Jesus and Politics

bou

There are often discussions of the religious persuasion of political regimes and the wrongs they have done, thus attaching wrongs to the religion which should actually be associated with the regime. People and regimes can be corrupt or just and their reasonings and justifications can be straight of deceptive. Religion or other philosophical positions may be invoked to justify their actions while the actual underlying motivations can be something else entirely.

So, the thought occurs, did Jesus express any particular political opinions or talk much about how societies as a whole should be organised and run? From my understanding, Jesus' teachings were generally about one's own actions and guidance for the individual on how to behave in and view the world in which one lived. Of course, as a Christian no doubt, one should do what one can to improve the just and equitable workings of society for the benefit of one's neighbours, regardless of their own religious persuasion. That might include being active in politics to bring about good laws for society.

Any thoughts on society, its laws, processes and institutions and how religion works within that?

Or is just way too big and general/vague a topic to discuss in a thread?

BrianCalgary

Pretty big topic.

I think you are right, Jesus never did teach a political system.

His teachings boiled down to Love God with all you heart soul and mind and Love your neighbour as yourself.

He imparted on us individual responsibility to be active and positive members of society, to sacrifice our own selfish desires for thegood of the whole.

The italicised bit is not in the Bible, it is my opinion on the result of following the two great commandments.

Soul Winner

If one reads the record one finds that Jesus was never concerned with the cares of this world. In fact He warned against getting caught up in the cares of it a lot. He said to Pilate: "My Kingdom is not of this world" and to us He admonishes that "Ye are not of this world, for I have chosen you out of this world, therefore the world hateth you" etc... So no matter how important our temporary place is in this world maybe, we are to consider it just that - temporary - and not to take it more seriously than we take our heavenly calling, that (our heavenly calling) should be the most important thing that we should adhere to in this life, and once that is kept in focus "daily", then everything else will be seen its proper context, including whatever political affiliations we might have. At least from what I know of what Jesus said, that is the way I see it. If your political affiliations are leading you to do things that are contrary to your beliefs as a follower of Christ, then the choice must be made. But remember: "Be not like that profane person Esau", he sold his inheritance for a measly mess of pottage (bowl of stew).

wolfsbane

Soul Winner wrote: »

If one reads the record one finds that Jesus was never concerned with the cares of this world. In fact He warned against getting caught up in the cares of it a lot. He said to Pilate: "My Kingdom is not of this world" and to us He admonishes that "Ye are not of this world, for I have chosen you out of this world, therefore the world hateth you" etc... So no matter how important our temporary place is in this world maybe, we are to consider it just that - temporary - and not to take it more seriously than we take our heavenly calling, that (our heavenly calling) should be the most important thing that we should adhere to in this life, and once that is kept in focus "daily", then everything else will be seen its proper context, including whatever political affiliations we might have. At least from what I know of what Jesus said, that is the way I see it. If your political affiliations are leading you to do things that are contrary to your beliefs as a follower of Christ, then the choice must be made. But remember: "Be not like that profane person Esau", he sold his inheritance for a measly mess of pottage (bowl of stew).

Yes, that says it well, as does the OP and Brian.

Great evil has come from believers trying to run the world like it was the church. We ought to expel the evil-doer from the church and insist on pure worship in it. But if we try that on the world we end up using the State's means (the sword) to enforce religion in and out of the church.

That's one evil. The other end of the spectrum is where Christians divorce their morality from their civic life and end up using the corrupt tactics common to the ungodly politician.

DublinWriter

I love freaking out most Americans by stating 'Jesus was a Socialist'.

The following article is pretty insightful...

http://www.lcurve.org/writings/BiblicalLiberal.htm

UU

Well although I'm not Christian, I do think Jesus did have a lot of good to say and I certainly have nothing against him just I happen to not believe he's god. As for religion and politics, I'm a secularist so I believe firmly that religion and politics are two separate things and should have no intertwining. As soon as religion gets mixed up in politics, both the political system and the religion end up getting corrupted and religious beliefs and doctrines start being put into law which is a bad thing. Another problem is that Christianity isn't the only religion and there are many many different Christian sects in fact so if religion were to have power in politics, then it would have to include all religions not just one which of course would never work so really the best way of ensuring freedom for everyone, religion and non-religion is to have a secular state.

BrianCalgary

UU wrote: »

Well although I'm not Christian, I do think Jesus did have a lot of good to say and I certainly have nothing against him just I happen to not believe he's god. As for religion and politics, I'm a secularist so I believe firmly that religion and politics are two separate things and should have no intertwining. As soon as religion gets mixed up in politics, both the political system and the religion end up getting corrupted and religious beliefs and doctrines start being put into law which is a bad thing. Another problem is that Christianity isn't the only religion and there are many many different Christian sects in fact so if religion were to have power in politics, then it would have to include all religions not just one which of course would never work so really the best way of ensuring freedom for everyone, religion and non-religion is to have a secular state.

That is an impossibility as everyone has a 'religion' and a worldview that comes out of that 'religion'.

As a result anyone who is involved in law making will bring their worldview and their 'religion' into it.

re⋅li⋅gion –noun
1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.

2. a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.

3. the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions.

4. the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.: to enter religion.

5. the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith.

6. something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience: to make a religion of fighting prejudice.

Zombrex

BrianCalgary wrote: »

That is an impossibility as everyone has a 'religion' and a worldview that comes out of that 'religion'.

As a result anyone who is involved in law making will bring their worldview and their 'religion' into it.

re⋅li⋅gion –noun
1. a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.

2. a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.

3. the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions.

4. the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.: to enter religion.

5. the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith.

6. something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience: to make a religion of fighting prejudice.

I think some of those definitions are there to cover utterances like "shopping is the new religion" or "I follow the New York Mets religiously"

I'm not sure the definitions meant to imply that any set of beliefs held by a person or group of persons is to be considered a religion.

Soul Winner

UU wrote: »

Well although I'm not Christian, I do think Jesus did have a lot of good to say and I certainly have nothing against him just I happen to not believe he's god. As for religion and politics, I'm a secularist so I believe firmly that religion and politics are two separate things and should have no intertwining. As soon as religion gets mixed up in politics, both the political system and the religion end up getting corrupted and religious beliefs and doctrines start being put into law which is a bad thing. Another problem is that Christianity isn't the only religion and there are many many different Christian sects in fact so if religion were to have power in politics, then it would have to include all religions not just one which of course would never work so really the best way of ensuring freedom for everyone, religion and non-religion is to have a secular state.

Remember Christianity or the early Church became a State religion because a Head of State i.e. Constantine called a council and in accord with the Bishops of the then Church declared it the State religion. This was not an order from God, nor was it written. It wasn't even the will of the then Church leaders, they just buckled before the Emperor, the day the world had conquered Christianity.

It was this which ushered in the dark ages. Before that Christianity was a just a way that people lived their lives. Looking unto Jesus as the way the truth and so on. They still had to live as citizens of whatever country they were in and keep its laws and so on but that had nothing to do with their way of life as Christians until Constantine seen the power potential and boy was he right.

Church and State should never have married in the first place. Its one of the main reasons most intelligent people these days are atheists, they are turned off by what they see as the sins of the fathers, and rightly so. Unfortunately they go too far and throw the baby out with the bath water by also concluding that there is no God.

PDN

I believe 100% that the Christian Church should involve itself in political issues. I think of issues such as the abolition of slavery, the fight against segregation in the US etc.

I also believe that the Church should never ally itself with a particular political parrty or system.

I also believe that when the Church does speak out on political issues it should have the same influence as any other voluntary body - be they golf clubs, the GAA, or the ISPCA.