Christians In A Political World

I am as guilty and probably more than most when it comes to the subject of Christians and their wrongful involvement in the political system!

I, in my search for knowledge about the early Christians and how they dealt with the politics of their time have come to the realization that … they just didn’t involve themselves!

They, as the bible and Jesus commanded would “Render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s and unto God what is God’s”
(Unless man’s law conflicts with God’s law, we should abide)

They didn’t vote or hold pep rallies for their favorite candidate and they didn’t debate one side of the political aisle or the other.

They preached the Kingdom of God.

I don’t wish to get into a bible quoting debate here … I would just like to know everyone’s thoughts on the subject.

A question: If, as Jesus said that Satan is the ruler of this world and that he (Jesus) and his Apostles were no part of this world … Why would Christians involve themselves in politics and elections?

Since Satan will continue to be the ruler of this world and it’s political system (until Jesus’s Kingdom comes into rule) … doesn’t it make sense that whomever you vote into office … that person will still be “In the world” and still be under the rule of Satan?

In other words … regardless of who is in office, he is still a subject of Satan’s world.
(Just look at who rules the ‘free’ world right now!)

Isn’t spreading the message of God’s coming Kingdom Rule what Christians should be doing and Not worrying/involving themselves in the political system/world?

As an aside … God has allowed Satan dominion over all the Kingdoms for now and this is where I believe many Christians are confused on exactly Why their voting actually means … nada!

Okay … skewer me.:banana:

I wrote a blog piece on this subject that is a summary of a larger piece I have been working on;

What Romans 13 Should Mean For The Church In America - Member Blogs - Conservative Republican Discussion Forums

Be prepared though, I disagree completely with your position on this and lay 100 percent of the blame for Americas fall on the Christian Church in general due to selfish greed.


If Christians didn’t become involved in politics, the US would never have been formed, blacks would STILL be slaves in most of the world and, if any of our ancestors had even bothered to come to the new world, we’d still be subject to the “divine right” of kings and queens.


Our constitution makes us (Christians included), THE GOVERNMENT!!
Therefore, IMHO, we are bound to be involved, not just MAY be involved.
Again, IMHO, a major problem today is that we were NOT very involved as it was deemed “un-spiritual” for a Christian to be involve in politics.
We are now reaping the results of that monumentally stupid and un-biblical decision.
99% (maybe more) of past civilizations had no citizen input into their government, while our civilization, at least “used to be”, a government of/by/for the people; meaning we decided, not unelected bureaucrats! :angry26:


The people had no say in politics in the times in which the Bible was written. We do. And, as others have said, if it weren’t for Christians getting involved in politics, our country would never have been formed.

In fact, Jesus was “getting involved in politics” when He made the “render unto Caesar” statement.


Should Christians be involved in politics?

“Politics” is policy and policy is nothing more and nothing less that what we:



“do not do.”

To say that Christians ought not to be involved in politics is the identical same
thing as saying that Christians ought not to have a say in what we:



do not do.

Its irrational to hold that Christians, some 77% of America, ought not to have
a say in what we do or do not do here in America.

2012 Gallop
In U.S., 77% Identify as Christian

Then this:

The word “politics” has been impregnated with meaning that is NOT in the definition of the word politics,
for example when you say “involved in politics” many people [probably millions] automatically give the
word “politics” the connotations of ** “back-stabbing” ** and ** “telling deliberate lies.” ** Therefore the original
pragmatically important [and harmless] question is subtly and incorrectly “twisted” into the following question:

Should Christians be involved in back-stabbing and telling deliberate lies?
[Obviously not.]

But again, that’s a totally different question than “Should Christians be involved in politics?”

1 Like

Many excellent points over there in your blog piece, I just went over there and re-read it again.


Christians couldn’t vote in the 1st century.

Rome was bossed by one of the Caesar’s and the Roman Senate
and the Christians had no vote in appointing who would be Caesar
or who would serve in the Roman Senate. In fact the rank & file
Roman citizens actually had no real “say” in it either.

Senators in the first century AD held much less power than their predecessors, although
the Senate still had the right to confer the title of emperor.

This alone ensured that the Senate and its members remained relevant and important.

The Roman Senate started life as an advisory council, **filled entirely with patricians. **
In the last two centuries of the republic, however, it had become much more powerful
and a major player in politics and government.

Many senators had been killed in the civil war that brought Julius Caesar to power in
46 BC: as a result, the Senate was looking a little empty. Caesar increased the number
of senators from around 600 to 900. This changed the membership of the Senate
considerably: many of the new faces were Equestrians or came from Italian towns –
some even came from Gaul.

This increase in the number of senators soon reversed itself and, during the first
century, the Senate consisted of 600 men.** Most were either sons of senators, or
were elected quaestors (junior magistrates). **

**Climbing the ladder **

Only Roman citizens aged 25 or over, with both military and administrative experience,
could become quaestors, the lowest rung on the government ladder. ** Potential
candidates were nominated by the emperor and the elections
were merely a formality. **

The Roman Empire: in the First Century. The Roman Empire. Social Order. Senators | PBS

Now if this: . . . .
** “Potential candidates were nominated by the emperor and the elections were merely a formality.” **
. . . is true, then the 1st c. Roman Caesar and the 1st c. Roman Senate has no counterpart with the 21st century American Democratic Republic.

What do I mean by “has no counterpart”? I mean they are not the same thing and are not comparable.

The 1st century “Caesar” is NOT the 21st c. American Democratic Republic just because a lot of 21st c.
Christians ASSUME the two are the same and quote “Render unto Caesar” and incorrectly proceed to
apply that verse to the 21st c. American Government.

Let me be even more specific: The Lord Christ in the New Testament did NOT teach 21st c. Christians
that they are to “Render unto the American Democratic Republic that which is the American Democratic
Republic’s and unto God that which is God’s.” Why not?

Because again the 1st c. Caesar and the 21st c. American Democratic Republic are totally different and
therefore not comparable. And because in fact the Sovereign God has made the American people to
"be Caesar" via elections. [See RET’s blog at the link. I think his major point is irrefutable.]
What Romans 13 Should Mean For The Church In America - Member Blogs - Conservative
Republican Discussion Forums

It is probably true that the American electorate, in their present befuddled and mesmerized condition, are NOT
going to exercise their “Caesar-hood”, [half the country don’t even bother to vote] but it is at least “there for
them” awaiting a time when they “sober up” or are “sobered up” by some physically and economically catastrophic
historical events. Remember, we do NOT have to choose between:

(1) The total destruction of America . . . .


(2) . . . . A prolonged visit to the woodshed where let us say: History takes a large 2 X 4 and repeatedly slams it
into their pocketbooks and flesh for (say) 15 long years and in the process teaches the presently mesmerized
American electorate “to elect better men.”

When contemplating a choice between #1 and #2 up there, I think its a safe bet to go with #2

But I don’t predict either one. Severity may not be the method the Sovereign God uses to improve
America. Perhaps we will have a huge spiritual revival within American Christendom, not only among
existing Christians, but many new converts to the Christian faith as well. I hope this is the method
that will be used. Sustained severity within a nation always produces some bad results along with
whatever good results the nation gets from a prolonged “visit to the woodshed.”


1 Like

One of the more brutal debates on this issue arose during the reformation. Luther had argued that a true Christian community would have no need for government authority, because there can be no superiors among perfect equals. Some Anabaptist sects ran with this, and decided to form “Christian communities” that would stand apart from the political structures in the worldly kingdom. But in doing so, they neglected Luther’s additional point: that even if Christians don’t need government, they will still take part in and uphold government in order to fulfill the command to love one’s neighbor. Non-Christians are a reality, Luther reasoned, and will always be a threat to commit violence. A true Christian, therefore, will seek to maintain government as the best means of keeping one’s fellows safe from harm.

1 Like

Great point.

J. also its very good to “see you” again :smile:. I hope you have been doing super great in all departments.

You too Jack. Good to see you still fighting the good fight.


Yeah I’m still plugging away.

J, try not to stay gone so long :smile:, at least drop in more often and say Hi! and make at least one or two posts sharing your
current insights with the “old gang.” I know you’re still reading & writing & thinking, and are going to have at least some
fresh insights, now and then, about something that’s interesting and important.

I note the world appears to be getting nuttier and funnier as 2014 goes on . . . . that gang in D.C. never disappoints, they keeps
me laughing semi-hysterically these days ~ like excited monkeys in a zoo they’re entertaining and impossible not to watch.

My wife thinks most of 'em are “flipping coins” to determine what to do next on major political issues … lol … maybe they are?

Re the idea that Satan is ruler of this world: I hold the position that Satan is NOT now the ruler of this world,
and here are a few of several reasons why I hold this position:

The crucial New Testament passage is John 12:27-33

The crucial phrase within this crucial passage is “now the prince of this world will be driven out.”

Please take note of the these vital all-important words and phrases:

(1) “now”

(2) “Now is the time for judgment on this world”

(3) “driven out”

• When is this taking place? Answer: “… now …” v. 31
• What is taking place? Answer: A “judgment on this world” v.31 [Satan and evil are being judged here]
• What else is taking place? Answer: a driving out is taking place ["… will be driven out …" v.31]
• Who is being driven out? Answer: “… the prince of this world …” [Satan] v.31
• How is he being driven out? Answer: By the death of the Lord Jesus on the cross [being announced right here in this passage v.27 and v.32 and v. 33]

Based upon John 12:27-33 [and other passages too] we may confidently say that Satan is NOT any longer the prince of this world,
but has “… now …” been “… driven out …”

Jesus Predicts His Death:

27 “Now my soul is troubled, and what shall I say? ‘Father, save me from this hour’? No, it was for this very reason I came to this hour. 28 Father, glorify your name!”

Then a voice came from heaven, “I have glorified it, and will glorify it again.” 29 The crowd that was there and heard it said it had thundered; others said an angel had spoken to him.

30 Jesus said, “This voice was for your benefit, not mine. 31 Now is the time for judgment on this world; now the prince of this world will be driven out. 32 And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself.” 33 He said this to show the kind of death he was going to die.
John 12:27-33

I interpret John 12:27-33 to specifically make the point that when the Lord Christ died on the cross He by that Act, and at that time, voided and reversed
Satan as “prince of the world.”

I did not say that Satan no longer has the power to lead humans astray, I only said that Satan is not now any longer the “prince [or ruler] of this world”

What about what Satan said in Luke 4:5-7

5 The devil led him up to a high place and showed him in an instant all the kingdoms of the world. 6 And he said to him, “I will give you all their authority and splendor; it has been given to me, and I can give it to anyone I want to. 7 If you worship me, it will all be yours.”__Satan

(1) My main reply to Luke chapter 4 is that this was BEFORE the death of the Lord Christ on the cross. Remember in John 12:27-33 up there, it was the death of the Lord Jesus
on the cross that was the POWER that reversed and voided Satan as “prince of this world.”

(2) Another thing that could be said is that Satan was lying in Luke 4: 5-7 [Jesus said Satan was the “father of lies” so Satan could have been lying.]

But let us assume for argument’s sake that Satan was telling the truth in Luke 4:5-7. If he was telling the truth, then I would point out that Luke 4 takes place at the very beginning of the earthly ministry of the Lord Jesus and again way BEFORE His death on the cross, and so on this view Satan WAS telling the truth when he said all the authority and splendor of the earth “has been given to me”, but again Satan lost ALL OF THAT in John 12:27-33 by the Act of Jesus death on the cross and later resurrection from the dead.

Conclusion: Satan is NOT now the ruler of this world.

Who is the ruler of this present world? Answer: The Lord Christ is NOW the ruler of this world.

"Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven ** and on earth ** has been [past tense] given to me."
Mathew 28:18

In other words, its a done deal. The Lord Christ NOW has ALL authority both in Heaven AND ON EARTH.

[Satan lost his power as “prince of this world” when the Lord Christ was crucified and resurrected from the dead.]

Btw, even back when Satan was the “prince of this world” he had to ask permission from God to do what he did to Job, and Satan had
to ask permission to “sift” Peter.

See post 13 in Arguments For Hope here:


Naw, they’d be too scared the coin would fall the “wrong” way.

… lol … I hear ya . . . . and I’ll Amen ye :smile:

. . . continued from post 13 above . . .


John 12:30-33 clearly teaches that Satan was dethroned as “the prince of this world” by the
power of the Crucifixion and Resurrection of the Lord Jesus [see post 13 above].

• I used the edit to add some point to the exegesis of John 12:30-33 in post 13 above.

• Also see post 13 in another thread here:

• Indeed see that entire thread if you have any interest in :smile:

• I boldly claim that the realization of Christ’s Great Commission is the one and only hope to fix this mess down
here on Earth, both in America and throughout the world. I note that anyone that’s still charmed and fascinated
with secular political solutions would NOT be interested in the Arguments For Hope thread.


Satan was dethroned as the “prince of this world” and the Lord Christ was enthroned as the Prince Of This World via His
obedience unto death on the cross where He was given a name above every name and is now seated at the right hand
of God [the place of absolute power and authority.]

"Then Jesus came to them and said, “** All authority ** in heaven ** and on earth ** has been [past tense] given to me."
Mathew 28:18

In other words, its a done deal. The Lord Christ NOW has ALL authority both in Heaven AND ON EARTH.
Satan lost his power as “prince of this world” when the Lord Christ was crucified and resurrected from
the dead.

New arguments:

Ephesians 1:18-23

[SIZE=3]18 I pray that the eyes of your heart may be enlightened in order that you may know the hope to which he has called you, the riches of his glorious inheritance in his holy people, 19 and his incomparably great power for us who believe. That power is the same as the mighty strength 20 he exerted when he raised Christ from the dead and seated him at his right hand in the heavenly realms, 21 far above all rule and authority, power and dominion, and every name that is invoked, not only in the present age but also in the one to come. 22 And God placed all things under his feet and appointed him to be head over everything for the church, 23 which is his body, the fullness of him who fills everything in every way.

Here are the important phrases from Ephesians 1:18-23 that clearly say that when God raised
Christ from the dead that THEREAFTER the following was the reality, namely that Satan was no
longer the “prince of this world” but instead the Lord Christ was all that is listed below: [My
commentary is in blue ink]

“the same as the mighty strength he exerted when he raised Christ from the dead and” [the Crucifixion and Resurrection was the foundation of all that follows below]

“seated him at his right hand in the heavenly realms” [this is the place of absolute power and absolute authority … see again Matthew 28:18 “Then Jesus said … All authority in Heaven and on Earth has been given to me.”]

“far above all rule and authority, power and dominion, and every name that is invoked” [Christ and His absolute power and absolute authority is far above any “name that can be invoked” and that most certainly includes the name of now dethroned Satan]

“not only in the present age” [this phrase 100%-totally removes any doubt about the when of Christ’s absolute power and absolute authority. It is inarguably right NOW]

• **“And God placed all things under his feet and appointed him to be head over everything” **[Its clear as a bell: Christ right NOW is “head over everything” and that most certainly includes Satan]

• **“him [Christ] who fills everything in every way” **[A great statement at the end of a great and magnificent New Testament passage.][/SIZE]


♫ ♪ ♫ ♪

I Cor. 15:24-28

24 Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power. 25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. 26 The last enemy to be destroyed is death. 27 For he “has put everything under his feet.”[c] Now when it says that “everything” has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ. 28 When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all.


Great stuff Jack, I would also add that Satan was never the “Ruler” or “Prince” of anything by his own volition, He was given the authority to mess with Job for awhile and he has been given varying amounts of authority to torment the earthly realm as well but he has been “given” nothing in the absolute sense.

This world has always been under the ultimate authority of the God who created it, the lesser beings that have been awarded the Liberty to control various aspects of it for various times all do so at the will and pleasure of the Living God who serves only his own agenda.

  • Thanks

  • Exactly! Nailed it 100%.


My understanding plays out thusly, Jesus, in biblical times, lived in a Theocracy (Israel/Judah) that was under the thumb of a Roman Dictatorship. Jesus was political as he argued and warned against the Priests, Pharisees and Sadducees, the leaders. As for the Romans, Pilate summed it up in the Gospel of John (also see Mark and Luke) saying, “I find no guilt in him [Jesus]”. Herod Antipas, the Tetrarch of Galilee likewise found no guilt of treason. So it was only the Theocracy that placed guilt upon Him as He threatened their power. Granted, their power was more spiritual in nature, as Theocracies go, but Jesus threatened it by His preaching, which to them was a form of radical civil disobedience in it’s day, tho they called it blaspheme, etc.

Does paying taxes, “Render unto Caesar…” imply that we are already involved in the political process by funding govmt.?

Helpful points ↑

When we stop and really think about it, its impossible not to “be political” if we say or do anything that could influence “policy” which is a word
that refers to what “we do” or “do not do.”

Does paying taxes, “Render unto Caesar…” imply that we are already involved in the political process by funding govmt.?

I would say yes it does.