in this thread:
https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

I'm very glad to live in a nation with religious freedom, where the church leaders are responsible for maintaining a good witness and Christian conduct within their ranks, with their punitive powers curtailed to excommunication at the worst. And where the civil govt doesn't typically punish minority religious views provided adherents don't break secular civil law.

Thank you Jessica for the Bible lessons that express a political viewpoint very close to my own. Also the "judgement" lesson.
Besides the Bible, I thought I would list some books that I have formed my thoughts on government. I will admit, Christians disagree on politics, but it helps to understand how we all formed those opinions. Some of my heroes of political thought were not Christians but I believe a love of freedom and natural law meshes well with the Christian faith. Where we tend to go wrong, I think, is trying to solve all the worlds problems, especially esoteric ones.
I will start where I began in thinking about faith and politics: Charles Colson. I recommend his Loving God, Kingdoms in Conflict, and How then Should We Live. More recently I have discovered Os Guiness and recommend Last Call For Liberty, A Free People's Suicide, A Call for Civility (also Fool's Talk but that's not about politics so much). To understand why conservatism is the form of politics I espouse try The Great Debate by Yuval Levin, anything by Thomas Sowell, especially A Conflict of Visions, Alexis de Tocqueville's Democracy in America, which is a great book to understand why culture is important to freedom. More foundational works include John Locke's Two Treatise on Government and the Federalist Papers (although they can be hard to read), and Adam Smith's Theory of Moral Sentiments. I also find interesting what converts from socialism/communism have to say about the Left's attacks on people of faith. Try anything by David Horowitz (and he is prolific), or Naomi Wolf's latest. Also try reading The Gulag Archipelago or the Black Book of Communism. The oppression of people of faith is something we as free people need to fight everywhere. I would read why Natural Law is something we can get behind as Christians to fight the Left without "bringing religion into it": try J. Budziszewski's What we Can't Not Know.
Finally, besides obvious examples in history of why it is important for nations to be a force for good against the evil out there try Dennis Prager's Still the Best Hope or Mark Steyn's America Alone or Andy Andrews' How Do You Kill 11 Million People?
I have more to say about what I have learned that applies to a Christian worldview but I will leave that to my next post (or two).

Werner wrote: "Lots of good discussion here yesterday and today! It occurred to me that this is really a discussion dealing with what we think are the biblical principles that underlie our approach to government;..."
Thank you, Werner, for being a good moderator and moving this discussion to a better place. Also, thanks for the reminder that we read the end of the book. Which ever side of the spectrum we are on, and I lean more to the left, we have hope, not in our governmental systems but in Jesus. We are only here for a moment. God is good, He does good, and all His plans are good.

Tyrone wrote: "Jessica wrote: "Tyrone wrote: "Eclaghorn wrote: "Tyrone: were dietrich bonhoeffer, richard wurmbrand, the Christians in Nigeria and Sudan, the believers in China and the former ussr doing evil? Som..."Well said, Tyrone

Georgann wrote: "Thank you, Werner, for being a good moderator and moving this discussion to a better place."

Well, it hasn't really moved. :-) And that's okay! This thread is for discussion of Christian perspectives on partisan politics, so nothing that has been shared here is off-topic; and in sharing about this subject, we naturally will refer to the theology that underlies our thinking about it. (Though I think it's also useful to have the other thread as well, for more intensely theological discussion.) I'm more interested in having a good, serious discussion like this one, that people find helpful and rewarding, than in what thread it's on. I hope to comment more on both threads soon myself, when time permits!

In reference to the freedoms granted by the US Constitution, John Adams said: "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."

Clearly that was the context of the day in which the US Constitution was drawn up. As we are seeing today, when people largely abandon the transcendent moral code that we held when the Constitution was framed up, other things will gradually creep in to replace the religious freedom intended (and explicitly granted).

Here's previous US Attorney-General William Barr very eloquently expounding on this in what should be received as facts from the US historical narrative. Indeed, this was acknowledged bipartisan sentiment as recently as the 1990s. Yet, witness the partisan response to his speech in late 2019...
https://www.dailysignal.com/2019/11/2...

Nathan wrote: "In reference to the freedoms granted by the US Constitution, John Adams said: "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any othe..."

Well said and I completely agree.