The Christian who is involved in the material history of this world is involved in it as representing another order, another master (than the prince of this world), another claim (than that of the natural heart of man). Thus he must plunge into social and political problems in order to have an influence on the world, not in the hope of making it a paradise, but simply in order to make it tolerable — not in order to diminish the opposition between this world and the Kingdom of God, but simply in order to modify the opposition between the disorder of this world and the order of preservation that God wills for it — not in order to “bring in” the Kingdom of God, but in order that the gospel may be proclaimed, that all men may really hear the good news of salvation through the death and resurrection of Christ. – Jacques Ellul

Christians, when rightly informed and motivated, change the character of political debate. They bring the moral standards of God’s kingdom into the civic realm and thereby become agents of His common grace — of His provision for those who believe as well as those who don’t.

“Forgiveness of sins is the central message of the gospel,” says theologian Wayne Grudem. “That’s the only way people’s hearts are truly transformed.” But that’s the opening of a fuller gospel story. The whole gospel, Grudem believes, includes a transformation. God’s grace changes people, and as a result they change everything around them. Families are renewed. Schools are rejuvenated. Businesses reorient their mission and purpose. What’s more, the gospel of Christ, because it changes hearts, changes the course of civil government.

We don’t want to become modern day Gnostics, Grudem argues. God cares about our spiritual lives, but He also cares about food, water, jobs, and housing. When God commands us to love our neighbors, He means to love them holistically. That means we’ll care about laws that protect preborn children. We’ll care about policies that defend marriages and families. If we love our neighbors, we’ll naturally be concerned about the corrupting moral influences that creep into public schools.

The Church isn’t the kingdom of God, says writer and Prison Fellowship Ministries founder Charles Colson, but by expressing concern for these issues Christians reflect the love, justice, and righteousness of God’s kingdom. In Colson’s view, the Church becomes a compelling presence when Christians — in their homes, neighborhoods, and workplaces — exhibit a vision that “holds the world accountable to something beyond itself.” Christians understand human nature for what it really is, Colson says, and that perspective affects the civic conversation. According to Colson, human politics is based on the premise that society must be changed in order to change people, but Christians understand that it’s the other way around: People must be changed in order to change society.

As they enter the public square, God’s people recognize the authority of Christ’s kingdom, they bring its ethical standards into the stream of history, and — through them — Christ’s kingdom breaks the “vicious and otherwise irreversible cycles of violence, injustice, and self-interest.” As God’s people engage in debate — as they create, shape, and lead public policy — it’s evident that Christ’s kingdom has, in Augustine’s words, equipped them to be the best citizens in the kingdoms of man.

Author and theologian Richard John Neuhaus pointed out that atheists obey laws; they vote, pay taxes, and lend a hand to needy neighbors. But good citizenship, Neuhaus says, requires more. Good citizens feel compelled to give a moral account of their country. Good citizens want to recommend their country’s virtues “to citizens of the next generation,” and they want to “transmit that regime to citizens yet unborn.” It is, Neuhaus contends, “those who believe in the God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Jesus that turn out to be the best citizens.” That’s because their loyalty to the political order is qualified by a loyalty to a higher order. Their ultimate allegiance is not to the regime or its founding documents, “but to the City of God and the sacred texts that guide our path toward that end for which we were created.” Such citizens, in Neuhaus’ view, were specifically designed for “dual citizenship.”

The late theologian Carl Henry believed that Christians, as citizens, have a duty “to work through civil authority for the advancement of justice and human good.” It’s a pervasive responsibility. After all, politics determines whether we’re at war or peace. It affects the nation’s job supply, wealth creation and distribution, and property rights. It determines our freedom to speak, write, and worship. Even the circumstances of family life, says writer J. Philip Wogaman, often depend on government policy, including the quality and content of public education.

Christian citizens naturally “do good to everyone, and especially to those who are of the household of faith” (Galatians 6:10). Such good deeds, says Grudem, include commending and criticizing policies that affect the poor and powerless. We teach church members to do “good works” in hospitals, schools, and inner-city neighborhoods, so why would we exclude government? Our good works there, as in other spheres, give glory to our Father.
In every culture, Wogaman observes, religion tends to be important to people who care about politics; likewise, politics often matters most to those who care about religion. And often, these are the same people.

So what then, uniquely and specifically, might be the point of Christians’ participation in politics?

Christians Keep Government Accountable

Romans 13:4 tells us that government authority exists for our good. But how, Grudem wonders, if no one explains what God expects, can government officials serve Him well? 1 Peter 2:14 further explains that government is to punish those who do evil and praise those who do good. Again, Grudem asks: How, unless they receive counsel from the religious community, can mayors, senators, or presidents understand God’s view of good and evil or right and wrong?

Throughout history, Grudem recounts, God has called His people to counsel secular rulers. Daniel told King Nebuchadnezzar, the most powerful ruler on earth at the time: “Therefore, O king, let my counsel be acceptable to you: break off your sins by practicing righteousness, and your iniquities by showing mercy to the oppressed, that there may perhaps be a lengthening of your prosperity” (Daniel 4:27 ESV).

Joseph, as Egypt’s second-in-command, often advised Pharaoh. Moses confronted the Egyptian ruler and demanded freedom for the Israelites. Mordecai counseled King Ahasuerus of Persia. Queen Esther, too, was influential in Ahasuerus’ court.

In the New Testament, John the Baptist was quick to confront officials about morals, even scolding Herod the tetrarch “for Herodias, his brother’s wife, and all the evil things that Herod had done” (Luke 3:19). These “evil things,” Grudem supposes, included Herod’s acts as a government official.

In Acts 24, Paul speaks with the Roman governor Felix “about righteousness and self-control and the coming judgment.” It’s a safe bet that Paul held Felix accountable for his conduct as a public officeholder. And it’s clear that he captured the governor’s attention: According to verse 25, Felix was alarmed and sent Paul away.

Christians Bring Transcendent Values

In 1966, Time magazine provoked a national uproar. The magazine’s April 8 cover daringly asked: “Is God Dead?”

German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche may have introduced the God-is-dead concept in 1889 but, Colson observes, Nietzsche’s point wasn’t about God’s existence, it was about His relevance. God was declared dead, Colson says, “because we live, play, procreate, govern, and die as though He doesn’t exist.”

The “God is dead” movement of the 1960s quickly faded, even as Christianity continued to thrive. Nevertheless, an atheistic philosophy slithered into American politics. From the mid-1960s to today, atheism has become more aggressive and more political. It now insists on being believed, says Colson. It insists on imposing its views and seeks to forbid any competing vision.

Colson has seen a steady devaluation of values, so much so that it’s difficult now for anyone to declare something right or wrong, to call one thing good and another bad. It’s difficult to distinguish what’s just and unjust. Without a set of transcendent values, Colson explains, nothing governs how we are to live together.

Once God is removed from civic life, Neuhaus argued, we’re left with two principal actors: the individual and the state. With God out of the picture there’s no mediating structure to create moral values. Without religion, there’s no counterbalance to the state’s ambitions.

And yet, says Wogaman, religion is always the basis for judging a society’s beliefs and values. When politics is evaluated or criticized on the basis of values, the question — whether acknowledged or not — becomes a religious one. As a result, when legitimate religion is banished the vacuum will be filled by bogus religion, a kind of religon that, to borrow Neuhaus’ phrase, has been “bootlegged into public space under other names.”

Former Yale scholar Alexander Bickel made the point that law, if it’s to be viewed as legitimate, must be backed by moral judgment. In a democratic society, Bickel said, state and society “must draw from the same moral well.” Government makes moral judgments, and they’re judgments of an ultimate nature. Without religion’s influence, “secular” reasoning is given the force of religion.

“Removal of the transcendent sucks meaning from the law,” Colson adds. Without an ultimate reference point, there’s no just cause for obedience, and that means the state must seek more and more coercive power.

Christians, then, must enter the civic realm because the Church conveys moral values. As the late James Boice once wrote, “Religious people are … the only citizens who actually advance the nation in the direction of justice and true righteousness.” Christianity not only provides for individual concerns, but for the ordering of a society with liberty and justice for all. Christianity alone, Colson says, as taught in Scripture and announced in the kingdom context by Jesus, provides both a transcendent moral influence and a transcendent ordering of society without an oppressive theocratic system.

Society’s well-being, then, depends on a robust religious influence. We don’t need more laws, Boice stated, arguing that without a moral citizenry even existing laws can be used immorally. The nation needs people willing to live by God’s moral laws. That’s the only way to retard evil’s advance. It’s also how the moral standards of God’s kingdom gain ground and community life becomes, as Augustine predicted, “organized in the image and likeness of the heavenly city.”

Civil government benefits from a community of people whose lives testify to “this law behind the law.” The whole of human society requires a community that believes some things are right and some wrong, and which adheres to the God-given wisdom that pervades all creation (see Proverbs 8 and Proverbs 22).

Christians Provide a Restraining Influence

But the church is more than a model. By its presence in the culture it is a restraint on the kingdom of man. Contrary to popular illusion, says Neuhaus, it’s not government’s job to promulgate moral vision. That duty belongs to other social institutions, especially the Church. When the state steps beyond the bounds of its intended authority, the Church becomes an “effective source of moral resistance.” But it doesn’t resist for its own sake; it doesn’t resist to gather power or broaden its own following; it resists for the common good. The same attitude was evident in the late 1800s, when Southern Presbyterian pastor Robert L. Dabney taught that Christians — those in government as well as those outside — should bring their Christian conscience, “enlightened by God’s Word,” into the civic realm. Christians needed to be involved, Dabney believed, not to force their morals onto society as a whole, but to advocate for justice, show respect for life, and support the powerless.

One hears an echo of Augustine in Dabney’s words. Augustine believed Christianity was society’s most essential preservative. When nonbelievers lack the strength to act out of love for country, he explained, Christians act out of love for God. When morality and civic virtue break down, “divine Authority intervenes to impose frugal living, continence, friendship, justice, and concord among citizens.”

The Bible Instructs Us to Get Involved

Romans 13:1-7 and 1 Peter 2:13-14 aren’t mere grist for intellectual curiosity, says Grudem. They’re not in the Bible for our private edification; they’re there to equip us — to teach us how to speak to government officials — and to explain how God views government’s roles and responsibilities.

Effective government is pivotal in the pursuit of justice. And true justice, Augustine said, springs from a sovereign God. Without justice there can be no community, no shared values, and no common ideals. Writer and scholar Christopher Dawson once said, “Christianity is the soul of Western civilization. And when the soul is gone, the body putrefies.” God’s people must address moral issues, they must measure public actions by biblical standards of justice and righteousness, and they must inform leaders when they — councilmen, mayors, governors, and presidents — stray from God’s intended path.

When Christians abandon the public square, what happens to community values? To ethics? To moral standards? When Christians wash their hands and turn away, who speaks for the poor and powerless? Throughout history we’ve seen the effect of Christian influence: in the abolition of slavery; advocating for universal literacy; for improved education; and for laws that protect children, factory workers, and women. That sort of impact, Grudem points out, doesn’t come from silence or withdrawal. It comes from faithfulness.

The United States isn’t the kingdom of God, and Christians today must understand, as Martin Luther understood in his time, that, “It is out of the question that there should be a Christian government even over one land.” The wicked, Luther wrote, always outnumber the good. Therefore, to try to rule according to the gospel would be like placing wolves, lions, eagles, and sheep together into the same fold and letting them freely mingle.

We plunge into social and political problems, not with the hope of ushering in Christ’s kingdom, but to provide a glimpse of something better, to exhibit our hope for what’s to come, to — as Jacques Ellul put it — modify opposition between this world’s disorder and the order of preservation that God wills for it. That way, the gospel may be proclaimed, and all men may really hear the good news of salvation.

About the author, Richard Doster

Richard Doster is the editor of byFaith. He is also the author of two novels, Safe at Home (March 2008) and Crossing the Lines (June 2009), both published by David C. Cook Publishers.

26 Responses to Politics: Why Christians Must Be Involved

  1. John Musgrave says:

    1. Nowhere in Scripture is there a command for believers to try to transform pagan governments. Look for a command to influence society by preaching the moral law & you won’t find it. 2. Romans 13 & 1 Peter 2 are not there “to teach us how to speak to government officials—& to explain how God views government’s roles & responsibilities.” Read the passages! The command there is not remotely close to that. 3. Jesus & Paul do not show concern about civil governments. Paul, before government officials, preaches the gospel to them. Jesus is dismissive of politics & in part is crucified for not seeking to transform the government in Israel from Caesar to a righteous, Davidic, enthroned-in-Jerusalem king, which some had hoped He was (Palm Sunday).

    • Mike Anderson says:

      I believe you are correct, John, in that we are not called to overthrow governments nor to institute a religion into a secular government system. However, I believe we are called to be salt and light in all aspects of the world to bring glory and honor to God. We cannot roll over and surrender our world to the prince of darkness.
      Christ came into the world not to declare a worldly kingdom but to redeem His people. His purpose was accomplished. Our purpose is to do as the madman was told in Mark 5:19-20 proclaim to unbelievers what Christ has done. This means every day and every where.
      We must do that by confronting darkness when it is presented to us but not as secular men would do. I believe we must take the gospel into our secular…

      • Shawn Adams says:

        Here is the problem this is not “our” world. We will inherit it, but as it stands it is not ours yet. We are called to spread the gospel and nowhere have I seen scripture that tells us to get politically involved.

    • Scott Pierce says:

      Agree! I wonder whose politics we are supposed to trumpet? The Christian Left or the Christian Right?

  2. Holly Drake says:

    We are citizens of a different kingdom and to live as such is what brings His light into this present darkness. God is ALWAYS interested in the heart of the matter, He is pursuing hearts not appearances, laws and outward compliance. When we seek to manipulate the ‘world’s system’ to be godly it causes a whiplash of disgust from the heathens who know not God. The vehemence of this growing hatred as we seek to legislate morality is actually hardening hearts to the Gospel.

    Jesus changed the world categorically. He did not involve Himself in the politics of the time, nor did He promote such tactics to His disciples. If we were more concerning with loving and obey God by loving others not controlling them, change will happen…

    • John Hendrickson says:

      Holly, all law legislates morality. God judges unbelievers according to His Law. Why shouldn’t we bring that Word to our rulers attention? God calls the magistrate his ministers in the areas of good and evil. Who else is better able to inform them of how God defines such? Paul tells Timothy what the Law is for (I Ti 1.9).
      Yes, God does look at the heart. But are we to understand that has nothing to do with behavior? Do not changed hearts result in greater obedience to God’s Law? Why would we want to abandon or cede any realm of cultural to fallen man? Are we to believe God only created this world as a platform so man could fall and then be redeemed in order to get to Heaven? God’s Word is what changes hearts, so we preach it to…

      • John Musgrave says:

        The gospel with God’s Spirit—& not the moral law—changes men’s hearts (Philippians 2:16; Romans 2:4; John 3:1-8, 6:33).

        The moral law does not give life to nonbelievers (Galatians 3:21; John 5:39-40), nor are nonbelievers inclined to obey it, as emphasized in John 3:19-21 & Romans 3:10-18.

        Thus, feeding nonbelievers the law (“Government, do this & not that”) is an endeavor in which Christians are not to expect fruit. This is one of many reasons Jesus, Paul, & Peter do not direct Christians to change society.

        Instead, Jesus promised to build His Church (Matthew 16:18; 1 Peter 2:4-5; Ephesians 2:19-22). Correspondingly, the New Testament says believers are to focus on this (evangelism, gifts), and not on transforming the kingdom…

  3. John Hendrickson says:

    “Nowhere in Scripture is there a command for believers to try to” (fill in the blank). Are Christians only to pursue those things in life which are explicitly stated in imperative form in Scripture?

    Is there any area of life which is not within the purview of God’s Word?

    When we are redeemed, are we not to bring every thought captive to the obedience of Christ?

    Romans 13 tells us that the magistrate is the minister of God, rewarding good and punishing evil. How do we define those two terms? I opt for what God tells us they mean. The passage defines the magistrate’s duty in the context of those terms. So how can a Christian approach the magistrate or participate in its functions apart from bringing such to bear?

    • John Musgrave says:

      Hi, John. To your paragraphs 1&2: of course not. However, we don’t do something apart from Scriptural command unless we can deduce from Scripture a principle &/or positive example to guide us. Holly (above) & I point out Jesus’ & Paul’s examples of disinterest in the governments of man. Paragraph 3: 2Corinthians 10:1-6 is about Paul using the Word in his gospel preaching & in church discipline. In those realms he rightly expects some response. Paragraph 4: Romans 13 is written to Christians in Rome, telling them why they should submit to (not try to transform) their government that wasn’t living up to its godly purpose. Peter, in 1Peter 2:12-17, says the same. Neither passage gives any push to Christians to seek political transformation.

      • John Hendrickson says:

        Mr. Musgrave: I don’t believes God only intended purpose for the redeemed is to witness and hang on until they get to eternity. If one understands what it means to be made in the image of God and to live that way (Col 3.10), they can’t help but speak His Truth to the fallen world around him. Thus when Ro.13 speaks of the magistrate as God’s minister of good & evil, how could we not be compelled to inform him of how God defines it?

        You did not answer the question I first posed: Are Christians only to pursue those things in life which are explicitly stated in imperative form in Scripture? There are countless activities we are not directed to engage in; are we to turn from bringing God’s Word to bear on those areas of our culture?

  4. James Johnson says:

    My experience is that the theory doesn’t comport with the practice. Christians from my observation are often mean, angry and all too dogmatic during the political season. I can’t help but to think that the church and God’s kingdom loses more than gains by Christian participation.

  5. Rick Negvesky says:

    John Hendrickson/Mike Anderson – I agree with your perspective. I have to ask about about Daniel in Babylon, or Joseph in Egypt. or Mordecai and Esther in Babylon? Are they not clear models of being involved in government and even doing things to help and protect God’s/other people and minister justly and wisely using biblical precepts?

    Heck, even the nations of Israel and Judea had administrations and governments that touched upon all manners of life and function for the body of Jews, issuing edicts, making treaties, going too war, and they were very much more theocracies.

    I missed where in the New testament that that all changed and we were then told that it was anathema to be involved in the political/governing process.

    • John Musgrave says:

      Hi, Rick,
      You lastly state: “I missed where in the New testament that that all changed and we were then told that it was anathema to be involved in the political/governing process.” First, I’m not calling you a Pharisee nor one who crucified Jesus. To your statement, it is exactly what the Pharisees and the Jews of Jesus’ day missed as well. They wanted Jesus to change their society. When He repeatedly showed He wasn’t interested (John 6:15 & “Caesar’s coin”), they crucified Him, choosing Caesar, a political king, over Him (John 19:15). The OT, earthly kingdom of Israel was a shadow of the reality Jesus brought of the heavenly kingdom, of which we’re now citizens (Philippians 3:20) and to which we “recruit new citizens” as we…

      • Rick Negvesky says:

        Hi John:

        Thanks for your thoughts.

        1) I do not think you have addressed my last statement. Yes, as believers, our citizenship is ultimately in heaven – but we live in a dual -natured world, physical and spiritual. We have a responsibility in both, including acting upon civic responsibilities. That did not change with the arrival of Jesus.

        2) I disagree completely that the reason Jesus was killed by the Jewish leadership, particularly the Pharisees, was because they wanted Him to change their culture. The NT is replete with evidence that they hated Him for 2 main reasons – He claimed to be God, and he continued to clearly put them in a bad light, pointing out their hypocrisy and arrogance. He was a threat to their power…

  6. Tim Carlson says:

    Why were the Christians in the Roman Empire thrown to the lions? It was because they were considered as civil rebels (those who sought to bring reform to the government). They rebelled against the injustice of the government. At some point, Christians must disobey the state. It is our duty to stand for the righteousness and justice of the Almighty God. William Tyndale, John Bunyan, Martin Luther, and John Knox are just a few examples of men who sought to reform tyrannical governments that were abusing their God ordained authority. “In almost every place where the Reformation had success, there was some form of civil disobedience or armed rebellion…” A Christian Manifesto, Francis Schaeffer, p. 93

    • John Musgrave says:

      1) How’s Jesus doing on changing societies 2000 years later? Maybe it’s not His goal. 2) Christians were thrown to lions for refusing to worship Caesar, & because at one point Nero falsely blamed them for setting fire to Rome. A claim that they were thrown to lions for seeking to reform the government is not factual. 3) Christians are to disobey authorities when the latter requires them to disobey a command of God. Other than that, disobedience to authorities is in rebellion to God (Romans 13:1-7 & 1 Peter 2:12-24). 4) “It is our duty to stand for … righteousness and justice.” American Christians assume this is our duty, it sounds great, it’s easier than sharing the gospel, but it’s not the directive of Jesus; the Great Commission…

      • Tim Carlson says:

        Jesus is doing very well changing societies 2000 years later. The Gospel continues to go forth in power. Now, the Southern hemisphere is exploding with new Christian growth. Societies and cultures are changing there. To be sure, the directive of Jesus is the Great Commission. And, we are to be the salt of the earth and the light of the world, a fragrant aroma…the likes of men like William Wilberforce who by God’s grace, stood against British Parliament and led the Slavery Abolition Act 1833 abolishing slavery in most of the British Empire, or Martin Luther who influenced the Protestant Reformation, or Dietrich Bonhoeffer who resisted the tyranny of Hitler and still reminds us very powerfully of “The Cost of Discipleship.”

        • John Hendrickson says:

          Tim, good response. I would add that the Great Commission includes Jesus’ command to not only make disciples but to teach them to obey all he has commanded. Unless one thinks that there is no more Law of God (by which all men will be judged) then his command necessarily includes teaching the nations what he has commanded. We may disagree which parts of the Law continue as our obligation, but it does continue.

          The Great Commission is very misunderstood by many to exclusively refer to getting souls saved for Heaven through faith in Jesus and nothing more. We can thank the wrong understanding of what being under grace and not law means.

          • John Musgrave says:

            Hi, in good spirit to my brothers, three things: First, preaching the moral law to unbelievers, expecting them to conform to it, does not conform (unless we’re Pelagian) with our Biblical understanding of man’s ability to respond to God’s truth. Secondly, the Great Commission says that those who are to be taught “all things that I’ve commanded you” are baptized disciples of Jesus, not the governments of our world (baptizing governments is impossible). Lastly, preaching the gospel and preaching the moral law are two different things. Often, Christians meld the gospel & the moral law, and this is incorrect.

        • John Musgrave says:

          Hi, I appreciate the comments. Two things: First, Jesus is changing PEOPLE very well over the past 2,000 years, but not SOCIETIES. Our world is no less full of wars and societal inequalities & oppression than in Jesus’ day. Secondly, look at the context of “salt & light.” Jesus defines it as doing good deeds (nice things) to our neighbors (Matthew 5:1-16), not as declaring the moral law to them nor telling them how to “run their show.” Being “salt & light” is doing kind deeds for neighbors, He teaches. Scripture specifically teaches Christians that it’s through doing good deeds and submitting to authorities (not telling them what to do) that nonbelievers come to faith (Matthew 5:16; 1 Peter 2:12 & 3:1; 1 Peter 2 & 3; Romans…

  7. Clint Fletcher says:

    2 Corinthians 5:20… I am an ambassador, a representative of another kingdom. I am not here to overthrow, to call you or your policies foolish i.e. “raca”. I am here to speak the truth, but my truth does not include insults, synicsm, sarcasm, or the desire to prove you wrong. My truth stands on its own accord. I merely relay this truth in how I live, speak, and teach. It is not up to me if this kingdom responds to this truth, as that is up to my King. This keeps my role in perspective and my heart grounded in my kingdom. My mere presence will influence this kingdom, as my mere presence will act as a restraining influence, because I have impacted those around me. I am but one ambassador among many, so that a whole country may be changed.

  8. Tim Carlson says:

    Our US government was established by many, if not mostly, godly Christian men.They established a representative government as Lincoln said, “of the people, by the people and for the people.” This type of government with its unique constitution is unparalleled by any other in history. When considering how Scripture speaks to our responsibility toward government, realize that our constitution and the law is king; governing officials take vows to obey and uphold it. Lex Rex, law is king! To be sure, as Christians we are citizens of Christ’s kingdom but we are also citizens of the United States, a nation “conceived in liberty,” the most wonderful liberty ever experienced by any country. We must be good stewards of such a blessed gift…

  9. Bob Smallman says:

    Is there a difference between how I as an individual Christian citizen may decide to participate in governmental affairs in a democracy & the church’s mission? It seems to me that all too often our churches have made political action a part of their mission and have assumed that if we could just get enough Christians into government things would be OK. It strikes me that when we’ve taken that approach, we’ve often been betrayed by politicians who seem primarily interested in our voting block but not in our issues. For example, during Bush’s 1st 2 yrs, Republicans held majorities in the House & Senate & conservatives controlled the SCOTUS, yet not 1 pro-life bill even made it out of committee. Not sure they were even…

  10. Paul Anderson says:

    Hello, brothers — just wanted to remind you all of the legacy of our dear departed brother, Dr. D. James Kennedy and his Center for Christian Statesmanship. One of his profound thoughts is that if Christians don’t get involved in civil government, politics shall always remain dirty unless we the church shine the light, sprinklle the salt, and clean it up. America was founded in 1620 by the brethren of Plymouth Colony, MA who relocated a church and founded a civil body politic based upon the Holy Bible. Each political charter of the original 13 colonies state clearly that the colony is founded to advance, not just generic religion, but the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ. Please pray for my own campaign for mayor of Fall River, MA Dec…

    • Mr. Anderson, we need more people of your caliber runing for office. Some that are as knowledgable as you are about the bible, & are willing to solicit prayer for his canadetecy, if we did just maybe we wouldn’t be in such trouble.

  11. Steve Page says:

    Romans 13:4 was used to make the case that Christian should be involved in politic. But I read Romans 13:1 and see the Lord controls politics, probably so we can focus on serving the Kingdom and doing those things Jesus commanded.

    Political donations of time and money don’t spread the gospel and more often than not hinder it.