This bifurcation of the realms of “moral” matters vs (supposedly) neatural matters reeks of Kantian philosophy and is repungant to the Christian believer who sees the ENTIRE creation as God’s creation. Nothing falls outside his domain. We need to strive to have consistent Christian wordlviews, not secualr humanism with Christianity sprinkled on top.

Report comment to moderator

We’ve both noticed the emphasis on the “system” and it’s “virtues” both of which are lackingany sort of comprehensive exegesis.

We’re also both a bit taken aback by Smith and Novak’s use of “self interest”. From what each writer has said of it, one would conclude that self interest has a transcendent quality to it.

Both texts are remarkably vague when it comes to the Christian faith. There are more philosophical justifications for capitalism in each text than Scripture.

When you posit any one particular earthly “system” above the Gospel, as Tony here has pointed out, the natural result is a diminished view of Scripture. Satan tempted Jesus with such a view. How much more so shall he attempt such recourse with us?

Report comment to moderator

Report comment to moderator

What I think Jesus clearly does is remind us that the laws are there for the good of all and if we as a nation don’t act well we will be judged for it. If capitalism moves us to a state where we become slaves to finance for instance we have missed the mark. The year of jubilee and the prohibition against interest for instance suggest that our banking system was designed for disaster (as we have now realized). The creation of easy credit and societies devoted to perpetual indebtedness is far more anti Christian than Socialism. We are taught that we are responsible to God for what we do with the skills and goods God gave us. We are also responsible to God for ensuring that every generation gets a shot at living to their full potential and that every now and again debts must be wiped clean and the burden of credit should not be used to enslave us.

Report comment to moderator

Report comment to moderator

Due to the twisted inverted interpretation of the 1st Amendment, freedom of speech and religion has come to mean its polar opposite, namely censorship of speech and religion lest someone be offended.

It is now interpreted to mean that religious speech and free expression of beliefs is disallowed in any institution touched by public money. And so, as the government gobbles up more and more power and money to pay for everything there will be no place left where its insidious influence won’t strangle freedom of thought.

Report comment to moderator

My concern with the soft fascism of Obama’s policies has nothing to do with religion. It has to do with the fact that they will ultimately fail. From a religious perspective I really don’t care what the kingdoms of this world do. They are ultimately all going to burn up. My religious concern is for people and their souls.

If I were to ask “What Would Jesus Do” in regard to debating politics, then I would be silent about it like he was. It was a subject he almost completely avoided. His concern was with the Kingdom of Heaven and providing the way for mankind to get there.

But the Bible makes it clear that Christians are to be good citizens. And so I see nothing wrong with being involved and trying to influence our communities and country for good. But I suppose I should be careful to not allow that to become a distraction.

Liberal Christians view this differently. They follow a social gospel. Their religion is their good works. They and their secular counterparts want to use government to affect social change. They want to create heaven on earth, as Obama says, by using the power of the almighty government. I prefer relying on the power of Almighty God instead.

Report comment to moderator

In this country, all public resources taken by government proceed through a secular filter. It is appropriate for Christians to wish that this filter be minimized and the size and influence of government be restrained.

Christians should be neither neutral nor silent regarding political or cultural issues. We are obliged to express our conscience and obliged to have that conscience formed by the Word of God.

Report comment to moderator

Jesus is not a Republican, nor a Democrat. He’s not even an American.

He had one reason for living: to glorify God.

Report comment to moderator

“By bringing policy disputes into the faith arena, we bolster the notion that Christianity is just a bunch of self-interested talkers using the Bible to get what they want.

Here is the problem. Many Christians have a problem separating church and state. They look at their faith holistically and think that the kingdom of this world somehow should foreshadow the heavenly one.

Whether one’s politics is left or right or from outer space, it has nothing to do with the gospel or the mission of the church. One cannot use Christianity to justify any political party.

The American forefathers, strongly influenced by the Judeo-Christian ethic chose a government which governs least as best. I concur. The smaller the government the less corrupt. And the better it is for free expression of religious belief. And the freer the speech, the more likely that truth will be heard.

But politics has nothing to do with the Kingdom of Heaven. Obama and Carter believe otherwise. As for Coulter, she is an entertainer who sometimes brings up good points. To make more of it than that is to miss the point.

Report comment to moderator