Christianity and Politics

I normally don't like to blog about specific religious doctrine because it can quickly become opinionated and lead down paths that have no resolution because they depend upon "faith". The fact of the matter is that I am a christian who seeks knowledge and truth in the pursuit of wisdom as God commands us, so it is important for me to study the Bible and test all human philosophy and knowledge against what Jesus teaches. If I am going to write about topics such as the income tax, the draft, social security, or any other government program I must also consider my faith in Jesus Christ. I will make every attempt possible to identify where I use my faith, instead of facts and reason, to make an argument in any blog post I make.

This article is an effort to see what Jesus had to say about the role of Christians in politics and government. I want to analyze whether or not the "christian right" or the "christian left" really takes the position that Jesus would take. I want to understand if Jesus would have the same objections I have to things such as: the income tax, social security, welfare, government education, property taxes, and the draft. I want to know whether Jesus would support a revolution against the established government and, if so, what forms of revolution are allowable. I did not know where this rabbit hole would lead, but, as a life-long Christian, I was very surprised at what I found and I hope that you will take the time to read all the way to the end, even if you think you are going to disagree with my conclusions.

Review of the "Christian Right" and "Christian Left"

The "christian right" and "christian left" are very vague groups of individuals whom do not have any specific doctrine, but there are some common positions attributed to members of these groups:

It doesn't take long to realize why politics are not discussed in most churches. The "christian right" and "christian left" oppose each other on almost every issue. Surely there must be some unifying message that Jesus has regarding how christians should approach politics and government. Both sides quote scripture to support their positions, but if Jesus were here today how would he vote or would he vote at all?

In order to discover the politics of Jesus we must first understand the authority of God, the authority given to man, and the authority that man can give governments. Once we know where governments and the people who create them get their authority to take any action we can determine the actions (ie: votes on issues) we can take without sining. Then we can settle once and for all how God would have us vote on each and every issue.

The Greatest Commandments

Because most christians can find some scripture, command, or example from the bible to justify their position, we must have a means to put all commands in context and to prioritize them. I will start my study with the greatest commandments because we can know that God would not want a christian to follow any other command of his by breaking a greater command (unless specifically directed to by God).

Twice Jesus effectively says "all the law and the profits hang on this (these) commandment(s)". We can infer that this means that all other laws are unnecessary and redundant because they all boil down to "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" or "love and obey God above all". For the purposes of this article I am only going to reference two of the derived laws: "thou shalt not kill" and "thou shalt not steal". It is quite obvious how these laws are derived from the two greatest commandments.

If a christian may not steal or kill then he may not pay or authorize someone else to do so in their name. To do so would be a sin. It also follows that a group of people may not steal from another group of people. This means that any government that derives its authority from the people cannot steal from anyone in society; this is the heart behind "property rights".

Following the "do unto others" law we can find that no one would want to be held against their will by anyone else. If you cannot hold someone against their will, then you cannot authorize anyone else to do so in your name. It would follow that any government of the people cannot jail people.

It is at this point that I had to pause. If a government created with the authority of man cannot fine (steal from), imprison, or kill anyone, then the second highest law, upon which all others are derived, implies that there can be no real threat of government action or means by which the government can punish anyone for crimes if those in government wish to follow the commands of Jesus. At what point does any government gain permission to "do unto others" what it would not want others doing to those who authorize the government action? At what point does one government gain authority to steal, kill, or destroy another government? Does Jesus say anything else that would confirm or contradict this biblical limit on governmental authority? If a government does not get authority from the "do unto others" law, then its authority must be derived from the "love the Lord your God" law. Do all governments have this authority?

I would like to start with a verse that further confirms that a government operating under the rule of man (all authority derived from men) has no more authority to fine, imprison, or kill than any other individual.

This verse makes it pretty clear that Jesus commands his disciples not to punish evil actions with more evil or resist evil demands made against your freedom, life, or property. If a sin is a sin and and those who follow God are working to eliminate sin, then their only choice is to forgive those who harm them. Do two wrongs make a right? If you do not have the authority to repay evil with evil, then you do not have the authority to delegate it to another or to any government.

Authorities Established by God

These are two of the most often quoted verses when anyone wishes to justify the authority of governments over christians and/or the very existence of any government. These verses clearly state that the authorities that exist have been established by God and that you must obey them. Jesus' own words verify the right of "caesars" to exist and that some things belong to "caesar". What is not often mentioned is that God also holds that some things are not "caesar's" and must be rendered unto God.

If we are to understand these passages we must identify who are the "governing authorities", "rulers", and "wrongdoer's" that were described. We have already established that you may not resist an evil man, that you must turn the other cheek, and that you must consent to unreasonable requests to the extent that they are forced upon you. Clearly we do not need any further instruction in the need to lend to, give to, and to serve all governments who demand it of us. So this message must deal with specific authority given to specific "governors" that have been established by God to bear the sword as an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoers.

All judgement of and punishment for sins belongs to God. No earthly authority can perform these tasks without sining, unless they are following a specific command from God (making it God's authority and not earthly). Only God's people, through obedience to God, can be a "governing authority". Romans 13 clearly defines "rulers" as having no terror for those who do right. These "governing authorities" are tasked with governing all people and all governments according to God's will.

It is clear that God lets dictators and tyrants rule over people of all ages. It is equally clear that not all governments "hold no terror for those who do right". It is also true that there are many godless leaders who carry out God's justice, but who do so without seeking or acknowledging God's authority. God works all things together for the good of those whom love him. We must all seek God and be prepared to receive and carry out all acts of governing that God gives us to perform, but we must not act upon our own authority or our own desire for revenge or "justice".

Can anyone make a claim that whoever can exercise the strongest force against other men is, by default, an authority established by God? If this is true, then I can buy a gun and hold authority over anyone without a gun. We hold that God cannot sin; therefore, He cannot commit a sin by delegation of an authority that he does not have. He can forgive sins committed by others and permit sin initiated by others, but he cannot cause or command a sin. He can even work all things for the good of those whom love him, but clearly he does not delegate authority to sin. So any use of force that is sinful under the rule of man or operating outside of God's authority to judge and punish those who do "wrong" is not ordained by God.

Obviously God must not be saying that all government action is the will of God simply because all rulers are given authority to carry out God's justice. To make this argument is to make any form of government an idol that becomes God. I believe that the clearest way to identify which authorities are ordained by God and which are not is to look at how "rulers" is defined. "Rulers hold no terror for those who do right". To the extent that any authority holds terror for those who do "right" they are not an authority ordained by God.

May a christian join or start a rebellion against an established government?

If God permits man to establish governments in order to carry out God's justice, then you must accept that men can create a new government, thereby creating a new authority, and then use the new authority to carry out God's justice against "rulers who hold terror for those who do right". It must also be said that God would grant authority to this new government and all who submit to it and obey it are obeying God and carrying out God's justice (so long as the new government does not hold terror for those who do right).

May a man operating outside of any governmental institution defend his family from an evil man?

The most frequent scenario that is posed to pacifists is the "murderer after your family" scenario. To answer this we must determine where this husband would get the authority to kill another man in either a preemptive defense of his family or in a seeking to punish the murderer after the fact. We have already established that unless a man is given a direct command from God, any attempt to kill anyone for any reason is a sin. We have also established that God has delegated authority to carry out his justice against those who do "wrong" to the "governing authorities". God clearly states that the husband is the "governing authority" within his household, so within that jurisdiction a husband has been delegated the necessary authority to carry out God's justice.

While a husband has this authority, his authority can be limited by his own governing authorities: local, state, federal, and world governments. He must carefully weigh all of his actions and be ready to accept the consequences of his actions if his governing authorities find fault in how he preemptively killed and/or punished the murderer after his family. For this reason a husband must ask God for the authority to take any action, if he does this and obeys God then he has not sinned.

What kind of government should christians establish? How should they vote?

Now that we know the source of all government authority and the limits of man's own authority we can investigate what kind of government can and should be established and/or promoted by christians. Let me suggest that if churches could make disciples of everyone in a society then there would be no need for government because all men would fear God. Even if sin is not eliminated, all men would actively seek forgiveness for any sins they do commit. Clearly this will not happen before Christ returns.

Each of us has the responsibility to teach others to love one another as they love themselves and to avoid forcing our will on others directly or indirectly through the government. We must teach everyone that all government force is sinful unless it is following specific commands from God to punish those who do "wrong". If you are going to vote for the use of government force (to extract a tax or punish a crime) then you must be sure that your action causes no terror for those who do "right" and that God gave you a specific instruction/permission to carry out His justice through your vote.

In a society that makes decisions via majority vote, christians must be very careful with their vote. If a church is split on an issue that involves the use of government force then they must admit that they have no clear command from God because God cannot be divided against himself. It is always better to error on the side of forgiveness of wrong-doing than on the side of terror for those who do right.

Judging Right and Wrong

If an individual decides that God has given him authority to carry out his justice then that individual must have a means of determining what is "right" and what is "wrong" along with what a "just" punishment should be. Many christians quickly pull out their favorite version of the bible and point to verses condemning all kinds of things: prostitution, gays, sexual sins, bad language, body piercing, drinking, drugs, dancing, rock music, violent video games, etc. It is very easy for man to "derive" all kinds of "rights" and "wrongs" from the bible that are not specifically stated. Jesus condemned this kind of behavior in the pharisees (the governing authorities of his day):

Clearly we each must decide for ourselves what is "right" and what is "wrong" because otherwise we risk falling into the same trap that the pharisees fell into. Jesus also gave us very specific commands about judging:

This command about judging follows the second greatest commandment of "do unto others" by saying "judge others as you would have them judge you". If a christian is going to claim that they are a governing authority then they must be very careful when it comes to judging others. In fact, Jesus goes so far as to say "Judge not". But if you still feel that you have a responsibility and command to carry out God's justice then there is still a way for you to do so that does not involve judging others. Let others judge themselves.

If you rob someone then you have confessed that you do not think that theft is “wrong” and therefore the government can use your own judgement on the “rightness” of theft to fine (steal from) you against your will. If you kill intentionally, then you have judged for yourself that killing is not wrong and so society can act on you accordingly. Notice a pattern? If you do something that affects another then the other may do the same to you in return without judging you or applying their judgement as to what is right or wrong.

It is this principle: that we are each our own judge and that our intentional actions show what we believe to be “right”. If we believe something to be right then we cannot object to another doing the same to us in equal proportion.

Any action that is private or personal cannot be punished, because any punishment would have to be equally private and personal and would therefore have no ability to affect the perpetrator.

The justice system I have described is essentially the ‘eye-for-eye’ justice system practiced in the old testament. Any Christian wishing to carry out God's justice must follow the eye-for-eye principle as the MAXIMUM penalty for any crime. You may chose to imprison a murderer instead of killing them because you are exercising some forgiveness in handing out your "just" punishment. If you wish to kill someone for the crime of theft then you are going beyond "just" punishment and judging for yourself that killing is "right".

Can Taxes be "Just"?


At this point you may be thinking, I wouldn’t want anyone to tax me for anything; therefore, all “taxes” must be wrong and if taxes are wrong then how do we pay for the government. To this I give you a simple answer:

Think of the government as a kind of superman. All people must do unto superman as they would have superman do unto them. If superman owns a bridge, then no one can cross it without paying the toll. Superman has every right to raise money by charging people for the privilege of using his property, it is his property after all. If we are to charge superman with the task of guarding our borders, then we can give him ownership of our borders. If he owns our borders then he may charge a fee to anyone or anything that wishes to cross. If superman starts to charge too much, then people stop using his property and find other solutions. This would force superman to lower his fees in order to maximize profits. Ultimately the government becomes just another "member" of society and is bound by the same rules that apply to everyone else.

If superman was not tasked with the job of robbing Peter to pay Paul then he wouldn’t need the revenue generated by an income tax or a property tax. In fact, he could probably generate all of the revenue he needs by charging others for superman granted privileges. In order to tax income or property we would have to give superman ownership of all of our labor and property. This would be nothing more than submitting to slavery for the promise of freedom. It would also be rendering to "caesar" that which is not "caesar's" because all men belong to God.

It is very possible to run a government on monies that are raised by means other than "theft" simply by giving the government some property of its own that it can use to "turn a profit" like any other organization would.

Where do christians go wrong?

I would like to include some common examples of where christians go wrong in their voting and political activism.

God commands us to “give to the poor”, “feed the hungry”, “take care of the widows and elderly”, but certainly wouldn’t approve of killing or stealing in the name of following those commands. Any christian who promotes taxes that amount to "theft" because the are unavoidable to funding programs like welfare or social security is promoting "terror for those who have done no 'wrong'". If a government can raise revenue without resorting to income tax, property tax, or sales tax then they have every right to spend that money as they see fit.

No Christian great grandmother would use a gun to steal money from her grand children, but this is essentially what many do when they ask the government to tax their grandchildren's incomes to pay for their social security check. No mother of four would use a gun to force their single neighbor to pay for her children’s education, but many will vote to have someone else use the gun for them.

To the extent that an activity is voluntary and hurts no one else, that activity is beyond the “do unto others” law and instead falls under the “love the Lord your God” law. As Christians we do not want anyone telling us who our God should be, thus we must “do unto others”. Therefore we cannot punish them for their sinful activities. It is not for us to judge, but for God to judge. If you believe it is for you to judge, then you must also allow others to judge you and your religion.

Many Christians will point to our Christian heritage as justification for the way things were meant to be in our country. They are correct on the first count, that we have a Christian heritage, but are often wrong in the application. They are wrong because most pastors do not teach their congregation how to derive all laws from the greatest commandments and instead teach a list of rules. Our pastors focus on the personal relationship with Christ and personal sins such as lust, envy, greed, idols, sexual immorality and fail to teach the application of the law to EVERY area of our lives, including politics. These pastors are right to teach that these things are wrong, but the are wrong to encourage their congegations to vote to use force on those who fail to obey God's laws. They also mistakenly assume that anything the least bit controversial in the political sphere is “debatable” and that there is no absolute interpretation of the law of God that can give us the answer. The truth is that every time we vote we are delegating authority and approval to the policies of a political platform.

Would you want someone telling you who you can have sex with and under what conditions? No? Then you must oppose all laws against prostitution. Even Jesus said, “he who is without sin may throw the first stone”. Just because God says that it is wrong does not mean that you can violate another of God’s laws to prevent someone from doing so or punish them after they have done so. God certainly has the power and authority to prevent prostitution and punish those who do it, but he does not prevent sin because to do so would be a violation of free will. It is for God to judge and punish (or forgive) the sins of others, not for man.

Would you want anyone stealing 40% of everything you produce? You may not mind giving 40% of everything you produce, but would you rob 40% of everything your neighbor produces to fund your favorite charities or your own retirement? If your answer is “of course not” then you must be opposed to any application of a general income tax.

Would you want someone to force you to rent your house that you own outright or risk losing that house for not paying? Would you deny your neighbor the opportunity to buy a place and live within his own property for the rest of his life without owing another dime to anyone? If not then you must oppose all Property taxes.



Would you want someone telling you who you must hire, whom you may not fire, or whom you must associate with? No? Then you must oppose all affirmative action and "employment" laws. You must oppose forcing the boy scouts to accept women and gays and you must oppose efforts to force others to recognize gay marriage. You must also oppose laws banning the right of gays to make contract/covenant with one another.

To the extent that you put your trust in government you are failing to put your trust in God. If you depend upon government to provide justice, then you are not allowing God to provide justice. If you depend upon government force to take care of the poor then you are not trusting God to take care of the poor. If the government gives to the poor in its name, then it steals the opportunity for you to give in God's name.

Conclusion

Governments can and do have a legitimate role to play in carrying out God's justice, but those who run the government and the people who vote for them must never replace God's authority with governmental authority. Government is nothing more than a man made organization that is prone to attracting evil. Christians must work tirelessly to reduce the size of government at all levels in order to prevent it from becoming a tool of the devil. Remember that you should not vote for things that God does not give you authority to do on your own and if you must vote for the use of government force then make sure that the force is used justly (bringing no terror to those who do right).