pleasemm, keep your religion to yourself.
I know you are saved and I'm a foul sinner, but lighten up!
we are not, as many on the right would have it, a Christian nation.
these rest of us suffer through months of inescapable Christmas frenzy every year, underscoring we are really only tolerated guests in our own land.
stop trying to push your ancient moralities and religious beliefs on everyone else: if you don't believe in abortion, don't have one (even better, avoid needing one). but leave the rest of us out of it. you act like it's your ball and bat and so everyone has to play by your rules.
imagine if instead of your sacramental grape juice, you were forced by a stranger in feathers to eat peyote. how would you feel, other than nauseous?
and please, give us all a break with the evangelists and Christian right. we recognize holy rollers and conmen when we see them, even if we have not been washed in he blood of the lamb.
61
In the Republican Bible (and only in the Republican Bible), Jesus apparently says “All for me, and none for thee.” This is well accepted by the party of Trump and earnestly followed by his acolytes.
52
People who attend churches that enjoy tax-emptions while preaching a gospel of wealth; while demonizing gays, Muslims and feminists (read...uppity women); while insuring that segregation remains in place in schools, neighborhoods & their own tabernacles; while stridently opposing abortion--and stridently supporting the death penalty; while protecting their subsidies (Social Security, Medicare) but not the subsidies of others (Medicaid, food stamps) are not Christians.
They are "Christians." They may not know it, but we do.
52
That what America needs is a journalist telling them why theyre beliefs are misguided.
Seriously. You should write a story on the new "Anti-Christs" and why they are all registered Democrat. You're obviously qualified to write about both.
2
This all works for me until I think of abortion. Abortion is clearly divided according to party. It’s a life and death situation, so there should be no excuse for supporting the party that advocates for abortion, over the party that wants to end it. On this, I strongly agree that NOT doing anything is doing something- which is helping maintain the status quo of babies being killed in the womb. What’s more important than life? Christians should be on the side of life first. Then, if the ONLY party on the side of life has problems in other areas- work to change those. But- don’t support the anti-life party.
9
If you are a Christian and believe in the teachings of the bible then surely you believe in the devil. I am not a Christian. Many evangelicals are good and decent people that I often disagree with. I cannot for the life of me understand how they can corrupt their faith and support a man like Trump. How can any Christian disregard his attacks on immigrants, other religions, women and common decency. Christians believes in the devil and would not agree with being tempted by the devil. I am not calling Trump the devil but I am saying he is not a good man. Giving up your morality for a chance of over turning Roe v Wade still means you are giving up a piece of your morality. Morality for sale isn't true morality. So evangelicals please look at what you are saying and who you are supporting. This country needs people of all, or no faith to stand up for decency and more civility. For the evangelicals supporting Trump, I call you not evangelicals but evilgelicals.
88
It seems to me that most Christians approach ideas tenet-by-tenet, plank-by-plank, drawing from a variety of perspectives and parties, in both religion and politics, regardless of what the 'official' statements or positions of the party (or denomination) might be.
While Jesus did not use politics to advance his agenda, Reformed and Presbyterian Theology (which Tim Keller believes) teaches he used great spiritual power to achieve his purpose in coming into the world through death on a cross (e.g., Col. 2:13-15; Heb. 2:14-15), and that God does the same when bringing people to faith in His Son (e.g., 2 Cor. 4:6).
3
Jesus healed the sick, fed the hungry, and welcomed the lowest tiers of society into his flock. His teaching on the eye-of-the-needle passage suggests that the rich might not be getting it right. He told us to welcome immigrants. Yes, marriage for procreation is an early christian value. Any religion that did not promote large families was outcompeted by those who did, hence that value is less spiritual and more practical. Me, I am always dismayed when the so-called Christians allow one issue - abortion - to dominate their political party and fail on all of the other teachings of Christ.
37
Well, religions are illusions anyway. If you are wired that way then to believe other things that have no basis in reality should be really easy. Freud thought religions are wish fulfillment for the all-knowing father. Unfortunately, evangelicals have chosen Trump as their always right father. No questioning of that allowed.
16
I’m a proLife Christian who’s very concerned about the Civil Rights of unborn children. I say this both as a believer and as a citizen.
Preborn lives matter.
14
I thought the headline and opening paragraphs were very commendable. The author is correct that neither major political party can be considered Christian.
But as I read on one could perceive that the details came from one whose opinion is quite different from my deep spiritual understanding of Christian morality. The usual lay political issues were well covered, but the deep Christian values as deemed important for the first several centuries of Christianity were absent. Take abortion, for example. From the first decades of the Church abortion was soundly condemned, as it was even by the Jews preceding Christ. Also, Christ never called on the Roman government to help the poor. Judah and Israel did as well as the Roman Empire decades after the Edict of Milan, but they were both Theocracies which had no semblance to the USA.
People should participate in government and be allowed to witness their faith in their service. This includes prayer....not forced prayer, but voluntary prayer without threats of arrest or lawsuits.
Deacon Paul Boboige
Coordinator, Pro-Life Office, Metropolitan Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
6
Since God's grace is given universally, to all, the requirement that to be "converted" (or saved) is to accept Christ is theologically unsound. Even more unsound is a requirement to belong to one political party, conservative of course. Since those parties tend to require absolute loyalty and acceptance of all of their policies and platforms, the possibilities for non-Christian behavior and hypocrisy, kind of like making a pact with the Devil. Several to many policies and actions of conservative parties and their leaders are non-Christian.
11
When it comes to God and government, the primary themes are justice, law, and order. US Civil law embodies justice administered without biases.
When it comes to Christian living, grace, mercy, and truth are the primary themes. Those who do this well live graciously on the outside and according to truth on the inside. Grace is manifested constantly. The truth inside manifests itself in personal choices, votes in elections, and rejoices in justice for all.
Those wishing exceptions in the law, are usually Democrats. Those wished adherence to the law, Republicans. The Democrats want to give to everyone according to their needs, Republicans want needs to be justified and financed fairly.
3
I disagree. Those who attend church regularly and practice their religion are most always conservative with jobs and have Republican Values. The opposite is true of way to many Democrats, sad to say. Yes, I’m a former democrat who “got” religion later in life about the time I became middle class!
1
Amen. It pains me that so many of our Evangelical brothers and sisters seem to be as doctrinal about being a Republican as they are about the necessity of immersion baptism to claim being saved. I disagree with both. I also lament my Catholic brothers and sisters who are one issue voters and don't take the whole demand of their (my) faith in considering the complexities of the voting options we must make to best fully align ourselves with the Gospel and with Catholic social teaching.
6
As one of many people commenting and many more reading, I encourage you to humbly get to know other people and listen to the reasons they think the way they do on different topics.
We have a lot of variety and complexity in our nation that can't be fully captured in internet comments. Learning about and understanding the beliefs of others with gentleness and respect is a great way to treat one another with the dignity we all desire.
Be well.
19
People play multiple roles. Our society has developed to include wider circles from large family groups, tribes, kingdoms, trade groups, democracies on and on. I'm not a Christian, but I really like this logic the author lays out. Why should we think only one way is the right way when humans have been creating a variety of rationalities over thousands of years. These differences are a source to draw on to help us solve social and political problems that occur. While religion has often been used to delineate differences, in its highest, loving, most just forms they are a format to help us live together as well. The success that the philosophy of separation of church and state should inform a similar idea of separation of church and political party. Other wise there is a "get in line and shut up" mentality that over rides the best that both our political system and religious beliefs may have to offer us.
7
Pastor Keller’s points made sense 25 years ago, but unfortunately fail to comprehend our current political system. Legislation succeeds or fails by getting the party you agree with most in power, in fact it is pointless to split your vote, it serves no useful purpose. The Democratic Party simply holds fewer positions that are biblical supported, and endorses more anti-Christian views than Republicans. Last, our puritan founders believed all of life, law and policy could be determined from God’s word. I am a Tim Keller fan, podcast subcriber and reader of his books, but I fear NY is clouding his political wisdom.
Be gentle as lambs and wise as serpents in politics.
5
@Paul Osbourn So, for instance, I'm sure you are aware that neither the Pilgrims, the Puritans, nor the Baptists of 17th and early 18th Century New England (nor those still in England at the time) believed marriage to be a sacrament, instead seeing it as strictly a civil matter. Yet, in the past few decades the issue of sacramental marriage had been a central concern for many, claiming that such a belief has always been held by all Christians. This is just one theological viewpoint about public policy that has changed over the centuries.
You fear Keller's "political wisdom" has been clouded by his time in NY. Perhaps yours has been clouded by Texas and the plethora of ministers there who some of us question might be false prophets--like those Christ warned about coming in His name at the end times.
42
Jesus was around long before the two party system and has survived past the reigns of many long live regimes. Hence Jesus belongs to neither but transcends both Democrats and Republicans.
While Jesus' kingdom is not of this world, nevertheless Christians are still in this world and they are part and parcel to implementing "Your kingdom come, your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven"(Luke 11:2; Matthew 6:9).
This in and of itself implies Christians should do what they can to be part of this process, even politically. What that process actually is, well, one can look to the past for some clues...
Six Surprising Ways Jesus Changed The World:
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-ortberg/six-surprising-ways-jesus_b_...
Quick summary:
--Value to children
--Humanitarian reform
--Forgiveness as a virtue
--Humility as a virtue
--Compassion for the sick leading to voluntary charitable institutions
--Education - love of learning
11
@SteamTime - For the record, that all existed in religious thought and teaching long before the Christian church. As my long-suffering mother was surprised to learn, Christianity isn't the first or only religion to have a dying and resurrecting god or God.
7
There is a quote in Islamic Sharia Law that describe all non-Muslims as pigs and apes. Mostly because that when the Prophet enter a Christian Church in the Holy Lands they all had two things in common. What laid in the streets could be found in the Church and that most of those of the faith could not read a Christian Bible. Something on the order of smelling like pigs and having an intelligent of a monkey.
Not too far removed from the current selection of Christians who while they bath they still smell and are just as illiterate as they were 1300 years ago
7
Evangelical christianity has become a political party and a not so very nice one. The venom spewed by the Talibangelical pastors is disgusting. Their unwavering support for morally bankrupt politicians shows their utter hypocrisy. If the alleged person known as Jesus finally showed up for his long awaited encore they would probably turn their back on him because he was a Jew with humanity.
36
Theresa, good for you! While the writer of this article suggests that every "good" Christian must be political, this is an unscriptural lie. Jesus never suggested that his followers become embroiled in politics. When the crowd desired to make him a king, he slipped away. God's Kingdom is no part of this world. So his followers must also be no part of this world. What then can a Christian do to make things better for his fellow Christian? He or she can develop the Christian new personality, becoming an example to others that strictly following God's direction is the only approved way to live. Most will ignore you. One or two may benefit from your example.
Can you resist the pressure of the world to mold you?
2
I wouldn't mind Christians being political if they actually bothered to follow the teachings of Christ instead apparently just following the dictates of money and power. How any actual Christian can stomach voting for a creature like Trump is beyond me.
40
I could call myself a lesbian African-American, but it doesn’t mean I AM one. Similar situations with these people who call themselves Christians. They aren’t what they say they are either.
11
It would appear that too many Christian "fundamentalists" read the letters of Paul and not the words of Jesus. Prey on others and pray for salvation.
Run with the hares and hunt with the hounds?
6
The author, Reverend Tim, sells his snake oil smoothly and expertly. You didn’t vote for this clownish unhinged administration, you voted for a higher authority.
4
Cast the money changers out of the temple/
And put the carpenter in
-Woody Guthrie
17
The Christian Faith, as built in Constantinople, was to be the 'Kingship over Kings' since, as God's Anointed, the Kings ruled, but as Representatives of God, the Church controlled public sentiment at ground level, and many of those kings found themselves on the wrong end of a Believer's Sword when they did things against The Church.
The Church was built Only as a control mechanism to keep the Roman Empire alive and well, under the guise of Higher Powers, they became THE Higher Powers themselves.
One only need look as far back as the Borgias to understand this.
5
Jesus said He brought the New Testament to replace the old. The Gospels state what we know about his beliefs. The Epistles represent people giving their personal interpretations.
Everything He said and did conformed with treating other people as you would like to be treated.
Everything He said about the Pharisees seems to match with todays's "Christian" leaders.
I would like to see the people using "faith" as an excuse to discriminate find anything in the Gospels to justify their deeds.
And as a raised Presbyterian I do not identify with the Evangelical belief that it is immoral to give others a helping hand! (see some prayer breakfasts.)
11
@SAlly Ann -
Your first sentence is absolutely wrong.
In the sermon on the mount, Jesus said, "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. " (Matthew 5;17-18 ESV)
Also note - Jesus did not bring us the Bible's New Testament. The books of the New Testament were written after Jesus left Earth and returned to Heaven.
Do not factually misrepresent the Bible.
6
Let’s be candid. We all know the Republican Party could well be renamed, without much internal opposition, as “The Christian Party.” That their version of Christianity is one that the biblical, if not historical, Jesus would disavow is immaterial. What is material is that The Christian Party implicitly claims divine sanction for their policies, thus making social and political discourse and compromise difficult, if not impossible.
If we are ever to restore a semblance of comity and cooperation in politics, The Republican Party, as we know it today, The Christian Party, must die. A new center-right conservative party could then contribute to our national dialogue.
17
To my perspective you have spoken like a true conservative, whereas many people identify as republican for religious reasons. I don’t think the Christian party and the Republican Party are going to divorce any time soon.
2
The problem in this country is that Christians here have given up their citizen’s duty to uphold the Constitution in favor of a myopic version of Biblical doctrine, centered around a single proposition that government support of a woman’s right to choose to have an abortion is unacceptable. In giving up on the complex and multiple mandates of the Bible (and the Constitution), Christian citizens, along with their conservative enablers, have distilled their political action down to essentially a single issue, which is now reaching its apotheosis in the Kavanaugh nomination. They have all come to believe that the single moral imperative of preventing abortion absolves them of responsibility to govern and abide by other, less salient imperatives, whether Biblical or Constitutional.
Democracy cannot function when citizens fail to engage in the broad spectrum of governance, and Christianity is diminished by its adherents’ willful ignoring of the broad spectrum of moral imperatives put forth in the Bible, so many of which could be addressed through judicious and compassionate government policies.
19
@T Bucklin -
I doubt if there are <i>any</i> Christians that meet your description of them. I am quite sure all Christians are interested in a great many issues. I would suggest that it is you being myopic, for you did not mention a single one of those "salient imperatives." You appear to single-mindedly oppose Christians and your opposition seems to be based on a single issue - abortion.
As for your democracy, I could care less about it. I am a citizen of a theocracy whose God and King is Jesus Christ. This democracy you speak of is just another earthly government that will come and go.
3
As a Christian I can not understand how anyone claiming to be a follower of Christ can align themselves with the Republican Party. The foundation of Christianity is forgiveness, acceptance, generosity, justice, compassion, love. When Jesus was asked how one could enter the kingdom of heaven he told the man to sell all his possessions and follow him. The man went away sad. He must have been a Republican. Jesus said it was easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. Does this sound like the prosperity gospel? I can’t think of one parable that is consistent with the platform of the right wing Republican Party that is in power at the moment. If Jesus were to appear at a senate confirmation hearing I believe the Republicans in power would be calling for his crucifixion. At the very least the self righteous right would be chanting “lock him up”
31
“Package-deal ethics” is an entertaining euphemism for the concept of morality itself. The only meaningful distinction between ethics, and morality, is that the latter is purported to be divinely ordained.
All the world’s a stage.
3
This piece really hit home. Both my wife and I have struggled mightily with this issue of Christianity and politics. The other day, on a whim, I searched for how many references to justice were in the Bible. While I didn’t get a real number, one source indicated “over 2,000”. The Biblical definition of justice is “making things right”. We can read many times that taking care of the poor, the disenfranchised, the prisoner, and the immigrant are hallmarks of faith in God, especially as brought to us through Jesus. Personally, I believe that all of us should strive to apply our beliefs in our daily lives, no matter our job or position. No matter what political party leanings we may have, we should view everything through the lens of our Christianity.
I tend to have conservative leanings, but personally attempt to apply that in the light of achieving justice in a manner consistent with my beliefs. For example, a government program to address homelessness by spending money up front, stabilizing and training people so as to create productive citizens, could result in less money spent over time. However, I’m not at all sure that many of our Christian friends would agree that that is conservative and worthy of a true Republican loyalist.
All to often, it is a struggle for us to determine whether or not we are fitting in with those around us. Hopefully we are not in a silo ourselves.
18
'The other day, on a whim, I searched for how many references to justice were in the Bible. While I didn’t get a real number, one source indicated “over 2,000”.'
The number of occurrences of "justice" is 130. (biblegateway.com, NIV)
'The Biblical definition of justice is “making things right”.'
That phrase is not in the NIV or the AKJV. What translation and verse is that definition from?
See, however: "The King is mighty, he loves justice— you have established equity;" (Psalm 99:4, NIV)
4
Thanks for sharing such a well articulated and truly Biblical view. Such a perspective sadly is missing from many pastors, congregations, and especially the political action groups they support. The tendency also to emphasize one or two “critical issues” (e.g. homosexuality as sin, abortion as evil for whatever reason) ignores much of the message of the Gospel: love your neighbor, love your enemies, help the poor, protect the weak, etc.. It also creates a public impression that Christians are self righteous and don’t care about others’ lives.
While I agree with your insinuation that neither of the two political parties’ platforms are totally aligned with Biblical teaching, and that believers can have different perspectives in the best approach to fulfilling God’s commands and basic principles, I do think there has been a major shift over the past forty or so years in our general political environment—moving further and further away from the support for social justice for the weak, oppressed, and poor, and more and more towards “personal responsibility”.
While many of my fellow believers have long supported one party based on their opposition to homosexuality and abortion primarily, and the notion of personal responsibility as well, they have been supporting the party whose policies have supported an unnecessary and devastating war and whose monetary policies have resulted in the widest gap in income inequality since the Gilded Age.
18
so,they are Republicans because they think it's their right to tell other people how to live - not to be gay, not to need an abortion?
they may be authoritarians, they may feel superior, but how are they thus Christian?
or is it all an excuse to hold power and remain proud of being selfish and stingy?
7
Mr. Keller ignores that fact that the early Christian Church did precisely what he says that Christians can't do: it preached the Gospel and left the Roman political establishment alone (or rather, it mostly left it alone and sometimes worked very hard to convince the Romans that Christians were loyal subjects of the Empire).
5
@Stephen Merritt -
TY Stephen. There is not a lot of truth being spoken in these comments. What you say is correct.
As Christians, we are not here to fix the world. We are here to tell people how they can escape from this world and its future judgment and become citizens of the Kingdom of God.
3
Religious bodies are human organizations, just like governments, corporations, clubs, families, groups, etc. As such they potentially embody any of the human virtues and vices that can be expressed collectively. Churches and congregations have participated in power structures and reinforced the repressive and cruel aspects of society (slavery, the Inquisition.) They have also successfully challenged power structures and forced societies to become better (the Reformation, anti-slavery, civil rights.)
Mr. Keller is simply asserting that the best of Christian belief no longer aligns with either party. It's a valid and useful point that can help Christians figure out how to navigate our current political polarity. I especially applaud his explanation and warnings about "package-deal ethics." As for churches getting involved in politics, every church, every congregation, every denomination has to make its own decision. The teachings of Jesus offer rather amazing moral guidelines for making the world more humane. Atheists would do well to confront these teachings and allow them to challenge and deepen their own ethical framework.
The power of the collective action of churches to make society and politics more caring of the poor, the vulnerable, the rejected and the imprisoned cannot be underestimated. Christian congregations need to identify and unite along the currents of agreement and faith running underneath their conservative and liberal confessions.
5
Perhaps being "Christian" is a state of mind and a set of behaviors a person acts upon consistently in life. It is how one treats oneself and others, with kindness, compassion, and acceptance. Personally I am inclined to question people who must first tell me they are "Christian" rather than simply let their Christian actions speak for themselves and take the time to recognize individuals who don't define themselves as Christians and have a different set of values can be remarkably so.
8
The IRS regulation prohibiting organizations that receive not-for-profit status, including religious ones, should be diligently enforced. Doing this would curb the endorsements from these organizations that we are seeing.
14
"So Christians are pushed toward two main options. One is to withdraw and try to be apolitical. The second is to assimilate and fully adopt one party’s whole package in order to have your place at the table. Neither of these options is valid."
There is a third option. There are more than two parties in the country today, and just as the Whigs eventually became irrelevant and vanished, so could the Democrats or the Republicans if sufficient people took to one of the alternatives. As a professed Christian, I find the Libertarian party most in accordance with my ideals. Others may find other parties in line with theirs.
However, while it is a long term strategy to build up a third party to a powerful force in the political world, Christianity takes the long term view of things and future gratification is in line with the concept of the return of Christ.
Reverend Egan, by using theological language, emphasizes the need to divorce religious institutions of every kind from the electoral process. Simply, the manipulation of religious rhetoric is rife, used by conservatives and liberals, and members of both major political parties -- an insult to the political system and to the religious world.
As I was reading the article, I thought about the IRS regulations that prohibit not-for-profit organizations, including religious institutions, from endorsing candidates for election, a protection.
Unfortunately, the regulation is upheld in the breach. Too many religious groups, many more than the Christian churches to which Reverend Egan referred, use their dogma to endorse the candidates of their choice.
5
Dear Dr. Keller, or brother Tim,
I have read some of your books from front to back and again and I probably have listened to 70% of all of your sermons on your tube. Here is my take on the charity theory:
1) Democrats believe in the charity by government.
2) Republicans believe in personal charity.
As a Christian, I feel like doing a combination of both would be most appropriate and biblical. Personal generosity can be achieved with or without government. But I accept the limitations of my personal sphere, that’s why I must vote democrats to set up a government system that helps the people beyond my reach.
No matter what people believe, I think democrats and republicans all do too little charity. Jesus says, love others like yourselves. My challenge for all Christians is, if your income is 200% above poverty level, will you sacrifice your comfort and give 50% of your income away? That, for me, is the definition of loving others as much as yourself. This 50% can be in form of taxation, this can be in form of tithing, this can also be in form of personal charity. If all Republican Christians and Democratic Christians do the same, I believe Christians on both political sides would agree with each other more.
Hope more people could test if God would pour His abundance on you!
5
I went to the UK in 1972 as a conservative, born-again evangelical Christian missionary. I married a British girl, stayed for nearly 20 years, and when I returned to the USA, I was shocked at how political evangelicals had become. Meanwhile, I had become a near-socialist, and all my "born-again" British friends pretty much voted Labour Party.
Notwithstanding that I became an atheist a few years ago at the age of 61, it's still starkly clear that American Christianity is in a class all by itself (well, maybe not if you include Uganda) in placing political conservatism way above the teachings of Jesus, in importance and status.
354
@Wesley Mahan
True about Americans Christians, but Jesus focused on unconditional, individual love, submission, and service. He said nothing about governments doing likewise—that would be impossible and result in a nation without laws or justice. He advised, respect the government and “render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's.”
A government establishes just laws and keeps them without respect to people.
5
As an evangelical Christian, I have been dismayed over the last two years to see my faith disgraced by leaders that I used to admire selling out to right wingers for political power. Thank you, Tim Keller, for being a voice in the wilderness speaking up for the truth!
369
Unfortunately the sell out began decades ago with Newt Gingrich and then the Tea Party.
13
@Alexandra Hamilton
It began earlier than that with Saint Ronnie and Lee Atwater.
3
@Amy Raffensperger How exactly are Christians "selling out" to right wingers? There are two main parties. Democrat policies that support abortion and that have made too many low income people dependent on government are antithetical to a Biblical world view. And they are becoming as a party increasingly hostile toward Christians and Christianity.
11
As a strong believer in the separation of Church and State, I believe that religion has no place in political discourse. I am sick and tired of so-called Christians and other faith-based groups. using their religious beliefs to influence public policy. You want to pray. Fine. Go to church. You want to live your life in accordance with some religious belief. Fine. Do it in the privacy of your home. But, do not use your religious belief to argue that your right to free speech is infringed upon when you are asked to bake a cake for a same sex couple, provide birth control under your company's health insurance plan, deny science, etc. In short, do not use your religious beliefs to deny my right to live as I see fit. To influence public policy which denies millions of women, minorities, and children, access to health care, abortion, voting rights, civil rights. I am simply fed up with the hypocrisy to the so-called religious people in this country preaching to the rest of us who simply want to live our lives freely and openly without the burden of dealing with someone's else's gods foisted upon us.
576
@Rachel: you have just laid out a whole raft of your beliefs of how you think things should be and it is every bit as much a declaration of your beliefs that you think should be imposed on others. I don’t disagree with all of them, but you need to see that you are doing the same as you condemn in others.
58
@Rachel Bird
I hope you realize the irony in your statements. You are essentially saying that you want people to live freely, just not religious people. Their religious views are not allowed to influence how they run their businesses. No one is forcing anyone to buy cakes from those shops or work at those businesses, so why can’t they live under their own religious beliefs? You want a free and open place to live, but why not for religious people also? I believe a free and democratic society functions best when all people are allowed to make their life decisions, business or otherwise, according to their own worldview.
31
@Rachel Bird If religion has no place in political discourse, why should any other self-identifying characteristic hold any place: gender, age, economic status, etcetera? While this is a familiar trope, it is disingenuous, simply bias by another name.
36
Good thoughts from Mr Keller on the social mission of the Christian faith and different paths to accomplish it. Government is neither the sole answer or sole problem, nor is the private sector or charities. Each plays a role and the balance is important.
But what concerns me more is that fundamentalist Christian ideology promotes a remarkably ignorant view of the planet, whose declining living conditions are likely to overwhelm the significance of any shorter term social mission.
When you believe that the Earth is only 6,000 years old, resources are to be exploited and the Second Coming of Jesus makes a sustainable future unimportant, your politics are a problem for the rest of us.
It is possible to have faith in the collective spirit of humanity to better understand our world and overcome the greatest of obstacles and suffering without also subscribing to end time ideology. But when you believe there is only one way and one answer, you are poisoning that collective spirit.
496
@Look Ahead
Fundamentalists are to Christianity as Hedonists are to Liberalism.
I am a conservationist who happens to believe that we won’t cool the planet by buying a Tesla and screaming at Baptists.
Commerce and trade lifted a billion people from poverty during the past 50 years. We can either help find more sustainable practices or start wringing our hands about population control and birth rates.
The hysteria of the climate change activists is doing less than the innovation of our finest entrepreneurs. Calling Christians your enemy crystallizes why Keller wrote this column.
No more sound bites.
16
@Look Ahead What a colossal bunch of nonsense. I believe in and love Jesus Christ, I believe the Bible; I do NOT believe "resources are to be exploited and the Second Coming of Jesus makes a sustainable future unimportant". What never ceases to amaze me is people who don't share your beliefs telling you what your beliefs mean. I don't know much about the Muslim faith and I surely wouldn't profess to make any sweeping judgments about it.
And your last line sounds good, but it has no meaning. One way and one answer to what? I believe Jesus can help us overcome our personal issues, be it illness, hatred, addiction, judgment, and I believe in helping others both with my time, my resources, and my prayers. Jesus is the one way and the one answer FOR ME, but I do understand that what is right for me is not right for others. To each his own. (Which is also why, though I believe abortion to be a sin, I don't believe my religious belief should be government policy).
Please stop making negative assumptions about people because they believe something you clearly know very little about.
13
@MR
My comment, which you described as "a collosal bunch of nonsense" was about the future devastating impact of climate change on all life.
While you described yourself as pro-life, you ignored my central point about the future of our Earthly home and its inhabitants.
(BTW, I was confirmed in a very conservative Christian denomination, requiring many years of Bible study. We raised our own children in a faith whose core principles include the interdependent web of life, which has influenced their career choices.)
5
A Christian can evolve spiritually into an agnostic, a system of belief that acknowledges many ways to truth. One can be a Christian agnostic just as easily as an atheist agnostic, and in practice many people are.
I realize that Mr. Keller is writing from a Christian perspective, and that he might have felt strange advising his Christian readers to move on. However, at the moment, I’m driving a gasoline-powered car while I shop for an electric vehicle. I’m a participant in the old system, but I see its inadequacies and I’m moving towards something better. Thoughtful Christians can do the same.
7
@Global Charm, Agnosticism is simply denial of the scientific fact that no fickle personality of nature has ever been substantiated.
1
For nearly 250 years, Christians have found ways to participate in vast numbers in the brilliant, messy American political process that is built—in no small part—around the protection of religious expression. The inherent (God-given) right of each of us to live by and act on our own freely chosen moral code is foundational. But moral codes clash with other moral codes and our own desires. That’s why we set up this infuriating, compromising (at its best) political system. But you’re considering walking away? Generations who struggled and died for this deeply imperfect system (but, as Churchill quipped, one that is better than everything else that’s been tried) should view from the hereafter your moral weakness, your capitulation to your sense of entitlement, with such a feeling of betrayal.
2
@Patrick Carroll: If you want to enact a law, you need to justify it with purely secular rationale and reasoning. It is that simple.
1
Whatever. The oldest and largest Christian institution recently made
a deal with the mightiest authoritarian nation. This assures us
that Christians will continue to be flexible enough to live within
democracy as well. Good luck to them.
3
Any Christian who embraces the morality, humility and compassion of Jesus Christ is welcome in our Democratic Party.
And I’m an atheist.
23
@DoTheMath Does that include Christians who hold that the life of the unborn is equally as valuable as the life of the born?
@DoTheMath: One doesn't even know who is Christian when they follow the advice of Jesus to keep one's relationship with God strictly private.
4
@Steve Bolger How do you reconcile your statement with Mark 16:15 "And He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation."
or "Ephesians 4:11-12
And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of Christ"
2
I also believe that aligning oneself with a party can put one at great risk of us vs them mentality......to the point that our hearts begin to hate people. I went though this years back when I was rebublican in Bush yrs. I could feel such deep disqust in the "other" that it felt like hate. I came to a point that I asked myself " If this is of The Lord, then why am I not at peace inside?" I then prayed about it and put my focus on Jesus to show me. He did. I stepped away and discovered my blindness. I know some just switch sides but the danger in that is that the same spirit of us vs them is still present. I know that many find it so hard to look at themselves when a party is telling them that they are the morally right to follow...But if Jesus is not placed above the political sides, we get too caught up in the "other" and dismiss our own hearts by looking outward not inward.
156
They have become CINOs, Christian In Name Only, because they want to live by Old Testament isolation, laws and violence. Who did Jesus call the father of lies? And look at our president.
10
Maybe just maybe the Christians should look into their hate. Hate is all I see from them and racism as well. They hide behind some weird kind of Jesus idol who wears a Rolex and professes austerity while the Jesus substitute goes out and buys a Rolls.
10
@joeHall - ...and a private jet using the contributions of the widows' mite.
3
I will try again to post my comment.
From the article, “The Bible shows believers as holding important posts in pagan governments — think of Joseph and Daniel in the Old Testament.”
Keller’s assumption is that Joseph and Daniel were real people and not mythic characters, and that is the problem with mixing church/synagogue/mosque/temple with the state.
As the cliché goes, “Keep your religion out of my state, and I will keep my state out of your religion.”
14
Christians in the United States revealed themselves to be the ultimate phonies when they voted for Donald Trump. False religion!
13
Why should ANYBODY fit into a two-party system? The Red vs. Blue false dichotomy of American politics is stupid.
It's so bad that some Republican political ads have been reduced to just using politicians' names as political shorthand. "Vote for me. I'm basically the second coming of Trump, and that other guy has never insulted Nancy Pelosi even once in his life!"
5
The church and university of Bob Jones is not the church of Jesus Christ.
10
Christian is a private belief systems/cult ...take your pick. It is just like Islam and Sharia law. How about Prosperity Christians ...what the heck is that all about!! None of them promote morality, ethics and integrity.
Systems based on unassailable ancient texts (many that promote slavery and are anti-women) should just not be public. Certainly not tax-payer supported.
Good people exist everywhere. Be content. Be compassionate.
13
Mr. Keller, I hate to break it to you, but there’s no blank to be filled. “(Christians) need not only to believe in Jesus but also to become members of the (fill in the blank) Party”. The blank was filled in some 30 years ago. Christians are Republican, lock, stock and barrel. You write naively, as if the choice of party affiliation is yet to be made. Have you been asleep for the past few decades, ala Rip Van Winkle??? Not only have Christians become the Republican base, when there is a conflict between Republican dogma and Christ’s teachings, they’ve abandoned Christ.
14
@John Ranta
You're conflating (white) evangelicalism with Christianity. What you say is mostly true of the former, but most mainline denominations (Methodist, Episcopalian, PCUSA, etc.) are heavily liberal and have been for some time.
6
Religion divides us and always has. The GOP loves this and uses it to move their agenda forward. That those of faith ignore the obvious and embrace conservative policies that ignore the very things every religion advocates is laughable. It makes Christians look like idiots. Moreover, religious people who claim to be certain of their faith are arrogant in their claims since no one really knows if a supreme being exists or what she, he or it has planned or has not planned. Religion is control and control is government. This is not lost on Republicans who manipulate persons of faith for political empowerment.
13
@Robert Westwind: When "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" is nullified, the US will dissolve.
5
As clergy myself, Rev. Keller, please accept my comment as a colleague.
Your apparent unwillingness to recognize an established fact is bemusing: Christians are conservative Republicans.
Why do you not know this?
God is a male, evolution is a hoax, gays are sinners. female choice is blashemu, and capital punishment is God's will.
Republicans epitomize each of those and more, including the election of unrepentant womanizers.
When are you going to understand we are here to insure tax relief for the rich, removal of health care for the poor, enhancement of senior citizen poverty, and wars against allies, both militarily and economically.
Seriously. Rev. Keller. Why are you not better informed?
15
One of the most powerful political movements in this country - the Civil Rights Movement - was started by a southern Baptist pastor and eventually fueled by churches everywhere. Many social activists today are reluctant to link their beliefs to Christian faith. Keller is correct in showing that "the historical Christian positions on social issues don't match up with contemporary political alignments." It's really too bad. We need a Rev. ML King-type leader for the misaligned age we live in.
10
The "Render unto Caesar" remark also suggests that Jesus may have perceived that public spending adds to people's income, directly and indirectly. When government is optimized, this can mean that public spending adds enough to incomes to pay people's taxes.
2
The writer should have made it very clear he isn't talking about Christians at large. This missive is about White conservative Christians; looking at the photo and caption should be obvious.
1
Before we can have freedom of religion we need freedom from religion
8
Mr. Keller doesn't fully quote Jesus. The completely statement is "Love your neighbor as yourself". If you hate yourself (and many people do), then it's logical that you're allowed to hate other people. Therefore, the Bible clearly allows racism.
1
While Jesus was on earth in Palestine, the Jewish chief priests and religious leaders were in powerful positions and were concerned that Jesus would upset things in their dealings with the Romans. They were concerned that they might lose their high positions. So they wanted go get rid of Jesus.
Pope John XXIII once said that the Roman Church had sought political power down through the centuries and that political power had done much harm to the Church. Many cardinals, bishops, and priests have had comfortable positions "serving" the church down through the years.
At the present time many evangelical Christians are chasing political power in their support for The Con Don and right-wing republicans.
In the Gospels, Jesus is not interested in worldly power, military power, or money. He did say that the two great commandments were to 1) love God, and 2) to love thy neighbor.
For many Christians, religion is about being right - believing the right things, doing the right things, looking like the right thing. But Jesus said it is about loving God and loving your neighbor.
In the gospels, it also says that the road to hell is wide and full of people; the road to heaven is narrow but there are few people on it.
What I get from all this is that Christians should love God and our neighbor but don't expect to get stuck in heavy traffic while we are doing it or on the road to heaven. That seems to leave out political power.
4
@Aubrey: The tantrum in the temple probably wasn't about currency exchange. The fatted Pharisees feasted on the sacrificial animals they sold to desperate people on behalf of God.
1
@Steve Bolger In the Book of Samuel, the priest Eli falls out of favor because when people sacrificed cattle his two sons would take the choice parts of the animals for themselves.
As you mentioned the Pharisees, scribes, and money changers benefited greatly from their activities.
But the things that the sons of Eli and the Pharisees got were small change compared to what the modern television evangelists are getting. They are raking in millions and have private planes, mansions, etc. There are many others at the intersection of right-wing politics and right-wing religion who are profiting in a big way.
Thanks for your comment.
@Aubrey: Cable TV providers always include lots of preacher channels in their basic packages.
1
There are sincere Christians and then there are "Donald Trump Christians" such as Jerry Falwell, Jr. who believe:
1. God created mankind in his own image (that of a Caucasian male)
2. Lying, bullying and cheating are not sins when committed by Donald Trump
3. Religious and racial discrimination are perfectly acceptable when practiced BY Caucasian-Christians AGAINST non-Caucasian-Christians
4. In God's eyes, supporting Donald Trump is more important than following his teachings, so when the two conflict supporting Trump is ALWAYS the right answer
“I think every good Christian ought to kick [Jerry] Falwell right in the a-s.” – US Senator Barry Goldwater (Time Magazine, July 20 1981)
12
There is a cosmic law of consonance. It points to the entire universe and all that constitutes it. All is sacred. It includes our planet. It includes you and me. That law finds its truth in a destructive-constructive consonance. As Jesus told us at Nag Hammadi, it is either that or nothing. He said if we do not understand this, we will be deprived of even the little that he (we) has (have). In recent years, the materialist, secularist, sophist, modernist lifestyle of many Christians leaves them far away from finding it.
www.InquiryAbraham.com
2
@David Anderson: I find idolatry completely profane.
1
“What should the role of Christians in politics be?”
To stay out of other peoples’ bedrooms and wombs would be a good start.
19
First see: https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/03/why-white-evangelicals-aband...
then see: https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/what-you-should-know-about-th...
(the "prosperity gospel" is followed by many, many Evangelicals and includes Trump's personal "preacher"........)
1
How people who claim they have "values" allowed McConnell to put a lying con-man molester in the White House, and now another lying possible molester on the Supreme Court, will forever be a mystery to me.
And the gross rationalizing about "putting up" with these faults because they liked the things that could be done for them actually reinforces their lack of "values."
Democrats aren't perfect by any means, but the hypocrisy of Republicans knows no bounds.
14
Evangelical Christians do not fit into any system, unless it is their own, based on fundamentalism, ideology, and racist patriarchy.
They are a shrinking minority, and rightfully so.
9
There is a very simple reason that Evangelicals are so tightly aligned with Republicans, money.. They first think of their pocketbooks, and then think of the Lord. It is true you cannot serve God and mammon, so they choose to serve the mammon. Granted it looks good because of the abortion fig leaf they throw over it, but be not deceived...
8
Considering the enormous scandal of the catholic church, the so-called evangelicals voting for the seven deadly sins president, the greed of the tv preachers, and people who fly planes into buildings to honor some god's greatness, religion may finally be on it's last leg.
All religions were created by men to control people.
Superstition, delusion, and divisiveness have no place in the modern world.
5
Lots of types of Christians. You can't lump them into one group.
6
My neighbors are evangelicals. In everyday life they are kind and considerate in the extreme and seem to be living their faith. Yet when it comes to their political views, they seem ignorant in the extreme and espouse politicians who favor mean spirited policies such as attempting to take away health care coverage to large swaths of the population, tax cuts for the very rich and large corporations, increasing military spending to obscene levels, denying climate change and policies that make pollution and the advance of global Thearming even worse. Are they really that ignorant because they don’t seem that stupid. So what gives? How does Trump and his cronies fit in with a loving god who they purport to worship?
14
@LoveNOtwar, as a left-leaning follower of Jesus in an evangelical church, I resonate with your attempt to reconcile your neighbors' personal expressions of faith with their political ones. I have had (and continue to have) this same experience with fellow church members whom I know to be people who truly love God and their neighbors, but who post hateful articles on FB and vote for politicians whose character and policies I believe to be extremely un-Christian. I would suggest inviting your neighbors over and having an honest yet civil conversation about the perceived disparity. Our church home group did that after the election and I found the dialogue helpful. I still didn't agree with their choice or rationale, but it helped to truly listen to them and to have them genuinely listen to me. Also please know that there are white evangelicals who are not Republicans.
5
I never needed the bible to tell me thou shalt not steal and thou shalt not kill.
And the bible has polygamy.
The bible has slavery.
In the bible, they stone a woman to death for adultery.
6
Any Church and State collaboration is a toxic mix. This is a secular, not theocratic nation. We are free to worship any thing, god, etc. we like, and not subject to the rules of any religion. We will not be happy if it is forced on us, and probably religion won't in the long run. Thank goodness! This Christian nation needs to go back to church and stay there. Do as you wish. You do not belong to and have nothing to do with rule of law in this gov't. Go away and especially take the hypocritical evangelical's when you do.
2
“(Fill in the blank) party.” Um...that would be Republican. If you call yourself a Christian, like it or not, these days you’re part of the Republican mainstream. Christians can claim to love Jesus and live by his teachings but they cannot ignore that they have been co-opted, manipulated and used by the Republican movement in their never ending quest for power, control and wealth. That the author cited a story about a Christian going to Scotland and discovering Christian socialists completely proves my point. In the US - Christian means Republican.
4
The Bible provides guidance even in the face of change. Do your best to live a Christian life and leave the rest to God. Love your neighbor and trust that God will take care of your imperfections as well as his. Only God is just. Only He can judge.
It's simple, really: Our "Christians" who align with the wrong wing aren't, when actual Christians would practice a compassion and charity they'd never dream of much less care for.
Jesus, as presented to us in the Bible, lived a brief time here as a powerfully kind man, especially to those in most need. He veered into the nutty (the whole "King of the Jews" thing?), but rarely if ever into the vile and hateful.
And boy, if HE who threw the moneychanger tables was head of the CFPB! What a fine time we'd live in.
I whole heartedly agree that we must never let our politics dictate to our faith. You can be a good Christian and a Democrat, Republican, Green or Libertarian. All of them have strengths and flaws as does my party the American Solidarity Party but for me it comes the closest to my values. Let me know what you think of the platform www.solidarity-party.org/platform
1
Our culture is radically opposed to the concept of objective truth. It shouldn't surprise anyone that Christians are rejected from the political system of a culture that increasingly believes that all things are relative. The challenge is in how Christians respond. That Christ is Lord and Savior of all, should be evident in the response.
2
I’m 48. I never known an American Christianity that wasn’t hypocritically entwined with GOP, growing worse with each election cycle, defending pedophiles, philanderers, strong men and con men in its insatiable need for power and control over others.
6
The legitimate media should be more discerning when referring to the Christian Conservatives. You have the majority of Christians under various groups and each group has its denominations. The Christian Conservatives are a sub-sect of the Evangelicals. It is the Christian Conservatives, under political wannabes like the late Jerry Falwell, that are h..l bent on placing America under their thumb. Their prayers have been answered by the false prophet, Donald J. Trump, whose empty soul and mega ego will help them morph America into a Christian caliphate. Please, don't lump in God loving God fearing Christians with the Far Right sect of the Evangelicals. It's insulting to Christians.
3
"What should the role of Christians in politics be?"
Vote in elections. Just as I, a nonbeliever, do. If you have angst that you wish to label "religious," handle it in the community of your choosing but please keep it out of my face, and keep your sermons out of my newspaper.
1
@Naomi Fein Whose newspaper? A newspaper edited and published solely for you?
1
Jesus wouldn't recognize Christianity as it's practiced today.
He was a wandering teacher -- an itinerant, a homeless man -- who came into contact with a universal revelation of love among all human beings which he called "the kingdom of God." He particularized this concept for his own place and time in history as a universal fellowship of love and respect which was to transcended all other human thought and political structures.
He contrasted this God-sourced divine social reality of communitarianism with the dominant culture of political oppression which he called "the kingdom of this world," whose oppression is enforced by violence and threat of violence, and which also exudes violent "principalities and powers."
Everyone who has every been abused by the "principalities and powers" knows what they are and how they work. When a man is killed by police for selling loose cigarettes on a street corner and a banker who swindles millions with illegitimate loans pays no penalty you can be sure these principalities and powers exist. Where industrialists rake in billions because they inherited a monopolist business from their father, the principalities and powers exist. Where women are raped while their assailants rise to positions of cultural distinction, you can be sure the principalities and powers exist.
Jesus was killed because violent, powerful people were basically afraid to share the wealth and were threatened by his message of universal brother-sister-hood.
10
To be apolitical is to be political ?..
"not withhold help for your neighbor" are we to believe that means voting for leftist government bureaucracies caring for the poor? Or helping your neighbor with your own money/ efforts and not brag about it.
Voting in people who promise to do good and help the poor with other people's money..rings marxist ,certainly not Biblical.
Is the divide between liberals and conservatives in this country so vast that the man from Mississippi had to journey all the way to the Scottish Highlands to converse with a liberal? Amazing.
8
Most of the ills of the body politic can be traced to the voluptuous embrace of the Repubs to the "moral majority" back in the day. That their christianity was neither moral nor particularly religious, even, perhaps, anti - christian. has become ever more apparent. Perhaps there are some christians out there who adhere to something that jesus might have recognized, but they are essentially & practically silent. The very word 'religious' strikes most people dumb & acquiescent, how else to explain the extraordinary catholic sexual abuse program, its systematic coverup & lack of legal recourse for the victims & the appointment of conservative (what else) catholics to scotus where they will continue to tell the rest of us how to run our lives. Unfortunately.
6
To be religious, you are taught to believe in your particular religion's fairy tales against all evidence.
I prefer science, which encourages doubt and disbelief until the evidence is insurmountable.
6
The Christians can now join everyone else, ie. the Me To Movement, the Black Life's Matter Movement, and yes folks, the Tea Party Movement. What do these entities have in common you say ? They are all tired of being stepped on and disrespected and pitted against one another by the corporate owned government that supposedly serves our best interests. In most cases, probably does not serve any interest other than their own perpetuation. Dem or Rep. Clinton or Trump. Lib. or Cons., it doesn't matter folks; we all loose .
2
For the final question of his ("What's your drink of choice, Senator?") hearing, Brett Kavanaugh was asked by Kennedy of Louisiana, "Do you believe in God?"
Such a question puts a religious test on government service (in violation of Article VI, clause 3) and invites cynical hypocrisy. It should have no place in our civic life even if it were not expressly forbidden.
8
So this article is sown by someone who apparently has no idea what it means to be a Christian. Also it is full of the logical fallacy called "being the claim" As one example, sure racism is against God, but this article is written as though the party that does not exhibit racism is the one that does.
If a Christian does not very invoked in politics, you see what you see right now. ...you are leaving the decisions for this country in the hands of those who are against God.
Is every conservative a Christian? Absolutely not. However, it is very possible to be a Christian and subscribe to conservative platform.
On the other hand, anyone who subscribes to Christianity would be forced to leave the Democrat platform behind, or either recant their Christian beliefs.
Any group that assembles becomes a microcosm of society brought together for the interests of the individuals who either by necessity or choice must participate.
There is always a need to sacrifice a measure of anonymity as well as autonomy for the sake of a groups purposes and Christianity is no exception.
Her into lies Christians fundamental failing; Christ's teachings are in every way without fault for the individual who choses to grow and govern oneself through love and rigorous self examination but is useless in governing a group unless perverted by an inherent need for approval and to belong.
He chastened the judgement men find so very useful to the causes of men who seek power in the clergy and politics.
I willl conclude with a very sobering thought for all those that claim a moral high ground through association with the Machevellian politics of this generation and its otherism. If Christ isn't peddling HOPE, in something, anything, better than ourselves, then He has nothing to sell.
1
i have found in my life ,that those who harp on the most about their faiths or their complete lack of faith (and wish to ram it down other peoples throats ) tend to have the most to say and the least to do in relation to the simple principles of Christian living .
Back in the 60's and 70's I would imagine that the Catholics ,who mainly came from Ireland italy ,and Hispanics would have been more inclined towards the Democrats .Remember when JFK went for US President ,there was a lot of discontent because he was irish Catholic background and certainly the Democratic party in the late 19th early 20th century was strongly influenced by the Irish American clubs ,unions ,affiliations etc .
Looking through a number of present day Irish American politicians in the GOp ,I noted that many of them had changed their practising faith ie Catholic to what ever in order to appear more user friendly to their electorate ,I imagine ?
Irrespective of ones religious persuasion ,there is a greater likelihood that one will vote Republican as one becomes more financially well off ..So when you are young poor and struggling ,you are a natural democrat and then when you make some money and perhaps become more rigid in your thinking then GOP for me.com.
If Christ was to walk among us now ,I could imagine him meeting up with one of those Bible thumper sorts and he might ask what are you?
I am a devout Christian Sir ..and Jesus would say "and I am Jesus and you sir are no follower of mine" .
1
While I am Catholic by upbringing, I am more a simple christian than I am a Catholic, because I cannot attend church services every Sunday (transportation issues and life in a Baptist retirement community). However, I understand completely why there is separation and church and state articulated in our Constitution, and why this issue is so important to so many of us today. Over the course of human history, there have been horrendous, egregious abuses of secular power by religious leaders. There have been mass executions and mass suicides (Jim Jones "kool aid massacre"!!)(Jewish internment camps in Germany)(Moslem beheadings of Americans) perpetrated in the name of somebody's personal 'god'. Any kind of emotional / religious fervor spurred on by a religious leader can lead to dreadful consequences for the people who follow him. But by the same token, a social organization, or a system of controls/checks/balances endemic to a form of secular government can become oppressive, immoral and destructive to life, and to more than just human life. Balance is required - mental and social balance rising from reasoning, public debate, freedom to express opposing views, freedom to abstain from participation. Allowing our country to be taken over by any form of religious order to the detriment of these fundamental requirements would destroy our basic freedoms.
5
Tim Keller advocates "practical wisdom." Agree. My sense is that practical Christians lean Republican not because they embrace Trumpian Democracy, but because the 21st century Democrat Party acts like God is dead and that Christians like VP Pence have mental disorders. Misinterpreting the doctrine of separation of church and state, Democrats today turn their back on our nation's history of faith. George Washington said in 1779 to the Delaware Indian chiefs, "You do well to learn... the religion of Jesus Christ." Thomas Jefferson wrote to a friend in 1816, "I am a real Christian... a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus." Abe Lincoln in 1863 said, "We have forgotten God... Intoxicated with unbroken success, we have become too self-sufficient." Democrat Truman said the night of FDR's passing in 1945, "At this moment I have in my heart a prayer... I humbly pray to Almighty God in the words of King Solomon..." Democrat JFK said in 1961, "The guiding principle and prayer of this Nation has been, is now, and ever shall be, 'In God We Trust." Before the 21st century, practical Christians did not lean to one political party or the other. Christians did not leave the Democrat Party as much as the Democrat Party chose to move into the 21st century without the support of practical Christians.
I am definitely a Christen; however, NOT of the ilk of Trump's christians.
I thoroughly enjoyed this article. It encapsulates what I’ve thought for years.
However, it does make what I believe to be one false assertion. That one must be politically involved. It made this assertion in two places: when speaking about slavery & helping neighbors.
Staying quiet about slavery isn’t the same as supporting it, especially if one is praying against it. It’s simly putting effort and energy into different sources of hope. One is putting it in human influence, the other in God alone. While most of us would probably attempt both, there’s room in God’s Kingdom & will for people who only do one & not the other. One could also speak against it 1 on 1, but not publically demonstrate against it, and that would still be apolitical.
And with helping neighbors, one can do that on an individual level without government ever getting involved.
So it is entirely possible to be apolitical and still honor God.
In an age where the Party is the main motivator of political dialogue, and thus where the partisan divide is the dominant landmark shaping discourse, it is important that we strive to become individuals who are capable of being well-defined in our political ideas without relying on Party as political identifier. The cure for partisan division in politics is to reject partisanship as the basis of politics. For Christians, as well as adherents of other faiths and belief systems, I believe that this can be done by critically engaging with one’s faith before considering party allegiance. I much appreciate Keller’s article for pointing out how Christians can hold true to their faith in this time of strife, and do so in a way that helps the whole of the country overcome that strife.
1
Thank you Mr. Keller for your well thought-out writings. As you so elequently pointed out in your book "The Reason For God", when Christians view Christianity as a moral improvement program and not what the Bible teaches which is salvation by grace alone, they fall into the trap of attaching Christianity with a political (fill in the blank) party.
3
Great article. Because of various reasons, I have never voted in any election. This article is making me re-examine that decision.
1
Brother Keller,
You did an amazing job on this article! It is so true how you brought out about Daniel and Joseph participating in politics and allowing their moral standards and GOD given talents to be used to benefit the whole (not just the body of Christ).
Excellent article. Thank you for sharing this with the world.
Matthew
4
In my view, the more the political parties are based on ethical values, freedom and capacity of progressive transformation, a humanist and a philosophical one, the better Christians will dovetail with them. Christians we are maverick and ambitious to think beyond the more often than not narrow bounderies of political parties that broadly speaking in too many countries are lacking either in freedom of thought and ethics, demand dull and obedient followers and spread corruption and lies. The empire of veneer and apparence clash with Christian like for truth.
I have appreciated a lot this article of The New York Times for raising this crucial issue.
1
You say, '...the Bible shows', but, the Bible shows so many different things, including many that contradict ('eye for an eye' vs 'love your enemy'). I see Jesus' message as centered on love, non-materialism, giving, non-judgement. Wonderful and healing and basic, eternal wisdom. Stick with that.
For some reason the issues of abortion and guns are now the central players for 'Christians'. This is politics. The rich, who want and get the tax cuts for their income, homes, investments, political contributions, etc. are bankrolling the Republican party and acting as though they are the true 'Christians'. Such a fraud.
Yes, we must do our best to limit the number of unwanted pregnancies that lead to abortion. Education, good jobs and contraception have proven to be the best ways to do this. And, hunters need their guns, even law-abiding citizens in crime-ridden areas do, too. These issues are real. We must recognize this. But, Christians must recognize that climate change is already destroying so much and killing many. They must help us fight the concentration of wealth, income, power and property; which is the enemy of democracy and the love that Jesus preached of.
Help this world with love.
1
I believe Mr. Keller raises some very valid points. Perhaps in the strictest sense; politics and Christianity are irreconcilable. Most people I know have long put water in their wine. No political party can be in total alignment with any one particular Christian branch; as obviously there are so many deep divides within Christianity itself that there is no consensus of what Jesus would do. That said; it is ridiculous how the Evangelical churches have become little more than an arm of the Republican Party. Their conservative bent leaves no gap between their doctrine and politics. I can pretty much state Jesus would never approve of that! Many mainstream Christians I know have long ago realized that one has to pick the lesser of two evils in deciding who to support politically. The last thing I wish to state is something that cannot be debated theologically as far as this life long Catholic is concerned. Jesus ALWAYS sided with the poor in His teachings; and any political party that has turned their back on"the Least of Our Brothers" is NO CHRISTIAN in my opinion.
1
It is deeply unfortunate then that for non-Christians like myself looking at the role Christians play in my society, Christianity is tightly associated with white supremacism, racism, oppression of women, and destruction of the environment. I know something about the New Testament, but I don't see much trace of that compassionate spirit in our current environment. Since I am of the "don't tell me what you believe, show me what you do and I'll tell you what you believe" I have the impression that htose teachings are either ignored, or are not permitted to influence how Christians present themselves in wider society.
I think your call for a compassionate and grounded Chistianity in the public space is a delightful image, and one to be strongly wished for. It is, however, very much at odds with how those of us watching how your coreligionists conduct themselves perceive the current Church. I would think that the very idea that outsiders have roughly come to see your religion not even as an interest group wanting power, but pretty nigh on a hate group would give you profound cause for where your fellow Christians have gone so terribly wrong. What is happening that that perception is pervasive? I'd love to see some real soul searching and maybe a new reformation within Christianity so it can become the force for good it ought to be.
4
@Doug K Thank you for this comment. As a Christian I couldn't agree more. I am ashamed at what we have allowed ourselves to become.
Peace.
1
Americans of every background should take note that we just negotiated a nuclear agreement with a theocracy, we are trying to contend with a country whose refugees are running from a government and a caliphate, we trade and sell our debt to a country whose belief system sits atop the remnants of a fully discredited political model, and we are routinely attacked from without for our foreign imperialism and liberal social mores.
We get worked up easily when you step back and look at the alternatives.
3
"Nevertheless, while believers can register under a party affiliation and be active in politics, they should not identify the Christian church or faith with a political party as the only Christian one."
And if they do, all they need to realize is that the most Christian President in the lives of anyone over the age of 45 was the most Christian in their lifetimes.
Jimmy Carter was not a great President by any measure but without a doubt he was the most Christian and probably the nicest human being to hold that office in in history of our great nation.
He believed in his faith and wore it on his sleeve for all to see every day of his life.
Can we say the same for Ronald Reagan, Richard Nixon, JFK, Lyndon Johnson, HWBush, Clinton, Bush or Obama? I think not. They were and are Christian by their need to succeed.
If you are a true, Carter, Christian then you belong in the Blue column.
5
What we used to consider as "main stream" Christianity has abdicated it's role a long time ago. The non-denominational, the prosperity Gospel preaching, the Dominionists have taken over Christianity in America. They've created a cult that is antithetical to all that America was founded on. The Deists that were the founders would be appalled by the the preacher class of the Joel Osteens, Pat Robertsons, Franklin Graham or Creflo Dollar. They knew men like this, and they knew how dangerous they were. Now frightened and ignorant people, desperate for some anchor is the increasingly changing world cling to these "preachers" because they confirm their fears and biases. Traditional groups, fearing further defections avoid direct confrontations. Christianity, in the form it has mutated into, has become the single greatest threat this nation has faced since the Civil War.
5
First... Did Jesus preach charity, or "redistribution of wealth" by the state?
Christianity does not fit into a political party. But when one party primarily chooses to fight for policies that are absolutely unchristian then it is realistic pragmatism that leads Christians to support the party that in many cases has policies which are much more aligned with the Bible's teachings.
Which political party has spent the last two weeks trying to destroy a man because of one allegation without evidence, while pretending they care about the alleged victim? Which political party has fought for decades to glorify things that are condemned in the Bible? Which one has argued for decades that killing unborn children is a good thing? Which one believes government has the right to take your earned money or anything else because they think someone else deserves it more than you? Is that charity or theft?
Yes, systemic bigotry and segregation was opposed by and defeated by people of all parties. But one party fought to uphold slavery and segregation. The others opposed them in the end until they defeated them.
There is no Christian political party, but there is certainly one that is shockingly anti-Christian. And if that party's biggest check on power is one that is imperfect but much more friendly to Christian values and ideals than the other, it is an obvious choice for anyone who understands what is in the Bible.
1
Which party promotes policies that decrease abortions? Democrats. Which party doesn’t promote individual responsibility for developing a moral compass? Republicans. Which party destroys families with policies that promote impoverishment of young families? Republicans. Who believes that recognizing love destroys families? Republicans. Who creates laws that suck money from the middle class to support wealthy Americans and non Americans alike? And then tear apart families at the border and claim that they are pro family? You know who. Open you eyes. Open your mind. Open your heart. Don’t quote me back excuses. Or is that un-Christian?
The history of religious power and courrution is monumental. Today is no different than the Protestant Revolution. God was not being protested, the behavior of church officials was. Power corrupts. We see it daily.
3
"there are no atheists in foxholes"
Ever wonder why?
Once science, humanism and reason replaces religion there will be no foxholes.
2
For all those evangelicals voting for Republicans because of abortion, it is really easy, give women birth control.
All the evangelical women I have talked with, their mothers, their daughters, all use birth control.
Sounds like Democrats and Planned Parenthood.
5
How many angels can dance on the head of a pin? Is Christ of 'one substance' or of 'like substance' with the Father? Who moved the stone from the Tomb? Is the Pope the vice-regent of God on Earth or is he just a man with a lot of robes and some really fancy hats?
All these questions may be meat and drink to Christian theologians and worrying matters to the Christian faithful, but what part, if any, should they play in the conduct of our political discourse? Our nation was founded (correct me here if I'm wrong) on a principle of the strict separation of church and state.
Why should Christian principles even play a role in our politics? Or Muslim or Jewish or Zoroastrian or Atheist principles? Wouldn't it be possible, permissable, and (God save us!) even
responsible to take religious questions completely out of the debate? Our faith(s) have often become the most poisonous element in our national self-examinations. Wouldn't we be doing ourselves a favor if we tried to find our way forward by developing a political and social ethics that made no reference at all to a Deity?
1
Thank you, Dr. Keller!
I gave up on most American Christianity when it became clear that they were not in any way followers of their prophet's teachings. Far too many so-called 'evangelists' are a separate religion altogether born of TV preachers using the bible for personal profit and gain instead of providing help to the poor and suffering. Their party of choice has decided instead to provide all the assistance it can to the greed infected richest people on earth whose main premise seems to be to deny the poor anything at all.
2
Thank you for a thoughtful presentation of what Christian values are meant to be. I'm Catholic and have said for a long time that Catholics, with almost a century-and-a-half of teachings on social justice, aren't really represented fully by either of our nation's two leading parties. Moreover, one party in particular, the Republican, has cynically used abortion as a tool to manipulate Catholic and Evangelical voters while at the same time sending their daughters and mistresses to get abortions. I put a lot of blame on the prosperity gospel message, as well, that makes it easy to overlook the poor who, after all, could be rich if they just believed strongly enough.
7
@W. FryThere are Christian hypocrites and non Christian hypocrites. This is the problem. Man will always fail us. They are not perfect. To condemn Republicans because they secretly send their daughters/mistresses for abortions. Well, that is the point of the article. Follow your beliefs not a party. In this scenario, you cant align with the Democratic party either because they are equally hypocritical. You should not look to a religion either to help you determine where you stand on issues, because religion is man made. We are to only look to God and he gives us an entire book of wisdom to speak to our hearts and heads. Personally, I believe that taking the life of a baby grieves God and therefore grieves me. No one has manipulated me into this personal belief. The Gospel which has penetrated my heart has given me this compassion for the preborn as well as the poor, widow, and orphan. I speak for many others in this regard as well. It also drives me to do something active with my compassion in serving others and getting involved in the political process to speak for those who cannot speak for themselves. Its not about promoting a political party but about doing what God has put in my heart and motivated and commanded me to do.
@Tracey Murtha
No argument from me on your fine points. My point is only that Christians must be wise as serpents and not persuaded by empty promises--and then become complicit in the evil done in their names. The separating of babies from their mothers in order to punish people seeking refuge in our country is abhorrent and profoundly evil. Taking health care coverage away from people, or denying it, in such a wealthy country is also, for me, profoundly evil. Christians have to stand in solidarity with those with whom Christ stands in solidarity and for whom God demands justice: the poor, the widow (read, elderly) and the immigrant. That is not happening in American Christianity. The opposite. Silence isn't an option.
1
The correct answer to the question of where religion belongs in US politics is - absent.
I am sickened by the manipulation of people of faith into attacks against this Nation of Laws’ Constitutional brick wall forever protecting individuals from religious organizations.
The Supreme Court, once the body that barred even organized prayer in schools, has turned into a body supporting company rights to shove religious values down the throats of employees, or business refusing to sell to people based on a difference in faith.
This court has forced open use of, and funding by public institutions of placed of worship.
Members have forgotten, or ignore the fact The Constitution prohibits discrimination against INDIVIDUALS because of faith, but outright prohibits any public support of ORGANIZATIONS devoted to worship of any god(s).
It says companies cannot impose religious values on individual employees.
It says companies can’t refuse to sell to wares based on a different view of a god’s law on relationships.
Well, it did - until the last few years.
The lawmakers and interpreters have forgotten the difference between the protected rights of the individual and the deliberate exclusion of organized religion from politics.
Any candidate who brags about going to Worship when asked whether s/he’s just lied about alleged past crimes should be shown the door.
Jefferson’s wall is the wall we need to rebuild, the US border to be strengthened . Courts must again stop those who would break it,
2
I'm afraid you're confusing evangelicals with Christians, they are not the same.
1
One more paragraph please. "Another reason Christians these days cannot allow the church to be fully identified with any particular party" is that it's against the law.
To use tax-deductible donations and tax-exempt purchases to fund political activity is grossly unfair to your fellow citizens who pay taxes first and support political causes with what's left. Hypocritical morality -- taking advantage of your neighbor -- is the ultimate sin.
5
Being a Christian should mean you have nothing to do or say about American Politics. Just as being a Jew, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, Catholic should have no input to American politics.
You want to worship, fine, but don't impose your belief system on others by trying to influence American policy for your own betterment.
Separation of Church and state, now!
7
@no kids in NY While I agree that separation of church and state is generally a good thing, it is impossible not to let one's deeply-held beliefs influence one's political views.
3
There is a line in scripture which I thinks describes the dysfunction of America's religion.
When America left Europe it was with a belief in government of the people.
Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's and render unto God what is God's. Without Caesar you are the Government and what is yours requires great thought with an ethical and moral base.
Here in Canada we wrestle with who we are every day.
What I fear is that the USA has had its debate and has two separate armies.
I cannot accept faith without doubt and I cannot understand people of faith who have no doubt. I am 70 and every day brings new information and new discoveries.
I only believe in one miracle in the bible and like my ancestors I read about it on the Day of Atonement. It is in the Book of Jonah and the miracle is that the King of Nineveh believes Jonah.
1
St. Paul's letter to the Romans: 13: 1Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves.
@Kevin. That scripture, by itself, is antithetical to the foundation of American political philosophy — government authority and power are derived from the people. In American political philosophy, the state does not a priori have authority (historically understood to be from some devine entity) such that the state allows/grants the people rights. Rather, the people, citizens, are the authority who grants any power or authority to the state that the state may have. And the state has those powers and authority on forebearance—at the pleasure—of the people. You should meditate on what that scripture means within the context of American political philosophy.
1
I have no trouble rectifying my Catholicism with my conservative thoughts and principles.
As long as progressives have more concern for transsexuality and the destruction of the family than the lives of the unborn or religious freedom, I am confident that the Democratic party is not the place for Christianity.
I think that a major problem Christians have regarding the political process is the black and white / no room for discussion nature of their religion. Prime example: Abortion is murder. Period. End of discussion.
The puritan worldview is an anachronistic coping mechanism ill-suited to addressing the complexities of modern life. It is also dangerously susceptible to disastrous manipulation. I defend that contention by pointing out that without the "evangelical" vote. there would be no president Trump.
12
Perhaps it is important to note that the expressed view on Christianity-as-black-and-white has the same flaws of which it accuses the faith. It is not the case that Christians as a cultural body are uniform in the belief that “abortion is murder. Period.” and to assert that such a belief is the total and sole province of Christian adherents is itself the very black-white thinking of which you are wisely wary. Many Christians (including myself) have contrasting views on the subject, and since I entered the faith I have had the opportunity to talk to many Christians of different backgrounds about their takes on the issue. The range of beliefs is as wide among the faithful as anyone else. Indeed, the most common view anecdotally is the most common among the American people: “I would not choose abortion, but I don’t think the government should be allowed to ban it for everyone.” We are fortunate to have many beliefs in our country and people, and it is uncharitable to reduce people to straw men only to bemoan their lack of nuance. At the very least, it does miss the point of Keller’s op-ed!
6
@Alan R Brock You and I are probably very aligned politically. But I'd like to point out two things. First, although I'm no expert in the Bible, I don't believe there's any mention of abortion in it. So I wouldn't conclude that all Christians are compelled to be against it. Second, regarding your reference to "the complexities of modern life", I imagine a Christian such as Timothy Keller would agree that times change, but that an overall moral framework remains for those who follow the faith. He specifically mentioned helping the poor and fighting racism ("loving your neighbor").
1
@Alan R Brock As a Christian, I have to disagree with you, but I completely understand how you would come to that conclusion, given the behavior of the American church as a whole.
The Scriptures do contain many black-and-white commands such as the Ten Commandments; however the application of those commands is not always laid out so starkly. For example, abortion is never explicitly addressed anywhere in the Bible; however most Christians I know have deduced from other more salient parts of Scripture that abortion is akin to murder, which is specifically condemned. But it should be noted that outside of archaic commands made specifically to Israel in the Old Testament, the proper punishment for murder is not outlined. (For what it's worth, I myself am opposed to abortion but I don't necessarily think that declaring it illegal is the way to go)
On the whole, I think the Christian faith is much more nuanced than most people--believers and non-believers--realize.
Peace to you and your loved ones.
1
It confounds me that the hard-right Christian right-wing believes that making abortion illegal will re-establish 'life' as sacrosanct. It won't, any more than Prohibition made Americans stop drinking.
If Christians believe abortion is wrong and fetal life should be sacrosanct, the way to accomplish that is with moral suasion in the marketplace of ideas.
6
This opinion is like reading a "Why do Christians--?" question on Quora.
Christians are not a homogeneous group of folks. While I'd have to look up the source, runs in my mind the conservative and ultra-conservative positions in the Christian spectrum are pretty much in the minority.
Believe it is keeping with the previous statement that it should be noted that even we Presbyterians...and the author is Presbyterian...have our own schism. The author's church is affiliated with a splinter Presbyterian group that is not part of the larger, moderate/progressive Presbyterian Church USA). Doesn't make the PCA less or more good...just that Rev. Keller doesn't speak for me personally as either a Prebyterian OR as a Christian--and as both I am fully and deeply committed to the political party that espouses to the greater extent my positions on social/economic issues.
I bid you peace.
1
Oh come on, call it like it is. Christianity is basically ( Democrat + Right To Life ). If you read the New Testament, it is basically the Democratic platform. The bizarre situation we have in which Christians identify as Republicans is due to the hijacking of the Democratic party by abortion rights absolutism.
1
Christians believe in justice, freedom, equality, honesty, life, honor, respect, decency, love, generosity, punishment, redemption, penalty, law, grace, sacrifice, service, fidelity, work, rest- all to honor God. So should everyone.
1
I appreciate that the NYT asked Tim Keller to write this piece. The truth is hard to find. This is why we follow Christ and not a political affiliation.
4
You, Mr. Keller, have been charged with being a "heretic."
Well, sir.
You must be doing SOMETHING right.
Congratulations! And thank you.
My sister and I used to exchange e-mails on political subjects. I'm may have let myself go. About the GOP. With whom I am not in love. She asked me to stop. I did.
One of our last exchanges came with a news clip she obligingly sent me. Hoping to reach out--find common ground--pacify my wrathful sentiments.
It dealt with three prominent evangelicals who--fearful and hesitant--were announcing to the world that: NO. Considering his record--considering his extraordinary language--considering this--considering that--
--they were UNABLE--
--to give their support to Mr. Donald J. Trump.
This, I'm afraid, only made things worse. My question was:
Since WHEN--was it obligatory and de rigeur for an evangelical Christian to vote REPUBLICAN?
It was as if these three brothers had chosen to deny the Trinity. The Atonement. The Resurrection.
See what I mean, Mr. Keller?
Already--I sound angry. Belligerent. An embattled warrior for THE TRUTH.
I don't mean to.
ALL your points, Mr. Keller--are eminently well-taken. I don't have a home with the Democrats either. No. Really, I don't.
My home is in Heaven. A stranger and a pilgrim, I seek a City "whose Founder and Builder is God."
But I'm not turning away (with a resigned smile) from our struggles and conflicts here on earth.
Not this child!
Not now!
1
I think that neither Christianity, nor Judaism should claim any political positions or be engaged in political proselytizing. It was bad enough when the Churches wielded power over life and death of the believers and/or heretics, and the disastrous role of the Judaic Orthodoxy in the drawing of the Parchment Curtain over the State of Israel needs no commentary. In my view, monotheistic religion is the foundation of Eternal Morals, and one can be religious in a sense of believing in the Ten Commandments, detached from the presumably divine dictates.
This article is appreciated - it basically articulates a point that I have also felt strongly. Partisan politics does not capture the gospel. People who look primarily to politics to solve our deep social problems are, whether on the right or the left, mistaken as to what would actually solve them. Those who would cynically respond to the claim that Christianity offers such solutions demonstrate their ignorance of what true Christianity entails and the sum effect of Christian lives lived with integrity. Unfortunately, their notions are reinforced by the actions of hypocrites.
"It confirms what many skeptics want to believe about religion — that it is merely one more voting bloc aiming for power."
Yes and that voting block is Republican. Advocating for everyone to own fire arms, suppressing the right of women, black, brown, gays, comforting the rich and heaping more misery on the poor is part an parcel of of the new Christianity. One must believe that only straight, white Evangelical men are ordained by God to rule over all other to belong to the true faith of Christian Republicans.
5
Keller: 'American churches in the early 19th century that did not speak out against slavery because that was what we would now call “getting political” were actually supporting slavery by doing so.'
Keller has the burden of proof, yet he doesn't cite even one "church" that used that "getting political" rationale.
Keller: "... the Christian church ..."
There is no such thing. There are numerous *denominations*, a fact that Keller should have acknowledged. Indeed, Keller never gets more specific than vaguely describing one denomination as "traditional Presbyterian".
They do, but their religion, by law, does not. The government should start pulling the tax exempt status of churches that engage in politics. They are not allowed to be tax exempt and be involved in political movements.
That would quiet them down.
Keep it to yourself, please. You don't have a lock on the truth just because you believe that a book written by humans is the word of God because it says so. Its embarrassingly absurd.
2
“Christians should be involved politically as a way of loving our neighbors, whether they believe as we do or not.”
Do Christian inspire “love” real brotherly love within a party platform. Not to do so is to reject Christ’s call. If Christians are not a light unto the world any other achievement is empty and hollow.
1
In times past, religious organizations of all stipes provided for the sick, the poor, the orphans, in general, all those who have trouble providing for themselves. As America grew, those care instances where gradually turned over to the government.
Therefore, as a democratic republic, we all have a responsibility insist that those services are provided...
Some would like to say the sole role of government is to protect its citizens from harm... True, but what about the other roles assigned to government over the years... Especially those Christian, Jewish, Muslin and other values to care for those who cannot care for themselves... The sick, the poor, the children, the old those with special needs..
3
All I can say is that any evangelical Christian who seriously thinks Jesus Christ would have voted for Donald Trump needs to go back to Bible Study class. There is not one single verse in the Bible that could lead anyone to believe that Jesus would have approved of Trump.
As Brett Kavanaugh said about himself and Dr. Blasey Ford (He was lying, by the way.) "We didn't travel in the same social circles." Jesus and Trump wouldn't have traveled in the same social circles.
5
"How Do Christians Fit Into the Two-Party System?"
Politics is for CITIZENS. Not Christians, or Jews, or Muslims, or Buddhists; or Athletes, or Artists, or Atheists; not for Doctors, or Lawyers, or Accountants. Not Moms or Dads or Aunts or Uncles; It is a matter for CITIZENS.
Leave your mystical beliefs at home please, there are roads that need to be fixed and sewage treatment plants to be built and criminals to be caught - fairly and efficiently. Let's leave it at that.
2
I guess that is my bible lesson for the day/week/month/year/decade.
2
I almost burst out laughing when he said, Christians...as a way of "loving others". I have seen much loving among self identified "Christians" I see more loving "christian" behavior from people who are not from organized religion. "Christians" have lost their way. They do not love their neighbor as their selves. They do not love ALL God's children. They do not support taking care of what is left of God's Garden of Eden (earth). Oh, please, let's forget those who have lost their way as they pretend to have all the ecclesiastical answers, and follow those who seem truly in touch with our higher power (God).
3
Timothy Keller, as the founder of a Protestant church, discusses these matters from a Christian point of view. But of course these teachings far precede Christianity.
The Torah commands us to leave the corners of the field uncut for the poor (Biblical welfare). And of course it was Rabbi Hillel, when asked to explain Judaism while his interrogator stood on one foot said "do not do unto others what is hateful to you."
Certainly the principles of the Securities and Exchange Commission Act and the Federal Trade Commission Act are embodied in the Noahide Laws.
So, as Micah said, "do justly love mercy walk humbly with thy God."
2
Christians must serve the lamb of Godand not donkeys and elephants. Religious values transcend politics not the other way around.
2
“I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires." - Susan B. Anthony (incidentally an abolitionist as well as a women's rights crusader)
23
No one faith or political party has a monopoly on freedom. Former SCOTUS Associate Justice William O. Douglas said it best,
“The right to be let alone is indeed the beginning of all freedom.
Dissenting, Public utilities Commission v. Pollak, 343 U.S. 451, 467 (1952). Your beliefs and convictions are yours and yours alone. I respect and honor them However please respect my right to be let alone and do not force them on me regardless of time or place.
11
You make a few nice points.
Yet you omit discussion of the prime difficulty when American Christians become politically active as Christians per se.
That is, the powerful drive among Evangelicals (the biggest political mouths, the loudest political actors) to oppression and totalitarian government premised exclusively on their professed beliefs.
This raging, egocentric religious body insists not only that they be permitted to live the religious lives they choose for themselves, but that they are charged to force everyone else to live by their bizarre rules.
Like all bullies, they're a scaredy-pants bunch who view even mild disagreement as a "war" against them. They have not the strength, compassion, or understanding to allow difference. They have not the common decency to grant others what they so rudely demand for themselves.
I say 'professed beliefs' because Evangelicals demonstrate time and again how lax is their personal devotion to the scriptures and the laws they seek to impose on others.
Contempt, misogyny, deviance, greed, egoism, theft, lying, provocation to violence, all occur among the perverse leadership of this dread cult. Somehow, they manage not only to forgive, but applaud their leaders for such behavior, even as they denounce the sins of outsiders.
Your prescriptions for good and effective political behavior among the religious are meaningless in the face of this unrepentant demand for social domination, for political and legal control.
10
@oogada Im so sorry you have never encountered a christian who has loved well. I assure you not all Evangleical Christians behave in the manner you just described. My hope is that this behavior has not been towards you by an individual. Sometimes when looking at a group as a whole you cannot see the individual heart but only see what others have manipulated and contorted to make one see others in a poor light. Christians are not perfect as no human is and have done much to make you feel this way, but please know that many are very kind, compassionate, and loving towards all. I pray you are afforded the opportunity to be loved and served well by a professed Christian or Christ follower. I also pray that you could find in your heart to forgive those who you have felt hurt you.
1
It would be lovely if Jesus's great, great, great, great,great, great, etc...granddaughter or g/son were to come amongst us soon.
I suspect She might warn against the paranoid evils of reality TV, mean tabloid news, internet crazies, political plots, bots and tribal divisiveness.
She might have a Psychology PHD or 2 and warn about narcissism in culture and economics. About bullies and arrogant cogs.
She would lament disrespecting the environment and destoying God's gifts of the planet, it's health and the rest of the floral and fauna we till now have share it's bounty with. And plead with us to repent.
She'd be a liberal and a progressive and have great respect for other heaven sent community and religious leaders. I'd look forward to reading the new updated bible.
1
@Anne Rofl. All you are missing is a pot leaf t shirt and Coexist bumper sticker. You are missing the part where Christ DOES have a “great great great great whatever.” If you believe in Him, place all your hope in his substitutionary death in your place, and walk in newness of life, you, yourself, are the heir of the kingdom. And you got it wrong. You are missing the part entirely where Christ deals in eternity, and that the material is merely a means to bring his people back to him. You also miss the part where his Kingdom is “not of this world,” so he would not be tree hugging. He would be people hugging. If you don’t believe this world is going to burn, and the people in it are the only thing that really matter, you haven’t been paying attention to your Bible.
Hello? I’m a Christian. I’m not some exotic specimen who might be expected to have peculiar views on a range of ethical or political issues. I’m just a plain old lefty-liberal like my secular colleagues. In fact, stereotypically so: pro-choice, pro-LGBT and, above all, pro social democratic welfare state. That’s me. I just happen to have some weird metaphysical beliefs about the existence and character of supernal beings and states of affairs, which have nothing to do with my politics.
My religious beliefs do not in any way influence my moral judgements or political views. Religion is about the supernatural and has nothing to do with the way we live our lives. So there. It does provide edifying stories that motivate good behavior. But ethics, which concerns what counts as good behavior, is a secular discipline.
I’m a Christian. I am not an exotic specimen. I am just an ordinary lefty-liberal upper middle class urban-coastal academic. I just happen to have some weird beliefs about supernatural beings and states of affairs.
1
@Harriet Baber You do not know Christ, and he does not know you, if that is what you actually believe.
Christians are obsessed with the Abortion issue. They overlook all the teachings of Jesus and vote Republican because they are against Abortion and Homosexuality. Wealthy Republican Politicians easily control Christians with the Abortion issue. This allows for corruption at the highest levels. Tax cuts for Billionaires and cutting Social Programs for the Poor are not Christian values. But those policies are at the rotten core of Conservatism.
3
@Art Ambient Sadly, as a Christian I am inclined to agree with you on this.
1
I am not sure what the author is trying to say. No one in either party is discriminating against the under privileged more than the other party. One chooses to allow the private sector to support the under privileged and the promotes the government to pick up the support. Both say it is up to all citizens to help the needy but one forces all citizens to provide support and the other says it is the peoples obligation by assisting through churches and charities.
If all were walking with Christ everyone would voluntarily give and share with their brothers and sisters but we can see from this fallen country that we are far from the Christian country that we once were.
Jesus' charitable commands were to the believers not to the nonbelievers. During this period in biblical history points to the Body of Christ to be the charitable leader in the community not the government.
Now, if there is an argument for or against a platform for one party or another it would be abortion rights (supporting murder) and homosexuality (distasteful acts); “If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act.” These would surely disqualify the Children of God from aligning with this party.
2
I'm not sure how I feel about the quote, "Christians should be committed to racial justice and the poor, but also to the understanding that sex is only for marriage and for nurturing family. One of those views seems liberal and the other looks oppressively conservative." I assume the racial justice is liberal and sex outside of marriage is conservative? The Republican Party strives for racial justice. It just looks differently from liberal methods. Right looks at each person as an individual apart from a social/racial groups; this is to ensure that each person is responsible for their own actions. Good/hardworking people are rewarded, while the opposite will not, despite their race. Liberals value the group of individuals possessing a unifying identity and confront racism by trying to offset historic/current racism through government programs. I think both are aligned with scripture with good intention but one doesn't necessarily help minority races to sustainably advance to positions of power in a nation that is led by predominantly white people.
There is no doubt that the GOP could benefit from Christian teachings, with which they have no familiarity beyond specious “chapter and verse” convenient excuses.
At the same time, the GOP provides a caution against letting Bible thumpers run the country, folks who use scripture to advance iniquity.
2
I grew up knowing a good Christian woman of the fairy tale sort but real. So, when I was young, I thought Christians were in general "better" than average if only not to be embarrassed.
As I got on in the rough and tumble of life, I learned that Christians were no different, no less trouble and certainly no less evil than anyone else.
As I'm getting older, I now think of them as slightly more evil than average (hey, they have "get out of jail free" cards from the torture you forever god) or more duped and often complete hypocrites.
Just my experience, but it spans continents, multiiple business fields, several religions, a few legal tussles and a wide wide network of people.
With Trump and the core of his core support, I think Christians should withdraw from politics and go back to good works -- they've been wrestling with a pig for decades and the stench has worked itself below the skin at this point. The pig won.
1
From the article, “The Bible shows believers as holding important posts in pagan governments — think of Joseph and Daniel in the Old Testament.”
Keller’s assumption is that Joseph and Daniel were real people and not mythic characters, and that is the problem with mixing church/synagogue/mosque/temple with the state.
As the cliché goes, “Keep your religion out of my state, and I will keep my state out of your religion.”
@Arch
Why does it matter whether they were “real people” or “mythic characters”?
Can you accept the premise or not? That is Keller’s point.
If a non-Christian cannot tolerate that others hold different beliefs in their hearts, what you are arguing for is far more terrifying than freedom from tyrrany.
There are serious comments here, from the writer’s point of view, that truly believe you should muzzle a person who does not hold “correct thoughts” (e.g., one’s you share).
Think about it.
1
Franklin Graham and the other sanctimonious cheerleaders for the Republicans don't believe in Jesus; they believe in Supply Side Jesus. "Whatsoever you do to the least of my brethren, be sure NEVER to pay any minimum wage. That's socialism." Supply Side Jesus thought about raising Lazarus, but Lazarus hadn't hit his deductible for the year and didn't have enough shekels on him for the co-pay.
13
@Paul Neilan. Im afraid you are airing your one sided personal opinions here. This was not the point of the article. It is not for you to know what is in a man's heart....only the Father. Really?... to say that leaders helping the world's poor don't believe in Jesus? sounds like you are angry and need to deal with that elsewhere. PleaseDon't put yourself in the place of moral judgment over others.
Why we adopt a religion in our life - to make our life peaceful and happy. The next question is what is the role of political parties in our life - to create a society that is healthy , justice, equality, freedom, Violance free and secured. Our constitution defines the structure how the society can achieve those goals by using politicL party. There is no doubt that a religious person can not be successful in his persuade of growth without active contribution to political process. All these time the religious were used to divide us, time has come for religions to help its followers to get the strength from its teaching to fulfill the missions of the true religious growth. There are many people who are trying to bring this new focus on religious community - it needs more penetration in our society. We humans are part animal part divine - we can not completely eliminate the animal part. We have to struggle all the time to keep that tendencies under control. Religion is that tool and politics is the field where we have to use it to get the golden crops.
@Kalyan Basu It does not make me happy to place prohibitions on my animalistic desires. It does not make me happy to get ridiculed for believing Jesus is the only way back to God. If you are coming to Christianity for happiness, “you came to the wrong town at the wrong time.”
Rev. Keller would be advised to read Max Weber's "The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism." Although a much-lauded work, Weber sketched out only a tenuous connection between the two. More substantial was the connection between John Calvin and the ruling business oligarchy of Geneva at the time, and the Puritan belief that the Elect rise to the top in this life. It was the 100 Great Families who bankrolled Calvin's theocracy.
Calvinist theology in substance also buttresses conservative positions. A tenet of Calvin's theology was the predestination of an Elect to go to Heaven, with the rest being the "inherently depraved" who deserve no forgiveness. If the Elect is identified with society's leaders and the depraved as the poor, then it makes little sense to pursue anti-poverty programs. It's all individual responsibility.
Core to Republican Party ideology is the Puritan notion of character. This has been a constant in the party since the beginning. The Evangelicals, whose faiths were originally part of the Puritan movement, have taken the mantle of advancing the notion of society as a moral order, as Calvin had done at Geneva.
So it should come as no surprise that Republican Party policies reflect the stern side of Puritanism.
3
We regularly attend a Christian church, but I wonder if we should stop calling ourselves "Christians". In the popular vernacular that term now means a lot of things that we don't consider very "Christian" at all.
207
@Prairie Populist It is not for any individual or self-appointed group to determine who is a "Christian".
Behavior and attitude speak for themselves, and one's conscience is the determination. Specific denominations have values that determine membership in those denominations, but conscience is between the individual and his/her Maker.
6
@Prairie Populist . I agree. I now am identifying myself as a follower of Christ. However, I am concerned that many people stereotype Christians into science hating only focused on abortion. That does not fit most of the people in my Christian community. Most of the Christians I know currently abhor the current administrations policies that only seem to promote greed and hate.
15
As a Christian, I vote for less government/states rights - as much as it pains me - precisely because of the separation of church and state and my objection to the expansion of "a-religion" as the state religion (I have accepted "a-religion" as the state religion as there appears to be no other choice). Any words of wisdom sent my way would be sincerely appreciated.
@Jack
A nation of charitable and compassionate human beings would be far preferable to one with a state-articulated form of redistribution.
Our social justice would be joyfully born, not taken; and people would have to reckon with each other, not enforce through laws and lawsuits.
Your goal is right. Sadly, in the full evidence of our broken condition, we fight to control the power that will do what humans choose not to do.
All you need look at is the PRC and USSR to see that such states never delivered on their promise either.
1
@Jack Which party is the "less government/states rights" party? In my part of the country, most people would say that the republican party is the party of less government and states rights. Except that the republicans are the party that wants to put religion and the ten commandments in the schools, to use government to keep women from controlling their own bodies, to keep blacks and the dark-skinned from voting, etc.
For a party that hates government, the republicans sure know how to use it to push their pet agenda.
These are not words of wisdom but I sent them anyway.
Have a nice day and a nice life.
@Stuart. Or you could look at Denmark. Current Danish political philosophy has embedded in it that society,as a whole, is to reflect social justice. That social justice is a collective action, not just an individual one. That the state/government is the means by which the society undertakes that collective action. And, that within that context everyone has obligations as well as rights. This seems to be in keeping with the historical theological development of the Danish christian chuch, one of the oldest protestant churches in Europe. However, many Danes today would argue that one does not need to be a christian to support this. It seems to me that your historical scope and knowledge are too narrow to make such sweeping generalizations, and solely rest on the usual stereotypical trope.
Politicizing religion and "packaging" thought control is nothing new. Each has been the right and left hands of all civilizations. Just look at St. Augustine and the Apostles/Nicene Creed--one of the earliest "packaging of ideas" that defined Christianity. Any deviation from this ideal branded you a heretic. Christianity has never completely been about following the path of Jesus which can be nebulous at best but rather about converting people to good foot soliders and using the concept of Jesus as a sword to forge civilizations that enriched and empower the contemporary structures that have existed.
4
@TooFunny Bro. How do you correlate any of this to the packaging of Christianity and the Apostle’s Creed? The Apostle’s Creed is literally a summary of the Gospel. So yes - if you deny the statements within, you are absolutely a heretic. What does any of this have to do with any of that?
I don't agree with Mr. Keller's assessment.
For me, it is not so much the whole-heartedly acceptance of one party as much as the whole-heartedly rejection of one party.
My moral fabric is constructed by what I feel in my heart is right and wrong...same as anyone else. Yet the democrat party openly mocks and berates my heartfelt beliefs as not being worthy of consideration. Like any expressed views I hold are not to be taken seriously because they are somehow tainted simply because I am Christian.
I have very little need for a government that has become a religion unto itself and views Christianity as an opposing religion. And as a result, has taken their intolerance of my Christian beliefs to the level of attacking it whenever and wherever they can. Justifying it with an overzealous interpretation of "separation of church".
I offer up Georgia Lookwood's comment and the associated number of recommendations as an example. The comment suggests that any church that even allows politics into their religious discussions should have their tax exemption status revoked. To suggest punishing the church for exercising their 1st amendment rights as Americans simply because they are Christian's and hold an opposing view is wrong.
I do not vote for a political party because of perceived promises in support of my religious views. I vote against a party that has repeatedly demonstrated their willingness to attack my heartfelt moral values simple because I profess to be a Christian.
3
Nobody mocks your beliefs. And if you have those beliefs, which party does its best to see them enshrined in law for the good of society, believers and unbelievers alike? The Democrats gave us Social Security and the New Deal, the Medicare and Medicaid in the Great Society, Child Health Insurance, the ACA. They would do more if they could. The Republicans tear at these laws, seeking to destroy them until they no longer work, to take them away from society. And yet you vote for the Republicans because they “don’t mock your beliefs.” Maybe you need to re-read the article and have a sincere re-evaluation of what it is you actually believe.
5
@Diatribe Destroyer
I am a Democratic Christian. I am sorry you feel the way you do. I don't believe in lumping any group of people into one big lump, as our current president does. The vitriol that he spews toward people is very Un-Christian. I resent it when someone thinks that because I am a Democrat that I don't value their opinions. I DO!! But I expect the same respect from those who may not agree with my values as a Christian, and can separate the politics from the issues.
3
@Diatribe Destroyer You are correct that there is far more evil on the left. But if people gravitate to the left becsuse that is the only party that makes them feel included and defended, there is something tragically wrong with the right. It is sin of commission on one side, and sin of omission on the other - if we want to really simplify this. Both repulse the Lord, and I have to agree with Dr. Keller.
1
As a liberal protestant centrist who attempts to be faithful, I applaud your editorial. It harkens back to the time when our chaplain, William Sloane Coffin, was taking many of the same positions, and others that we would have to think about. How often he would arrive at a conclusion that the rest of us would come up with 5-10 years later. That said, his personal life was a mess, nevertheless, he was a real giant in my life. And yes, it is possible to read the same materials and arrive at different, honestly felt conclusions. Our lenses are different from each others.
5
The Founders wisely separated church and state. They recognized the temptation to use the state as a weapon for religious purposes. From their perspective, the new nation had enough divisive issues already, and they formed the foundation where these entities do not control each other. Yet they started us on the path towards representative government. That path requires living and acting politically.
To live in a society requires engagement with it, including political engagement—at the very least to be informed and vote. To withdraw into a religious or other type of enclave and acting as though the rest of society were beyond redemption or tainted in an unforgivable way is to not be fully human. No matter one’s religious beliefs, living requires engagement. The questions are how and how much?
All people eligible to vote must. Every election. From local recorder of deeds to the president of the United States. Voting is both a right and an obligation. It is the minimum required of us by our society and honors all the sacrifice to establish it. Too many societies still suppress their people by either denying them representation through voting or conduct sham elections.
America has had a long, hard path to universal suffrage. Every person not voting is saying that their vote is not needed, that that path was not worth the effort, or they just don’t care. As we have seen in every current voter’s lifetime, elections matter.
November is coming. Vote.
9
I agree that churches shouldn't be associated with or promote any political party. Unfortunately, that just isn't the case. For many years, Democrats have campaigned in Black churches and now almost the entire, mostly-white Evangelical movement (or at least most of its leaders) are securely tucked away in the Republican camp. Evangelicals have campaigned relentlessly for prayer in public schools, inclusion of creationism along with evolution as a scientific explanation of the origin of humans and have at least promoted the idea of a "Christian government." Separation of Church and State is rapidly fading away.
I belong to a large church which supports separation of Church and State and which has never endorsed a political candidate or party. However, I wonder how long my church and others like it can maintain their neutrality.
6
Religiosity -- no matter the religion -- is anathema to American democracy and the separation of Church and State. Christians and other religious believers of the end times -- and their denial of climate warming and the peril of extinction of mankind on our planet -- should hold no sway in American democracy, which has been almost obliterated by extremely rich conservative donors to the Republican Party. Two parties, not three, rule the American system of governing, though the present Republican and Democratic parties are grasping for power as the earth is wobbling on its axis. It would be beneficial to Democracy if "believers" didn't meddle in our government, but they do.
17
@Nan Socolow
An echo to my own sentiments, especially the separation of Church and state.
Humanity tried a Christian society run by the rich:
It was called the dark ages for a reason.
11
@Nan Socolow
You are right on brother
Politics at its most fundamental level is about power, determining who controls the levers of government. The political quest for power divides and segments. One side wins, in the US, usually a win is a 49% - 54% (majority?). In politics, moral imperatives, service to others, and the tenants of belief are tertiary considerations that are brought to the fore as practical matters aimed to achieve electoral success. And compromised as practical matters in policy debate. Religion's root meaning is that which "binds together". The binding together that is the core of religious practice stands in tension with the political reality, thus Mr. Keller's perspective is accurate. The Founders presumed the existence of a core religious substrate which would underlie the Republic. This moral center, coupled with the separation of powers, so brilliantly devised would keep the republic on track. The Believer (Jew, Christian, Muslim, etc.) today as Keller suggests needs to consider his/her personal stand on the political spectrum. The Nation needs to reflect on the crumbling substrate of religious principles and practices in our culture and what that means for a country's future. Where will the moral compass come from? Or is it evaporating as the election of Mr. Trump and the ongoing bitter partisan debates seem to suggest.
7
As a believer in Jesus (can't quite choke out "Christian" as a self-describing modifier anymore), I find so much to like about what Mr. Keller writes. As an amateur historian and observer of humanity I "get" that at least 81% (coincidently the proportion of "evangelicals" that voted for the "leader" of our current regime) of those who claim the moniker "Christian" have chosen a bowl of porridge over their spiritual birthright.
Public rhetoric has become the proverbial "resounding cymbal" and is devoid of Love; which is what we who Love and believe in Jesus are directed to inhabit and model. The "porridge" that the 81% has chosen is the selfish food of power, rather than the selfless nourishment of Love.
Believers in Jesus aren't facing a crisis of political choice, we've simply sold our humanity to a preacher of selfish greed and lust who's "tickled our ears"...
23
@Kent R I value your sentiment, but you are naive if you believe a government is capable of showing love. I feel as though you are reading in a silent endordement of the Democratic Party by Dr. Keller, and to draw such a conclusion could not be further from the truth. Look at monsters like Nancy Pelosi who are the mouthpiece for the “party of love.” The ideals of social justice, protection of the underprivileged, and love are true and honorable. However, they are just that - ideals. And they are used as a weapon by the “Party of Love” to accumulate power. At least with my bowl of gruel, I have the freedom and the space to live out my calling as a matter of personal choice without the government stealing excess amounts of my money to subsidize gender reassignment surgeries and abortions. I have no allegiance to any candidate, party, or nation for that matter - my allegiance is to Heaven. The party and candidate I voted for are dead wrong about a great many things that relate to the ideals I mentioned, their sins of omission are beyond excuse, and that is his point.
1
@Joshua - concur with your initial statement and certainly empathize with YOUR sentiment. But I by no means meant to imply that the 19% (those that didn't vote for our would-be dictator) were 1.) by default virtuous, nor 2.) must have voted for the Democratic Party candidate...I certainly didn't. There were better options.
My intent, framed in christian "code", was to remind we who follow Jesus that our call is to Love, not to political ideology...and furthermore, I hoped to communicate that Love is our litmus, and therefore our birthright/birth-responsibility.
Mr Keller fails to address the most prominent reason why ‘Christians’ don’t fit into a two-party system: Christianity is not a monolithic entity. Some Christians adopt a rigid foundation for their beliefs, including an unbending assertion that sacred texts are literally conveyed from God’s lips to human scribal hands, that they must be understood in the most literal and conservative ways, and that every person subscribing to their creed must maintain every single item of the group’s creed. Others see sacred texts as human products, ‘inspired’ in the way that The Odyssey or Moby-Dick were inspired by gifted authors, and that no text, sacred or secular, speaks to readers without interpretation, which can and does vary with each succeeding generation. If two political parties are too rigid a choice for people of faith, the fact that people of faith are themselves distributed over a continuum of underlying foundational assumptions makes adherence to one party by the whole impossible.
15
Religions are ancient works, and God an ancient idea. Age doesn't make them weak. But it should give us pause. Durkheim showed how religion may be a belief in one's society, the others that one senses beyond an immediate horizon. Our own spirits find a place in group spirit. The old testament's God is local, and though Jesus speaks of aliens, his God isn't Rome's, much less in Asia, Africa, or the Americas. As we learn of more distant peoples, in theory God enlarged. But the idea crumbles under the weight of endless universes. It wasn't intended for deep space.
Look around, and realize that religion remains a belief in one's fellow people. Their morals inspire yours. So regions freighted by ethnic anxieties or antagonistic history will have believers who embrace an anxious and antagonistic God. We can be inspired by religious statements, but these encapsulate what we believe a fair and good society demands. We know better than to argue about God. But if God is really those believers in a span of six degrees of separation, we have something to discuss.
As a Christian who lives outside of the USA, I agree with much of what Tim Keller says. As much as I agree with one US party (GOP) on one issue like abortion, I find myself agreeing with another party (Democrats) on healthcare and helping the poor. I have to weigh which party best represents my morality. For me, the extreme support for abortion in the US which allows abortions up to the 20th week of pregnancy vs. restricted abortion after 12 weeks in most EU countries, is the dominant issue. Compassion for the needy must be extended to the most dangerous place in America, the female womb.
3
@Pat I used to vote like that too. But then I asked the leader of the Montana Family Foundation why they didn't focus on reaching teenagers instead of politicians and gave him the name of an excellent speaker -- but he was not interested.
The thing is -- the abortion issue has been an effective gimmick for 40 years to herd millions of people into the voting booth to check a box that gives the Republican party power for another 2, 4, or 6 years depending on the office you're voting for. Since the 80's, Republicans have held out the promise of a Roe v Wade Reversal and won election after election after election while most Christians never questioned them about anything else.
But with every closure of a clinic, hundreds lose their access to contraception, which results in more unplanned pregnancies. Brett Kavanaugh delayed an abortion for a few more weeks for a jailed immigrant. Yet the same administration forces those jailed women to remain shackled throughout their pregnancy (Sheriff Joe loved it when they had to give birth in chains). The ACA required contraception to be available at no cost. Republicans oppose that also. Let's face it -- time after time, it just looks like Republicans care only about women for the nanosecond it takes to mark a ballot. And after that -- you're on your own.
101
@ThinkFirstThenVote before opposing abortion, teach men some discipline and responsibility for their act. That would be a first great step. I have asked many men like myself why they can't restrain. A few answered "it's a natural man's thing". Unfortunately many men have similar thoughts, Christians included
@ThinkFirstThenVote, I like your compassion but you have too broad a perspective. As a Christian, my focus is on abortion, aka, the murder of babies. Volume of such murders in our country will surely cause judgment to fall onto America. I do believe the safety network is fragile, however, so many illegals are here taking advantage and obtaining benefits that should only be available to citizens that we have numerous homeless American citizens who have lost hope. That I lay at the feet of the democrats and sanctuary cities. Christians take our voting responsibilities seriously and I, for one, will not be silenced.
Many thanks to Dr. Keller! As an American expat who loves Jesus Christ, I have long felt dismayed by the strident partisanship of a significant segment of the faith community in the US. There is a better way.
10
Faiths, like political parties, come in full packages. If you want to be part of an organized religion and participate in its fellowship and good works, you have to buy the whole package, or at least the parts of the package you are required to buy, or at least not oppose them in public. Faith demands the same sort of compromises and politicking as membership in a party, and if Christians must be too pure to give themselves to the package of a party, they should also be too pure to give themselves to the package of Baptists, Presbyterians, Episcopalians, Catholics, or Mormons.
The historical Christian position has usually been to ally with governments that would give one Christian organization dominance over others, and to struggle for control over governments. The relation between Wahhabism and the Saudi monarchy is typical, each using the other for its own purposes. Putin and the Orthodox Church scratch each others' backs. The American relation between Church and State was very unusual, and is still honored in theory more than in practice in some areas of the country. In other countries that used to have powerful state religions, the state maintains magnificent old buildings that are rarely even close to full, and God is much less present in most people's lives than in this country.
5
Does the Bible say force others to empathize or donate to charity? Does is say steal from the haves and disperse to the have nots? While donating time and resources to those in need is a great and necessary thing to do, it's not the role of a govt to demand it.
@Allen
The Bible says that charity should be private and that people should not do it for credit or to seek credit. A great way to implement this is through taxes, so that the preening and pride of the giver and the obsequiousness and servility of the receiver are both avoided. If charity is public, it is a matter of right and is given by universal rules. If it is private, it is not a matter of right, and those who are good at making themselves objects of charity will get it.
5
@Allen Government is the agency through which a sovereign exercises authority, regulates the interactions of a populace, and implements public policy. In a democracy, the people are the sovereign and they set public policy, not the government. .
6
@Allen The Bible is where people of faith look for their personal morality. Our government is not religious, but secular, and as such should not embody Biblical principles of any kind.
e have separation of church and state. Freedom of belief even more than freedom of speech is what the first amendment covers.
The founding fathers may have attended Christian churches, but they basically were Deists. They believed in God. They said that with the "In God we trust" rather than anything about Jesus or personal saviors. Some may find that offensive, but others may find the fact that directly or indirectly so many of these men were connected with the slave trade offensive.
3
@Joan In California: Deism holds that a God might have necessary to create the universe, but it was left to run on autopilot long ago.
@Joan In California...and actually, not all of them DID believe in god. The 1st Amendment is as much about freedom FROM as freedom of.
This is a good article, and Keller is clearly trying to thread a needle here without offending too many dyed-in-the-wool Democrats and Republicans. Particularly important is his comment on "package-deal ethics." However, there is a risk of false equivalency here, because the current Republican Party seems to have abandoned truth, abandoned all pretense of stewardship of the planet, and has left the biblical mandate to care for the poor, the vulnerable, the lost, the last, and the least. Instead, they are enriching the wealthy, oppressing the vulnerable, and seeking to erode the social safety net. As a Christian, I may have a different opinion from the Democrats when it comes to certain moral issues, but as a whole they are trying to help the poor and vulnerable and to steward the planet. I can't say the same about the Republicans.
79
@Brian: The Republican Party is out to make the Apocalypse a self-fulfilling prophesy.
@Brian
Christ never told the government to help the poor and vulnerable. He told individuals to do so. And that help was to be voluntary (not by force or confiscation via government). Do not ask government to do what you have been told to do. If we had less government, we would all have more to be able to do what we were called to do.
1
I absolutely believe one thing, the teachings of Christ gave us all the lessons we need to navigate through life. I am a devout Christian and I strong my believe that the message of love, care for our neighbour's and happiness was all part of preparing us for navigating this world. Greed and self centeredness creates politics and I think that Christians do a big disservice to their fellow neighbors when they choose to stay out of politics. We should always let our personal principles and morals with the lessons of Christ be what guides us in making our decisions and not engaging in hypocritical biases that really end up dividing rather than bringing together. I think this op-ed speaks exactly to that and we must do better. I will be the first to admit it, my biases sometimes make me lean one side or the other hence making me apear hypocritical however I try to learn as much as possible from others that have different opinions, and work hard to keep an open mind to all. Christ was the ultimate example and we should all try to emulate him. I am sure with him coming in the flesh to understand how we function, he doesn't expect us to be as perfect and strong as him, but we should follow closely in his footsteps.
4
@Victor O: The Constitution denies Congress the power to enact any faith-based legislation. If you want a law, you have to justify it with secular reasoning.
This is a beautiful opinion piece that, as I see it, talks about the teachings of Christ. As a member of the Baha'i Faith, I am forbidden from participating in partisan politics while I am encouraged to participate in social justice and adhere to a strong moral code, just like my Christian brethren.
Yet because of controversies like abortion, many Christians, from my view, seem drawn to a divisive politics that muddys their message. I stand outside wondering where the love for the Samaritan is if a woman sinned or someone came illegally over the border. Do Evangelicals really want to associate themselves with a lack of charity and love for their fellow man. I would hope not. I believe all religions come from the same God. We do our best work when we stay away from politics.
9
These days many people equate Christianity with right-wing views. They don't hear from or about the religious left at all. As a Boomer, I vividly remember the churches' involvement in the civil rights movement. Our minister's son had gone to the South to work for it, and we were worried about him. We watched daily the news that people of faith were being discriminated, harmed, and even killed for their work for equality.
And I know those people are still out there, but many do not.
33
@Susan. INdeed, they are out there, from all appearances hopeless outnumbered. It is those folks that give hope that reform of Christianity in the U.S. is possible.
@Susan. Maybe some people should look up at and study they complain about and demonize before making judgements about religious teachings, different Christian groups (as we’ll as other sects) have and are doing to help others, instead of seeing a Christian acting selfish, which is considered sinful but also human. Christians don’t say they are perfect, if they do, then it’s a personal blind spot. So many people proclaim others are hypocrites- are you judge, jury and executioner? So great you can perfect and know All about the universe which we can only observe with our few senses. Do you truly believe that all there is is what we can see, smell, hear, taste and”prove “? Even scientists know that the range of what we detect is limited. Read up on some of the new works with quantum mechanics.
@Susan : Evangelical churches NEVER liked the civil rights movement. I'll bet you were involved in one of the "classical" Christian denominations, like Methodist or Presbyterian.
I am perplexed why Mr. Keller does not openly name the Republican party in this piece. He keeps talking about affiliation with a particular party, but seems to imply that it cuts both ways. Not so. As a very left leaning Christian who regularly attends church, reads the Bible and prays daily, I would never presume to interject my beliefs into political dogma. I have for many years resented the association of Christianity with with the right wing whenever it is mentioned in the same breath with politics.
Also, he keeps mentioning the "Christian church." What church would that be?
36
Protestant, evangelical and white for the GOP and black for the Dems.
One sad aspect of the evangelicals' seizure of power in the Trump era is their total disdain for science and research, based presumably on their disdain for the teaching of evolution. Thus the U.S. is failing to deal with global warming, and with efforts at energy efficiency going on around the world. Our government is also rejecting the warnings of science about the increasing risks of tropical storms, sea levels rising and destruction of wildlife habitat. We are also training fewer scientists and health professionals, and rejecting bright young immigrant students or scientists. The list could go on, but basically we are dragging ourselves back to the 19th century rather than preparing ourselves for the 21st. My faith teaches me to give my grandchildren a better world, not one that is worse.
34
@Bearded One
The reason they disdain research is that they think the Bible has already given them the answers -- for example, that the universe began 6000 years ago.
The concept of race was invented in the 18th Century. It did not exist in ancient times. The good Samaritan and the Jewish victim of the robbers were of different religions, but the Samaritan could not have thought of the Jew as of a different race. From the same geographic area, their physical appearance was likely very similar.
7
Any religious group, whether left right or center, that preaches a political view from the pulpit should have their tax-exempt status yanked. I guess they have achieved that status by being technically nonprofits, but as far as I can tell too many of them are poisoning the well of society.
43
@Georgia Lockwood
Had your idea been strictly enforced, half of the black churches in our larger cities would no longer exist. Ever since LBJ changed Democrats from Jim Crow to voting rights for all, partisan politics has been a staple in these places during October of election years.
The evangelicals are still playing catch-up in this regard.
@Georgia Lockwood
Why restrict your tax-exempt status to religious groups?
Would we not treat colleges and universities thusly?
Do you see violent intolerance, on of the recent focus areas of the academy, as virtuous? Banning speakers? Violent clashes over political views?
We need to be less blinkered in our alarm over the politicization of everything in society.
1
@Stuart my comment has to do with the mixture of church and state, which the framers of the Constitution were against. They didn't say they didn't want a mixture of education and the state.
Christianity is not an easy religion. It takes courage to turn the other cheek. It takes empathy and compassion to treat others the way you want to be treated. The christians who feel persecuted because Starbuck's had a plain red cup at Christmas have no real concept of what it means to a follower of Christ.
91
@Vicki Ralls, christianity is not a religion but is a personal lationship with Jesus.
Tim Keller, lets say this over and over and over again!
The Bible models a people who engage society, serving in a variety of roles in government and the community. Let's be those people in this world.
9
Anyone claiming to be a Christian who supports Trump or the GOP simply isn’t.
Trump and the GOP could not be more out of alignment with so called Christian values.
To say the very least, Jesus would not have voted for Trump.
52
@Andrew Romans 13: 1Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves.
@Andrew, You are presuming a great deal, Andrew. God allows rulers to rule and puts them in power. Your job is to pray for the leaders so that we may live peaceably in the world.
@Violet. What were your prayers for Obama and what are your prayers for Trump?
1
Market driven aid for the poor: What are they thinking?
5
@Guilford Jones--they are thinking trickle down.
13
@Susan
yes, which worked so well under Reagan!
1
Very high-minded essay that cleverly manages to sidestep the issue of abortion and contraception.
Abortion is the galvanizing issue for Christian voters, at least as far as they present themselves to those of us aren't Christian. Trumps promise to appoint justices that will overturn Roe v Wade is the single reason that the Christian bloc supports him; if not for that they would find as much to dislike as those us of us who do. If a Christian looked at this issue rationally, it would be clear that we have a society that permits abortion if one wants or needs one, while if one's religious beliefs or personal convictions preclude abortion, there is no compulsion to do so. In many ways it's as resolved a situation that can be. Since this is clearly abhorrent to the Christian electorate, one can only come to the conclusion that this is really a grab for political power wrapped in religion, the goal being to legislate a set of religious beliefs on everyone, regardless of conviction.
Let's not forget contraception. Religious groups, again Christians, have lobbied successfully from those parts of the ACA that make contraception available. Again, a grab for political power and the imposition of one set of beliefs on all of us. In a truly secular society, this should also be a matter of personal belief and conviction, the individual should opt in or out at his or her beliefs or convictions dictate, and the authority of the sate should remain unchallenged.
41
@DAL--You are correct that these views apply to many Christians, but as the article points out not all are the same. There are plenty of Christians who do not believe abortion to be criminal.
15
@DAL
Stop confusing Christians vs evangelicals. My church takes no position in the abortion controversy.
@DALyou need to identify what Christian sect you are talking about. Many Christians strongly disagree and are revolted by The ‘Religious Right’ , Franklin Graham. Gary Bauer etc.
Let us not confuse people who claim to be Christian to support their own bigotry and mysogyny with people who really are followers of Jesus.
"The second is to assimilate and fully adopt one party’s whole package in order to have your place at the table. Neither of these options is valid."
Exactly so, but Mr. Keller stops short from stating the obvious, that a large swath of the contemporary evangelical movement has gladly and whole-heartedly volunteered to accept one party's (the GOP) whole political package. This is one of the biggest problems in the church today, both from the standpoint of the church's witness in the world and the theological standpoint that much (most?) of the current GOP orthodoxy is completely antithetical to the gospel.
36
There is reason to separate Church from State. Simply put, the State keeps a lid upon squabbles between various groups whose very faith in their own views makes them unable to avoid mutual violence without State intervention.
If the State is to allow multiple faiths and sects, it must be prepared to keep their animosities at bay. Even today, with the millennia of struggle documented in history, the problems with State sponsored Religion or Religion sponsored State, are rife and repeated in country after country.
16
Using "Joseph and Daniel in the Old Testament" as a model for Christians and to make your point that "The Bible shows believers as holding important posts in pagan governments" is deeply disturbing, and inapplicable to American Christians. Yes, Joseph and Daniel did hold important posts, but their impact on those societies was a direct result of the dire circumstances they found themselves in, as both had been free men, but then became slaves. Further, they were not just slaves, but the tiniest of religious and ethnic minorities in ancient countries with leaders who were considered by the populace to be gods. Therefore, Joseph’s and Daniel’s very survival was contingent upon them serving whoever was the ruler, be it the pharaoh Taharqa, or Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon. Finally, America is a Secular Constitutional Democracy, not a Pagan Government. Reading Christians continually referring to America as if it is in fact a pagan government and society is frightening.
12
@Robert B, The USA is a constitutional republic. "And to the Republic, for which it stands..."
@Robert B A Constitutional Republic...
Mr. Keller,
I have seen thousands of versions of the assertion in the last sentence of your article. I have never seen, however, any further explanation (even by assertion alone) beyond (I'm paraphrasing) "God works in mysterious ways".
Can you offer any? If so...I hope you will write a follow up article including same.
If it matters, I am not a zealous atheist. I'm truly curious to hear any available informed insight (if either are possible) regarding the process of salvation.
Thank you.
1
@Colin If you are referencing the sentence regarding Jesus saving us with nails in his hands, this is in reference to the Christian belief of 'substitutiary atonement'. This is just a fancy way of saying that Jesus took the punishment that we deserved for our sins. To summarize in brief. 1) God is completely good, just, and holy. 2) God loves us deeply, but because of our sin, we now must face judgement because God is also just. (Also, sin ultimately leads to corruption and death, so it must be ended for God to be loving). The Bible literally says that the 'wages of sin is death.' 3) However, God in His love, allowed His Son Jesus to take that death on our behalf while giving us His righteousness. Hence the substitution. This happened at His crucifixion (the nails). 4) Now, if He had stayed dead, it would be hard to justify that sacrifice as good, in the Divine sense. But His resurrection proves God's goodness and fulfills both His perfect Justice and Love. This is the salvation for us: we are no longer subject to being condemned for our sins. Jesus did this not because we deserved it, or earned it. He did it in Love for God and us. By grace, we accept it as a gift with gratitude by trusting He did it all. This makes us all equals. See Romams 3:21-26. All the best.
5
@Colin, So glad you brought that up- one of Dr. Keller’s first books addresses this very question. It’s called The Reason For God and he explains in depth the answer you are looking for. I hope you will read it and find it helpful! I believe he also has a podcast where he addresses similar topics. I hope this helps!
1
@Colin You can also check out "How Jesus saves the Worlld from us", which offers a little bit different view of what being a Christian means than the "substitutionary atonement" view listed below. Among the outspoken conservatives you will most often find the personalized idea cited in that last paragraph as the summation of their Christian faith. I believe it is far bigger than that. For two perspectives you might also try the book "The Meaning of Jesus: Two Visions" by the eminent theologians Marcus Borg and NT Wright.
Mr Keller assumes that all Christians are the same flavor.
That is not my experience at all with people calling themselves Christian.
Or, for that matter, Jewish, which is where I am coming from.
It might be nice to think that the label describes someone who agrees with our definition of it but that just isn't how it works.
11
@simon sez
Once and for all, I would like the labels dropped. Few:
Blacks
Hispanics
Women
Asians
Other
Or Christians are of one flavor.
Did you not read Keller’s piece?
1
My feeling is that as a Christian one has to make a choice between the example shown in the life of Christ, or the tribal cultural model shown in the rules of the Old Testament. If you opt for the former, then you look for the same type of compassion for others in your politics; if you opt for the latter, then you look to politics to reinforce your rules and laws. Sadly, to me at least, the latter seems to be the choice of the moment for much of Christianity.
23
@Jwinder I have no right, perhaps, to say this, as I am not a theist at all, but well said. I think of my lovely friend and neighbor who looks to the life of Jesus as a model of the kind of human she wants to be, and llives her life accordingly. And thoughtfully.
3
Very offensive on your part and ignorant as well. Try reading and studying the Old Testament which is Old only in age, not in usefulness and meaning. Your words are hurtful to people who realize the great nuances in the Torah that give great guidance to our country’s checks and balances. If you actually truly believe in Jesus’ divinity, then you have to acknowledge that Jesus was born Jewish, lived as Jewish, taught Judaism, died Jewish and never rejected Judaism in the Sermon on the Mount. Casual repetition of what you were taught does a great disservice to understanding and appreciating other religions. That trait makes it so important to keep religion out of schools. It is so important for a religion to teach humility if it’s worth anything. It’s not the religion. It’s the people who pretend to be practicing that are most dangerous.
@Jwinder
My Biblical-history book said that the tribes largely died out after the Assyrian conquest, so what model are you talking about?
1
I don't speak to people about my deepest being, what some people might want to call my religious beliefs. For several reasons. It doesn't translate into words and it is my actions that should matter to the world. I have tried to follow a fairly simple code when it comes to my dealings with people: be kind, be truthful, and be respectful.
If someone tries to fortify the correctness of their political positions with their religious beliefs, I sometimes cringe but mostly just let it pass right on through. The way they treat me and others tells me who they are.
I once heard a quip attributed to Gurdjieff, "Those who understand what I am saying go off and live their lives, those who don't become my disciples."
7
Advocating that Christians take a central role in politics, but avoid rigid political party alignments, sounds like a nice way to avoid the corruption of religion and politics which infests our country. Unfortunately, these problems are largely caused by Christians ignoring and circumventing the Establishment Clause. A central point of the Enlightenment, which inspired the Founding Fathers in drafting the Constitution and creating our republic, was to prevent religion from corrupting government and government from corrupting religion by keeping them separate. The idea that Christians in not taking a position on slavery were taking a position on slavery is a no-brainer, but the real problem was that prior to the 13th and 14th Amendments Americans who practiced Christianity (and all other religions) failed to uphold a Constitutional promise to "form a more perfect union," and accepted slavery and inequality in Civil Society. The Founding Fathers understood that religious freedom is meaningless unless you have the right to do things like exclude non-members and create non-democratic hierarchies within churches. The Establishment Clause ensures that these things, which are actually forms of discrimination, are confined to your churches, and don't overtake and destroy civil society. You propose that Christianity has a solution to a central problem with our society, but the problem exists because Christian institutions fail to accept and respect the separation of church and state.
46
@Robert B
A masterful paragraph..
7
@Robert B You seem to forget the important role that Christianity played in the abolitionist movement.
And slavery and Jim Crow.
The only reason Christians lean more often to one party (Republican) is because it has more in common with their values. I.E. pro-life, traditional marriage etc. Until the Democratic party comes closer to center they won't be getting many Christians to vote for them. It's not because they don't believe in fighting racism or for equality they just don't want their values to be under attack.
5
The Republican Party is much further away from center. If they were truly pro-life, they would support policies that lower abortion rates which have decreased in the 16 Years Democrats have occupied the White House. They would also not interfere with the saving the life of a mother of five. If they supported traditional marriages, they could have supported civil unions and respect individual and states rights, the latter they only support when the states threaten the former. There are certain rights that people deserve in dying situations that people are just simply cruel to deny. Civil unions would have made Oberkfell unnecessary. Democracy is hard work. Judgement is God’s work. Humans should only judge when necessary. Otherwise it is lazy thinking.
18
@Danny--You write as though Christians are all a like-minded group, but nothing could be farther from the truth. The things you mention and others you probably feel are central to your beliefs are not held in the same regard by other Christians.
Many Christians fave no moral qualms voting for Democrats.
13
@Danny
But I would argue the Democratic Party is closer to the values taught by Jesus.
What you do for the least of my brethern is what you do for me.
It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than a rich man to get to heaven.
Jesus never complained about same sex marriage.
And if you want to stop abortion, give women birth control which sounds like Planned Parenthood and the Democratic Party.
Evangelicals don't realize they have been purposely conned by Republicans going back to Reagan and the Culture Wars movement.
4
My daughter and her family up in Massachusetts belong to a progressive church that used to call itself "evangelical." They don't use that term any more.
Ever since the election and the congregation's inability to reconcile Donald Trump's words, attitudes, and actions with those of Jesus Christ, they have a new label: post -evangelical.
I think they figured out that you can't say you love God, but you serve the devil, and they decided it's God's work they'd rather do. I wish more churches would consider the post -evangelical option.
35
It can be incredibly difficult for Catholics like myself to cast a ballot in many races. It becomes a complex calculus of how important a given issue is a given election, how much of an impact that representative can have on that issue, how likely they are to advance the issue, et cetera ad infinitum. Nearly every election is a stomach-churning exercise in hoping the good you voted for comes to fruition while the evil you voted for whithers on the vine.
1
I really do not get what "historical Christian positions" are. As a historian, what I see practiced in the American past does not measure up to the modern idea of "historical Christian positions". I mean, the actual historical record of treatment of non-whites and women across the board is horrible, even into the 1970's. Black Lives Matter and #MeToo and the problems in the Catholic Church demonstrate that. To me, the Christian silence during these centuries shows me what the actual "historical Christian positions" were. Mythology has replaced fact.
38
@gratis, Many christians believe catholicism is a cult. They changed the salvation message to say that we need good works to be saved. Not true at all.
The concept of sex being exclusively for marriage ignores a few things:
1) The scriptural basis for that restriction rests mainly on two verses. The first is in the Torah and mandates that any man who sleeps with a virgin has to marry her. This was not because of some mystical connection between sex and marriage, but simply forcing men to take responsibility for children that could have only come from them. In a society with no social safety net beyond the family, this was imperative. We live in a different society, with different imperatives.
The other verse is when Jesus says that when a man and woman come together they are one flesh. He was answering a question about marriage and divorce, not copulation. And yet this verse has been misinterpreted time and again as a prohibition of premarital sex.
2) Marriage-only sex _might_ have made sense back when boys and girls were arrange-married in their early teens or earlier (these days that would be called statutory rape - see how norms change?). But most people don't get married until their early twenties at the earliest, often their thirties or forties. It is unreasonable and cruel to forbid them from releasing their sexual energies safely in a healthy, loving relationship just because it doesn't include a marriage certificate. When we encounter realities that were not conceived of in the bible, we need new rules that respond to those realities, not old rules that ignore them.
26
The United church of Christ stands with Jesus in comforting the afflicted, like Dr ford. This author suggests he sympathizes with kavenaugh, and apparently wants to comfort the comfortable.
11
@Rhporter--The UCC has been at the forefront of progressive thought and action for centuries. It (along with its predecessors) was one of the first Christian denomination to ordain blacks, women, and gays. It was very active in the Civil Rights movement during the 50's and 60's.
9
The Catholics and evangelical are not true christians. They only support the Republicans so they can get yearly tax free church status. Our Pope Francis is for helping the immigrants the groups above are allowing the GOP to take kids away from immigrant parents. The Pope is for banning use of coal and fossil fuels as it is melting ice and warming our planet. The religious groups support Trumps use of coal. The Pope is for what God said hand the planet over to the next generation. The GOP and these religious groups do not want that to happen by supporting the Republicans. The Pope is the only true christian who cares about humanity and the planet. Very sad about the religious groups in the modern times.
8
All politics is tribal.
All religion is tribal (history proves this beyond a shadow of a doubt).
Therefore, this is simply a case of applying a Venn Diagram to one's political vs. religious beliefs - then choosing the Party which shows the greatest overlap.
Case closed.
4
@Dave
Look up neuropolitics. It shows that the conservative brain is much more receptive to tribal politics than the liberal brain.
Think of the Republican speeches during the 2016 primary. Typical phrases were Founding Fathers, the Constitution, strong military, strong leader, law and order, the bible. This identity with an authority such as the bible and Founding Fathers is more tribal.
Typical for Democrats were reducing poverty, education, global warming, the environment, and healthcare.
And not one Republican would admit in public they believed in evolution. Not because they didn't but because they were courting evangelicals.
In the 1950's you could be a scientist and still be a Republican. No more.
4
Once you get past the management of the terror of dying - which all religions do an admirable job of helping humanity with - the rest is pretty much up for grabs. People are political or not, and believe this or that, depending on who they're talking to and what suits their purposes at the time.
The "evil" religion does comes from religious people who wield bromides and fictions to abuse the less fortunate and less powerful. For that, religion deserves all the abuse it gets.
18
@Turgid I see no evidence whatsoever of any productive consequence to human life to belief in afterlife. The loudest preachers of it obviously have no fears whatsoever of punishment after death for any of their own lies and abuses,
Are US Christians really a cohesive demographic group? On one extreme you have fundamentalist Evangelical Christians and LDS. In the middle there are traditional Catholics. On the other end you have quasi-secular "christians" who view their church as an occasional social and community organization. The members of the latter group only identify as Christian because to them the word aetheist sounds radical and subversive. As the author of the article believes, being a Christian should have zero to do with political affiliation and that's a good thing for the country. But that's because the group itself is an illusion.
1
@Roget T, First of all, define a Christian. A true Christian has a personal belief and relationship with Jesus. His faith does not hinge like catholics and others, on works. Salvation is a gift and not based on anything we do, good or bad. LDS adds and has their own bible and it does not rely upon Jesus, Our Savior. You should perhaps research the differences for yourself and not take my word for it. Best wishes in your search for truth.
@Roget T
Sounds like you don't think mainline Protestants exist.
1
@Violet There is so much in the Bible that decry the easy certainty that promotes arrogance Read the Bible with an open mind.
1
but reverend keller, the timing on this article came too late! let's get real, in plain folk the message is "white evangelicals need to stop using the republican party as their political canon." the "package-style ethics" he's clearly referring to is roe vs. wade or in other words, evangelicals have made a deal with the devil. but that was the republican strategy all along and it's sad to see even with this whole business with kavanaugh that biblical principles are no longer the prerogative but the exception to a much larger, sinister, and partisan force.
30
Christianity is basically a proselytic belief system that requires its adherents to spread the faith. Many fundamentalists in America today believe their religion is under siege. It is increasingly evident that keeping church and state Constitutionally separate is being undermined by these embattled Christians. Judge Kavanaugh, by losing control and blurting out his bitterness has shown he cannot be trusted to honor the separation of church and state as a SCOTUS judgeship requires.
The Republicans are so driven by ideology, it seems that is the main thrust of their actions, and the only area, in contrast to their usual shortsightedness, where they show concern for the future. They don’t care about global warming, pollution, etc, but they’ve exerted an unprecedented effort of coordination and cooperation to stack the courts and legislatures of the country with fellow ideologues, in their frantic effort to save Christianity.
For reasons that entirely escape me, the issue of abortion has been the pillar of moral righteousness and action among fundamentalists for decades. This emphasis on a relatively unimportant factor in the social scheme suggests that abortion has taken on a symbolic significance for Christians far exceeding the intrinsic or rational. Judge Kavanaugh showed, by his astounding performance at the hearings, that he is unable to be objective and fair, and therefore should be barred from government service altogether.
21
The prophet belongs within the gates not outside.To be there the prophet must be strong, honest and humble.
With the immaculate Pence and the satanic Trump they could be the two riders of the Apocalypse ... which is just around the corner. They will pick any two others to make up the requisite four. Christians have shown themselves to be quite unfussy and forgiving. Ask Trump.
9
@Lycurgus -- All Christians?
Tell it to the Fox News nation. An American conservative Christian coming back from Scotland “humbled and chastened” by Scotland’s Christian socialism? I had to laugh. I’m sure it’s true of your friend since you witnessed it but it’s certainly not true of most of the Fox News audience, most of whom don’t even own a passport and are proud of it. Your work lies with them, not us. We’re post-Iron Age mythologies here, at least a large percentage of us, and glad of it.
34
Nietzsche’s criticism of Christianity in The Antichrist, appears more apt than ever: “With impudent selfishness they always wanted only their own advantage; out of the opposite of [Jesus' message] the church was constructed... one would look in vain for a greater example of world-historical irony.”
15
Does Tim Keller realize he doesn't speak for all Christians when he defines his "golden mean?" He's a kinder, gentler evangelical, than Jerry Falwell but an evangelical nevertheless who believes his sexual ethic is the only possible one. I remember when evangelicals had people like Lewis Smedes, who had a bit more nuanced view of sex outside marriage, Virginia Mollenkott, who spoke openly about embracing gay people, and when Christianity Today, the flagship publication of the evangelical world, entertained a variety of opinions about abortion. Now these guys are all sure what defines an evangelical, and what defines a Christian more generally. I wish they'd speak with more humility. They are not all the elected spokespeople of Christendom.
29
@paula
The verb “to sin” is taken from an ancient reference to archery meaning “to miss the mark”.
I don’t believe Keller is advocating for punishing people. But I also don’t believe that people should become so exercised about the fact that each person chooses a path with his/her life. And it’s an exclusive path.
I choose monogamy? Why? Why not mate with any partner I choose as Huxley advocated?
I choose heterosexual union? Why? Well, for one thing, children can derive from such a union; and our very survival depends on replacing ourselves, if only to pay for our nursing homes. But that makes you “homophobic”. No, it makes me willing to hold two contradictory ideas in place at once as F. Scott Fitzgerald admonished. The fact that one has science on its side is a benefit and ordering principle.
Some choose to abstain from alcohol and drugs ( a widely-held Muslim practice, incidentally). They call drinking “sinful” (missing the mark). But, you may say, I hold my beer well (sounds like Judge Kavanaugh). I might say that nobody really holds their beer well (and our country is embroiled on evaluating such a premise under just these conditions).
I don’t believe certain “ethics” are “the only ones”. But I am confident that there is a “best one”...and it pursues my life like a good and honest friend, even when I chose to ignore its counsel.
I believe we bring a great deal of misery on ourselves or at least enough that I no longer worry about others’ actions. They can deal.
1
I am a Christian; here are my opinions.
Christians may have whatever political affiliations they feel inclined to, as long as such activities are not corrupted by self-centered motives.
But the church itself must have no opinion on any political matter, ever. The church has one purpose, to spread the story of Jesus, and to provide support to all humanity with no exceptions in His name. Any political and social opinions the church takes sides on compromise this purpose, and drive away seekers who may have other opinions.
The churches now which espouse support for political views, wars, candidates, politicians, social issues and cultural movements are corrupt. They have lost their mission.
The ideas of Christ DO transcend all temporal matters. The church must do the same, or it is no longer a church but a political movement, and Christ’s message, and presence, which is completely apart from all temporal, material questions, is lost.
18
It is true that many churches unfortunately shy away from issues of the world and try hard to just focus on Jesus or personal devotion, e.g., 'be a good person' however I personally understand that. To some degree, in this polarized climate churches take that stance out of fear that bringing in hot button issues will tear their comfortable, "like family" community apart. Obviously this is more of an issue in churches which are moderate or of mixed views than it is for more homogenous churches (often on the far right).
That said, as an ordained Presbyterian minister & a feminist, I am not so sure we should simply follow the Bible and the example of the early church. Both are/were highly patriarchal. I believe that the Bible is a living document, which is meant to be prayerfully interpreted in each age.
12
Remember that there are many denominations of the Christian church. I get so tired of both left and right misusing "Christian" as a stand-in for "conservative Christian." When the far right refers to its Christian beliefs, as if they had a patent on the adjective, then often the far left derides Christianity itself. Both are mixing up politics with religion, the very thing this article criticizes.
29
How will Christians deal with man made climate change, surely a major clash with their beliefs? In the future decades this must play a major part in where they go politically.
9
@Hayden Boaler Hardly a "clash" with Pope Francis's beliefs. Pope Francis thinks it is a Christian duty to combat climate change, a duty that he finds fully consistent with Catholic doctrine. And he is urging Catholics worldwide to take action.
@Hayden Boaler, climate change was foretold as an indicator of the last days and the fulfillment of prophecy. Read Revelation. Read Daniel, read Ezekiel.
For those who make their religion and its teachings the lodestar of their lives, it is one thing to bear witness for those teachings, whether it is social justice, racial equality, opposition to the death penalty and to abortion, opposition to same-sex marriage etc. and quite another to push for government suppression of what secular society has decided it lawful. The deal American evangelicals have made with the GOP demands government reverse same sex marriage, abortion and other policies. What evangelicals don't recognize is that by supporting the GOP they are providing votes for men and women in Congress and at the state level who advance laws that among other policies evangelicals might oppose favor corporations, favor the wealthy, divert funds toward a bloated military that in turn facilitates military solutions to global challenges.
33
As a former Christian who left the flock and embraced reason, I believe Christians in politics is dangerous. Just look at the current climate.
What people don't understand about this situation is alot.
There is no point trying to rationalise the behaviour you are seeing regarding the Supreme Court pick. Christians, especially evangelicals have their primary allegiance to - in their language - 'the kingdom of God'. That is how they phrase it. Their primary allegiance is not to the USA. Or any country in which they exist. And not that all these Senators are evangelicals, but a lot of them are being voted for by a substantial number of evangelicals. As Pence said: "I'm a Christian, a conservative, and a Republican, in that order." American did not even make his top three. Their allegiance to the integrity of the US Supreme Court, or the process of filling it, is not as important to them as you may want or believe it should be. And they are okay with that - because in the end, they will have, in their words, 'Pleased God'.
Be very aware of their inability to separate Church and State.
Such people should be questioned quite thoroughly before being elected for, or allowed to hold public office.Who are they working for? Who do they serve? Just ask them, it is not the taxpayer.
32
No they don’t, and it has always been left to those who wish to live by the teachings of Jesus to chose the side that requires the least compromise of whatever teachings they value the most.
It is worth noting however that societal norms have been trending liberal for the past 2018 years or so (democracy, emancipation, sufferage, welfare, gay marriage, etc) and somehow the teachings of Jesus still seem perfectly relevant so maybe if the conservatives keep worshiping the socialist hippie Jesus things will work out.
8
Amen Rev. Keller
I am tired of being tarred with the wide brush of "evangelicalism" when I find so much that the religious right is identifying with is repulsive to me and clearly inconsistent with scripture. I appreciate your wise counsel to the church. I'm afraid you'll be considered a heretic by many but I think you are spot on.
Lord save us.
Tim
28
@Tim Edwards
Amen, Tim. Exactly my feelings. I am a Southern white Christian male. I am so tired of being thrown in the pot with people that believe nothing like me. This was a fine article. I am sharing it with my friends.
9
Often, the problem with individuals mixing Christianity and politics is one's version of Christianity becomes immutable.
At its most utilitarian, politics is flexible enough to respond to humanistic needs of a polis.
Too often individuals calculatedly invoke Christianity precisely because it tends to do the opposite--i.e., bend a polis to perceived immutable beliefs. Said beliefs inevitably tender a politic to match what such individuals want the world to be. In short, the polis becomes beholden to their version of religion.
Religion/spirituality can be useful when insular viewpoints are made more expansive to see what is good about humankind's attempts to be, well, human to, and with, each other.
Indeed, each of the world's major religions have tenets where compassion for others is a basis for selflessness with foci on healing, helping and lifting up those least among us in a way that benefits humanity as a whole.
Nonetheless, when Christianity melds with politics, inevitably a particular power of Christianity--its perceived command to immutable beliefs--is invoked by those demanding nation-state obedience to self-serving edicts that bend a nation to Christianity's most narrow instead of its most expansive views.
With moral edicts cherry picked to political goals, inevitably Christianity is tooled to batter the polis to bow to restrictive views of which humans and edicts to serve. That history of Christianity instructs us to keep it separate from the state.
7
This is true of conservative Judaism, and especially of the Muslim faith. for awhile, the USA seemed safe from religious tyranny. Our democracy has of late been undermined by the increasingly loud voices of evangelical Christians, a true minority.
Tim, you are such a wise teacher.
Reading the initial comments, it is clear that most readers cannot hear your or Jesus’s voice, and only skim your column before leaping in, for their attacks reflect neither your written argument nor His teaching.
People throw around the term “fundamentalist” like an expletive and wave the Constitution at the church door with red faces and screaming invectives.
Keep teaching. Your stern and gentle reminders of what is real and true, and Christianity’s transcendent and extra political status, is born out by your witness.
And forgive them, as I know you do, for they know not what they do.
I am neither Republican nor Democrat, liberal nor conservative. I follow Him in all my flaws and brokenness.
The Christian is a happy warrior. After the bitter rancor of last week, it is clear that most Americans know not for what they truly thirst.
It surely isn’t in a science book; this I know.
15
@Stuart
So, who do you believe, him or her?
@Stuart
Yea, they don't know what "They" truly want. BUT there's always some "christian" who does know what they want.
@Stuart Your last 2 sentences are not clear to me
1
Jesus fed the hungry and healed the sick. There is a clear alignment for those who do not turn toward the Old Testament to justify selfishness and hate.
19
@Dan Ari
EVRYTHING, and I mean everything we (think) we know about this Joshua of Nazareth is at best a secondary source.
We take all of ancient history that lacks the veracity of primary sources and documentation quite cautiously, however when it comes to certain ancient fairy tales, they are taken literally as the "word" of some sort of "god."
7
Shred the safety net. Spend $750,000,000,000 on defense in one year. Try to get rid of SNAP (food stamps), Cut veteran's benefits every chance you get, while saluting them. Take away affordable college, make college loan payback more important than dead beat dad alimony, set up tax laws that require managers to move overseas. Give huge tax cuts to the richest Americans, and cut traditional middle class tax cuts. Blow up the deficit. Turn banks into casinos. Have I left anything out? Which side is that? The top side, and almost always the above issues come from Rush Limbaugh's party.
212
@4Average Joe: $715 billion looks like an investment in conquest to me.
Historically, religion has been a factor in political alignments on the European Continent, where the church-state relationship has sometimes been a political issue and Christian parties fell to the right of center in a broad multi-party spectrum.
This was not the case historically in America's two-party system, where church and state have been firmly separated while the great majority of politicians proclaimed their religious faith and churches for the most part stayed out of politics.
Indeed, the right-left spectrum as understood in Europe had no meaning in the United States, where the principal European political divides simply do not exist. Our two principal parties overlapped each other, each a coalition of supporters whose views were scattered across the political universe.
That has begun to change over the past half-century, as one party sought to realign politics into a sharp right-left divide. Part of that plan has been a concerted effort to absorb Christian churches and believers into the party on the right. This is not only an unfortunate distortion of our political system, but a disservice to the freedom of conscience of individuals who find that both parties speak to them on different issues. The effort to impose a dimension of political loyalty on a commitment to religious faith should be resisted.
9
@Elliot: I think you are oversimplifying. The major social reforms in the U.K. came from Christians. The British Labour Party has Christian roots, even though it has moved away from them.
1
"Part of that plan has been a concerted effort to absorb Christian churches and believers into the party on the right." I mostly agree with this, but the Democratic Party hasn't exactly been very reassuring about religious liberty, and the cultural left of the Party is unrestrained in its ridicule and denigration of Christianity. Let's not even begin to talk about the universities, which have basically been commandeered by culturally left Democrats. I would much rather, for the sake of Christianity and our political health, not see this particular split taking place.
@Elliot America is great when it acts in a secular mode.For example, helping to create modern Israel for humanitarian reasons was GREAT. Being it's enabler now for religious reasons is AWFUL
1
Amen!
3
"Politics and the pulpit are terms that have little agreement. No sound ought to be heard in the church but the healing voice of Christian charity. The cause of civil liberty and civil government gains as little as that of religion by this confusion of duties."
Edmund Burke
9
"In great contests each party claims to act in accordance with the will of God. Both may be, and one must be, wrong." - Abraham Lincoln.
19
So what is a “Christian”? We sometimes divide ourselves between John 3:16 Christians and Matthew 25:35 Christians, but Mr Bruni is right to point out that neither one lays out an unambiguous political agenda. He is further right by saying that faith communities and political parties both hurt themselves by insisting on comprehensive agenda loyalty. This could explain why more and more people, especially younger ones, describe themselves as both politically independent and religiously post-denominational.
Is it too much to hope that we might yet return to a lost distinction of my own youth, between public and private moralities? The only way to achieve that would be to find it in ourselves to prosecute crimes equally regardless of who is accused. Imagine if a black man had done to Christine Blassey what she says Bret Kavanaugh did; dare we hope that what some would dismiss as “youthful indiscretion” would be universally treated and fully prosecuted across all walks of life? Only by drawing a firm circle around all crimes, and handling all instances consistently, will discussions about religion again inhabit appropriate ground. For when there are victims, a crime has occurred. Your priest may forgive you, your conscience might mature you, but in neither case should any level of law enforcement excuse you.
12
Hard to see a better argument for the strictest separation of Church and State than this piece!
59
Once again, those who need to see this won't. Those of us who know too well about the Christianists and their mission don't.
The Christianists are not at all interested in the man who served and died on the cross.
They want a ferocious Church Militant Jesus who comes riding in on a horse with a sword in hand to rule over all in the here and now.
33
@Berkeley Bee
I would be curious to know what each other interest group really wants, in your view.
Democrats become apoplectic over Christians, in a column where Tim Keller clearly argues that Christians straddle both parties, calling them backward and fundamentalist.
Yet, at the Democratic Convention, the Democrats featured a very thoughtful Muslim speaker as his wife stood silently behind him, veiled in a head scarf.
We all have a long row to hoe. When I take a seat in church this morning, it is one place that is demonstrably multi-racial and (from recent internal surveys) evenly divided between so-called conservative and liberal policies.
Your reference to Christ on a horse is offensive. He rode into Jerusalem on a donkey, was whipped and beaten in a mock trial, and hung to die. If that doesn’t make all people pause and think of what humans are capable of doing, reread you history of the early 20th century and reflect.
And park your sarcasm.
2
I'm aware 80% of evangelicals voted for Donald Trump. That they voted for a man so totally opposite of everything Jesus ever preached defies all explanations, save one. Racism.
Trump was a joke in politics until he scapegoated Mexican immigrants for what ails America. Then he shot to the top of the GOP polls and stayed there. Blaming people of color for whatever gripes whites has worked for generations. White spite got Trump elected, ever though none of those evangelicals would ever lower themselves mow my lawn or clean my hotel room.
Jesus said to help the sick. Evangelicals knew Trump wanted to kill the ACA but they voted for him anyway. I could go on, point by point of what Jesus taught and Trump seeks to kill, but I'll let it go.
There's no reconciling the teachings of Jesus to today's GOP. None. GOP is against healthcare, feeding hungry children, education, science, equality, fairness and livable wages. My GOP is as immoral and corrupt as Satan and I'll never vote GOP ever again.
That 80% of evangelicals could stomach pulling the lever for Trump is a disgrace and is why we must keep religion out of politics at all levels of government. Those people are plain wicked.
412
@Sad former GOP fan
Save two: Racism AND HYPOCRISY.
8
@Sad former GOP fan
So why is racism so deeply entrenched among today's evangelicals?
And why do yesterday's Republicans continue to make common cause with them?
1
@Sad former GOP fan
First, not a Trump voter/supporter. OK - "keep religion out of politics at all levels of government" yet you seem to suggest government should do the things Jesus commanded. Ironic - no? Jesus commands were given to you and me as individuals, not to government (Caesar). Hope you are giving away a large percentage of your income to charity every year to back up your desire to really help.
Evangelical Christians have sold themselves lock stock and barrel to the Republican Party, all for the illusion of political power. Christian pastors claim access to Republican politicians as a sign of legitimacy. Jesus Christ has been sold out completely.
122
This article is precisely the reason why the founding fathers wanted our government to remain completely secular. They would be horrified to see the degree to which religion has tainted our politics, and as a result politics has tainted religion in America.
Religion has no place in our political discourse, since the result is to impose one person’s religious orthodoxy on everyone else, and thereby create enemies amongst us.
Many of us do not believe in any religion, yet in America one cannot speak publicly of religion, let alone hold public office, unless one professes belief in a supreme being.
The public display of religion in political discourse, is inherently off-putting to those who do not share the beliefs. Witness Senator Kennedy’s pathetic performance at the Kavanaugh hearing.
There is no religious freedom in America. Not unless you believe the right way. That’s wrong.
38
@Jerrold Spiegel
In our political discourse, OR on public property. Including the ever present "God Bless America" or "in god we trust."
“There is no religious freedom ... unless you believe the right way.” This is exactly what many Christians worry about. Perhaps you could work with them instead of against them to guard both your beliefs.
"Christian" nowadays means right-wing evangelicals (the people who have hi-jacked the word). Those of us who are not religious, believe in other religions, or embrace what used to be mainstream Christianity (those who aren't the Pharisees of the right) are ignored in these discussions. Frankly, if the "Christians" would stop trying to impose their views on the rest of us and we agreed to play no part in the way they run their mega-churches in return, the US would be a kinder, nicer place.
23
Michael, we already play no part in how these right wing Evangelicals run their mega-churches.
2
This is all well and good, but as long as Christianity remains a religion that proselytizes, i.e. considers its Way the only Way, its Truth the only Truth and that its duty to God is to impose that Way and Truth on Others, Christianity can not be considered reasonable, or reasoning.
24
@HapinOregon
Every belief holds “its way” as the way or it would cease to animate action. When you make any decision, it is based on your belief in what will happen next, otherwise you are paralyzed in place or forced to flip a coin. If you cannot see our shared complicity in that fact, we have nothing to discuss, about the faithful or anyone else.
Christians greatest “imposition” is on themselves, first. What is lost on a culture is that this self-imposition looks like it treads on others because we live in community where you, your neighborliness, your corporate decisions, your children, your political representatives at some point intersect with every other person’s. And Christians are no less hypocritical than anyone else.
So to say that each person has to keep their beliefs to themselves is to say you no longer have the freedom to do anything that will come in contact with another human being because action follows belief or faith. Or it’s simply determinism.
That is why the liberal calling “to do whatever one wants as long as no one gets hurt” is a bit of a canard. Unless you are locked in a basement, and even that’s not dispositive, it makes it hard to think of a single scenario where you can apply such a worldview; because there’s still you.
Oh, right. That’s your individual right.
1
They tried to kill Galileo.
Now they try to kill climate science.
Not much has changed.
66
I have no special reason to support the Catholic Church, but I must point out that Galileo was not put to death by the church. The church did not oppose science, but actually supported it, and Galileo was actually funded by the church. Fundamentally, Galileo failed to demonstrate scientifically that his theory was correct, and in fact, it was wrong in a key aspect that others could identify - namely that he said the orbit of the earth was circular, and this did not match the observations. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/historical-notes-galileo-insul...
1
@Andrew, Newton corrected it all with calculus.
And it took the Church only 350 years to exonerate Galileo. Now that's progress!
Thanks. Great points.
3
Truly religious people should keep away from politics, especially in the US where it is all about money and power.
12
History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance of which their civil as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purposes.
-Thomas Jefferson to Alexander von Humboldt, Dec. 6, 1813.
28
@Jason: Democracy is rejection of the pretensions of priesthoods.
The two most important Christian New Testament rules to follow and weigh in every situation: ”Love one another.” (Jesus) and ”The greatest of these is love.” (Paul) Don't be concerned with where you fall on the political spectrum. Just always live by these teachings in every moment. Everything else will fall into place.
18
It is fine that people think there are different ways to help others. But should there not be some basis in reality to do so? One can believe that one should incentivize the rich by simply giving them more money, and incentivize the poor by taking everything away, and that helps everyone. I get it, it is a belief system. But if the results of a belief system actually can be measured, is not one morally obliged to do so?
Apparently... not.
7
Jesus was a Socialist. If the "Christians" actually read their Bible before hitting others over the head with it, they would open to the Book of Mathew. It's all about real charity.
133
@billd
Jesus was a Jew with a messianic complex.
At least that's what we know, from others who were supposedly around him during his time on this planet and left actual accounts of what this guy was all about.
@billd
None of Christ's commands and imperatives were directed to government -- only to individuals. So don't confuse charity (voluntary helping of others) vs by force and confiscation (government). I can only hope you donate a large double digit percentage of your annual income to charity as evidence of your philosophy. Some people do -- and most of them believe in smaller government.
I have serious problems with this and many Christian platitudes. Sorry folks, but this is but one example, of many, why:
Our Secretary of State Jeff Sessions stood before us and declared that the Bible supported the activities of ICE in taking children, even toddlers, from their parents without sufficient planning to assure that the children could be reunited. ICE has subsequently even deported some adults without being sure that their children were reunited with them, thus creating permanent orphans.
Sessions claimed that this was because it was an activity of the State and thus justified. Did Jesus really intend that? Jesus said "Suffer the little children ... " He didn't say, "yank them from the arms of their mothers."
Well, there was one, sole, lonely voice that spoke up. The Bishop of the Methodist church to which Sessions is a member pointed out that that is not what their church teaches and indicated that Sessions would need to repent.
Other than that there was an ominous silence ... There should have been a cacophony of disagreement. Just silence.
Christianity doesn't seem to have a moral backbone. It seems to be a crutch to justify doing whatever you want if you can just find the right Biblical phrase to take out of context.
146
@dpaqcluck alas, there was quite a bit of noise, but trying to get the press interested is another thing:
https://elca.org/News-and-Events/7935
1
@dpaqcluck, 1. If you heard no other Christians countering Sessions' proposals, you weren't listening. The United Methodist Church, not just his bishop, disagreed. So did leaders from the Presbyterians, Roman Catholics, United Church of Christ, Episcopal Church and American Baptist churces. 2. Jeff Sessions is Attorney General of the US, not Secretary of State.
6
@dpaqcluck
Are you suggesting that Sessions thinks 'suffer' here means 'to experience pain and discomfort' as opposed to 'allow'? It wouldn't surprise me at all for politicians of his ilk to take advantage of linguistic ignorance. Leave no child, behind, indeed.
1
Please keep faith out of my government.
Science and reason is the only way forward. As we have seen the religious people are easily led, a flock of sheep.
Evolve.
47
@Awake - The two are not incompatible. Just as my (early) faith formed my social and ethical conscience, science now informs my faith. This is a point with which many (most?) practicing scientists struggle, while remaining members of their faith community.
FWIW, "faith" here is identified as "Methodism," and "science" is my profession of chemistry.
@Awake
Yes. Can you believe how some want to deny gender despite the clear settled science on this?
1
If Christians don't fit into the two party system, Jews, Muslims, and any other religious group shouldn't either. Religion is what a person believes. Politics and religion and government don't mix. We've seen any number of excellent examples why. Abortion is one good example.
Just because a Christian politician believes that abortion is contrary to the laws of God doesn't mean that the woman seeking one does. His belief should not outweigh her right to decide when she wants to have children. Science is another area where politicians have interfered and often not to better things. Climate change happened in the distant past. Records have been studied. There is proof that WE are responsible for much of the climate change occurring now. But even if we weren't, what's happening should not be ignored.
In the view of this reader what is has been going on for the past 30-40 years in America is the dissolution of the barrier between church and state. It's preventing our government, at every level, from making decisions that are practical, humane, and sensible. Ironically the Pilgrims came here to get away from the Church of England so that they could live the religious life they wanted. One wonders what they would think of America now.
The intolerance displayed by fundamentalists is leading to ignorance. In today's world ignorance is not a virtue. It's a liability. I don't think Jesus preached that ignorance was something to value.
48
@hen3ry
"Religion is what a person believes" .....and government is what a person believes.
Jesus preached individuals had responsibilities towards fellow man -- not that government had responsibilities towards fellow man. The Pilgrims wanted very very limited government -- not what we have today.
Hoping you are giving a large double digit percentage of your annual income to charity to back up your claim to care for others.
1
Maybe we should do a better job of being salt and light with the various political parties. (I'm a Democrat, if that matters).
2
Lived in Hawaii for a number of years. Once asked a Hawaiian friend why so many Hawaiians were Christians given what had happened to them in the wake of the missionaries and their greedy immoral children. My friend went to church every Sunday and Hawaii still has one of the highest church attendance rates in the world.
Without hesitation he said, "They weren't Christians, they were liars. We're Christians."
Something the pious hypocritical American Christians of today may want to consider in their undying support of a man who gleefully brags about breaking the commandments and lies virtually every time he opens his mouth.
What do you think Jesus Christ would think of this man? Contrast that with your thoughts and actions.
46
@Lou Good
First, not a Trump voter / supporter. But if you think the choices to Trump were notably better, that is the problem.
I was educated by the nuns at St Jude School on W204th St. up in Inwood. Among other things, I was taught the Golden Rule - to love and treat others as I would myself - and another pretty basic rule that one doesnt touch things that are not one's to touch.
I thought everybody followed these rules.
I was wrong.
Interesting how political parties exploit religion and religious people for electoral gain - but it speaks volumes that the parties cant be bothered to actually honor what religion actually teaches.
According to Sen Ted Cruz, the imperative to take care of the lowliest and neediest in our society exemplified by policies of the New Deal are to be scoffed at and dismissed as "New York values". Its not - its Christian teaching.
60
@Andy Do you think the Republican party would have been able to put together a winning strategy by campaigning on tax cuts alone? Appealing to the religious and demonizing unpopular groups helped to broaden its popularity to groups that could barely pay their bills. Nowhere was this shown better than in the 2004 elections. Some state Republican groups actually sponsored defense of marriage initiatives to bring out the religious vote. Read this article from 2004: www.nytimes.com/2004/11/04/politics/campaign/samesex-marriage-issue-key-...
6
@Andy: the Hillel version of the Golden Rule is much more feasible and practical: Don't do to others what one abhors having done to oneself.
5
@Andy
Christ's imperatives were to individuals and not to government (Caesar). These imperatives were to be done voluntarily by individuals, not under threat of force or confiscation (government). Big difference.
Timothy Keller carefully avoided stating the obvious -- that overwhelmingly Christians identify with a party that is silent on bigotry, thinks the best way to help the poor is to help the rich, and supports an liar and an adulterer for President.
44
@lamplighter55; Overwhelmingly, the Christians I know and worship with come from more than one party. We share a concern for the poor, and an intention to be good, whether we are one party or another. We are distressed by the meanness of governmental culture, and utterly condemn the idea that one party in the US represents the Christian faith.
8
This is factually incorrect. The Christian denominations span the left-right spectrum evenly, and many individual denominations (eg Roman Catholicism) span the spectrum quite evenly as well. More than two thirds of the country identifies as Christian; they are clearly not all voting for one party monolithically.
2
@lamplighter55 , actually, according to pew, the only religious groups that are mainly Republican are Evangelical Christians and Mormons. Within those two groups, the religious people are more moderate than the right wing, especially around issues of race.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/19/opinion/liberalism-religious-right.html
1
The author omits the historical record in cautioning against too close a relation between religion and politics. The main reasons are (1) there are many religions, and Christianity is only one of them, and (2) even within sects of the SAME religion, history is replete with violent encounters between the sects stemming from each holding their apparently incontrovertible view that their own is the only valid one, and force is justifiable in asserting it.
15
The Bible does not endorse any specific cultural, social, political or economic theory nor should it be used to do although it has and still is. The worst sin in Judaism, oppressors, predators, the powerful who misuse their power, greed. The poor are not only those who are destitute but who have no voice and no hope of redress of grievances. The Kingdom of God is an Upside Down Kingdom because it rejects injustice, predation , oppression and our destructiveness. The Holy Eucharist the paradigm of God's Kingdom: thanksgiving, offering (sacrifice) to God and others. The breaking of the bread the Body of Christ is a symbol of all bread shared in an unjust world and sharing it. It's shame so many Evangelicals and others have hitched their versions of Christianity to the oppressor version, the Cult of My Personal Savior, the Prosperity/Happiness Cult allied to American Civic Religion, the Cult of the Flag. True biblical ethics cannot address all our modern problems but it can provide guideposts to some of them with the help of secular theories, psychology, science, philosophy. 125 years ago Evangelicals fought for labor rights, women's rights, against cartels, for purity of the food and water supply, worker safety, better working conditions, child labor laws. Right in line with the biblical message of justice for all.
15
I don't understand why "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" is a problem for any reasonable person, whether they are religious or not. It, in theory, spares everyone from getting into political fights over beliefs that cannot be substantiated, in arguments that go nowhere.
20
There's a reason why there's a separation between Church and State in this country, and all it took was Brett Kavanaugh's whiny testimony to prove it -- because his falling back on being a Christian, instead of behaving like one, ultimately made everything he had to say ring false.
In fact it's hard to reconcile the place of Christianity or any other religion in this country's political landscape because ours is hardly a monotheistic society, and faith-based decisions always manage to make someone feel left out.
That's why if you want to hear the Gospel, go to Church.
31
"The Bible does not give exact answers to these questions for every time, place and culture."
Yes, it does, and very clearly. "Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's." We are spiritual being having a physical experience, and the Bible is about our spiritual beings, not about the physical experience. Anything to do with this physical world is apart from what the Bible teaches us. Government and politics are outside the scope.
Christians mixing the two is a Christian interpretation, not something actually found in the Bible.
1
One more voting bloc aiming for power is basically true. A subset of Christians have been claiming that America is a Christian Nation when our founders made it clear that is not. A subset of Christians has made every effort to force creationism into science curricula as long as I can remember. A subset of Christians demand state sponsored prayers in public schools. A subset of Christians insist that the 10 Commandments be posted in public areas. A subset of Christians want to legalize their worldview at the expense of the worldviews of other Christians and non-Christians. This is all about power over others.
34
@David Bible: And a subset believes that abortion is outlawed in the bible, yet it is not mentioned even once. Unlike divorce.
1
@David Bible. Imagine if Jews, Muslims, Hindus or any other religion would act the same way as the subset of Christians?
It’s great when individuals are moved to help those in need, no matter if Christian faith or not moves them to it. But the problem getting necessary help to the poor is not individual givers, it’s simply that not enough folks are willing to give, period, of any religious or atheist persuasion. The government can be a mechanism to share the goods in our nation, to see that the poor are helped, and are helped systematically. And so Christians who wish the poor to be cared for, in addition to giving on their own, do need to be a part of the political life of this country, because it’s through policy that goods are distributed in America. Imperfect, but the most just I’d think.
I’m a progressive Christian with orthodox belief. I give and pray and believe in the resurrection of Jesus and also believe in evolution. I also have an easier time believing in the resurrection than I do that somehow everybody will suddenly be individually willing to share some of their material wealth with others to really ease poverty (or similar things to cure other social injustice difficulties). So I’m going to be politically active and vocal and chose a candidate as best as I can to vote for, who supports progressive policies, knowing that none may fit the bill perfectly.
24
Thank you so much for articulating so much that I would like to, and for making me think as well.
Among the comments we see the usual “religion is a lie” reflex responses, but I hope it will also cause them to think again, as well as those who consider themselves to be Christian and are hyper-partisan.
May God’s glory and righteousness be our main concern and all other things will follow.
4
“...One more voting bloc aiming for power.” Of course religion is about power, that’s why religions get involved in politics.
Though they often say they proselytize to save souls and spread the good word, I’m convinced they also desire to gain influence in secular affairs precisely to increase their ability to proselytize, which further increases their power and influence as well as their capacity to proselytize.
Religion is a social construct, and like all social institutions it seeks to give its members a sense of belonging and make them feel more secure. They accomplish this either by increasing the number of their adherents or by increasing the power of the ones they already have. Usually it’s both.
Though faith is a personal matter and individuals are fully capable of constituting their beliefs on their own, religion gives people a sense of belonging. Because belonging gives us greater agency and makes us feel safer, people band together precisely because it gives us at least a perception of greater power and the concomitant security that power provides.
Politics is the same and thus history often finds religion and politics closely intertwined. Currently, the influence of religion is waning a bit, and the faithful may feel a greater urgency to renew their alliance with the political sector. Time will tell its effect.
5
@Marshall Doris Religion is NOT about power. Religious institutions are.
1
@Marshall Doris: Religion was invented by patriarchs like Moses to legitimize their governance.
@gratis
Some religion IS most definitely about power: its source and our relationship to it. If you are asking for forgiveness, why are you doing so? If you are not allowed to do certain things, why is that the case?
The ancient spiritual masters upon whom material RELIGION was found ALL had two basic premises in their teachings: 1) give selflessly and endlessly, and 2) to embark on a spiritual life would require a life of rigorous and UNFETTERED SELF-EXAMINATION. Nothing more is in the equation, because nothing more need be. The very idea that religion-affiliated people continue to separate and divide themselves from the other into neat and tidy categories is directly antithetical to the teachings of "The One" they claim to follow. That claim is (for themselves) "because that's what he would do." Of all the distorted/embellished interpretations of ancient wisdom, this one continues to be on top of the heap as the most laughable and remarkable piece of spiritual ignorance to date, now well in into the 21st century. Even now, religionists refuse to get it.
The American Constitution invites anyone who chooses to practice freely the religion of their choice, as it should be. But that same spirit also guarantees for those of us not so inclined, freedom FROM it where matters of the State are involved. That in no way dissuades the principals of equality, compassion, charity, etc, of which "christians" don't have a monopoly.
Those are human principals, practiced LONG before cultural Christianity came into being. Given that, coupled with the observations in the first paragraph, this seems like a contrived dilemma, and not timed very well in light of very recent events re: the State.
9
Rev. Keller is so right! We need to add:Revelation implies insight or else we stay clouded and nothing is revealed. But insight means thinking for yourself, seeing the complexity of the world, e.g. the many differences AND continuities between antiquity and our time. Insight also implies motivation. Willing and knowing are not enemies. Insight, knowing and willing never occur in a vacuum. So if you are a southern American Presbyterian you should expect your Scottish or your upper Midwestern American Lutheran brethren to think and live differently. The beauty of charity implies that differences despite common causes are not a threat but an opportunity to grow in deeper insight and commitment. I am always amazed at the superficiality of meaningless judgments that being religious implies being "conservative", or being educated implies being an atheist! The opposite is true.
6
There are many Christian faiths, as well as non-Christian religions, whose ministry is physically helping people without proselytizing their beliefs on others. Unfortunately in this country we have a very vociferous group of operators and co-opters of religious sects using their professed beliefs to justify exercising political sway over the democratic process.
One of the principles our country was founded on was the separation of church and state. The state won't get in the faith business and the religions shall stay out of the government's business. Then we'll all get along just fine.
Interjecting your religion in my government is wrong, no matter what you think your religious beliefs entitle you to do. Please practice your faith in your life, in your church, and in your home.
38
I think Jesus would be uninterested in politics. He is on the record about this in his “render unto Caesar” comment. I don’t think he cares much about prayer at high school football games, 10 commandments monuments or “in god we trust” on our coins.
He seems to tell us faith lives within the hearts of people and seems most concerned that we treat others and ourselves with love and mercy.
The conservative Protestant church in which I grew up emphasized separation of church and state. Starting in the 80s, with the rise of the religious right movement, those kind of churches became an annex of the republicans. Moderates fled or were expelled. Now they talk about keeping God in the public square.
This column is wise. I hope the religious leaders who might benefit from these ideas will read it.
79
@CinnamonGirl
Agreed. Christ had no imperatives or commandments for government -- only for individuals. So let's have less government so individuals are more able to do what they are called to do.
In my opinion, more humility and uncertainty would strengthen Mr. Keller’s credibility as a spokesperson for Christianity.
Mr. Keller does not accurately speak for all of historical and contemporary Christianity, which actually is much more diverse in its beliefs and assessments than he pretends it is not. One obvious example is racism, which historically was not widely considered to be sinful, and even today, regrettably, is not considered sinful in some Christian quarters.
And not all Christians take the stories in the Hebrew Bible and in the New Testament to be historically accurate or even to be historical in the intent of the authors, whose identities and audiences and time and purpose of writing are largely unknown. Even the original texts have been lost, so we cannot know the original words and intended meanings with confidence, and we also are virtually clueless with respect to texts that were not preserved but could have been of historical value.
Likewise, due to a lack of currently available objective evidence, even the existence of an historical Jesus is arguable or, at minimum a matter of faith rather than clear historical fact.
9
@Al Cannistraro
"even the existence of an historical Jesus is arguable"
Josephus would disagree with you.
In my opinion, even the redacted relevant Josephus passages amount to nothing more than unreliable hearsay, at best.
There exist in many European immigrant families with Anglicized surnames the story that immigration inspectors on Ellis Island routinely and cavalierly changed names on the spot because “You’re in America now “. I myself heard this story from an official Ellis Island tour guide. And there is a small Italian-American immigration museum in my local area that recounts this story in an exhibit. But I recently learned that the inspector story has been authoritatively debunked.
The moral of my tale is that Oral Tradition — the mechanism that supposedly made the hearsay passed along to Josephus accurate and reliable— is baloney.
3
@Barry C
Antiquities of the Jews (Latin: Antiquitates Judaicae; Greek: Ἰουδαϊκὴ ἀρχαιολογία, Ioudaikē archaiologia) is a 20-volume historiographical work written in Latin composed by the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus in the 13th year of the reign of Roman emperor Flavius Domitian which was around AD 93 or 94.
The extant copies of this work, which all derive from Christian sources, contain two disputed passages about Jesus. The long one has come to be known as the Testimonium Flavianum. If genuine, it is an early extrabiblical record of Jesus, and as such is sometimes cited as independent evidence for the historical existence of Jesus.
The earliest complete Greek manuscript of the Antiquities dates from the eleventh century, the Ambrosianus 370 (F 128); preserved in the Biblioteca Ambrosiana in Milan.
The Eleventh Century was 1000 years after the original composition of this work, sometime in 93-94AD.
I am very grateful such a piece has finally been written for the Times. I wholeheartedly agree and frequently preach this point of view. Christians have a faith practice which calls Jesus the Prince of Peace and celebrates Christ the King as a holy day. We read about Jesus' triumphal entry into Jerusalem and how the Magi bowed to him while Herod feared his presence. Jesus is in charge. Unless we stand aloof from strict adherence to any philosophy or political affiliation we do not fully live into our belief system. Simultaneously, Jesus, a righteous Jew and extraordinary prophet, is in the mold of all who came before him in scripture who championed the poor and downtrodden even to the point of his own death for their benefit. We can be aloof from a philosophy or party, but must never be aloof from one another. Therefore political participation is absolutely necessary. Bow to Jesus, not a political party. Serve the needy, not a political party.
6
Politics and religion do not go together. Your example, Mr. Keller, of the Mississippian who ventured into the Scottish Highlands awoke to a new reality of Scripture. "He realized that thoughtful Christians, all trying to obey God’s call, could reasonably appear at different places on the political spectrum, with loyalties to different political strategies."
Is it really so difficult, if one is a Christian, to not politicize everything in the Bible? Is there really only one single, incontrovertible, unimpeachable interpretation of Holy Scripture? How man Americans do you think are " Christians [who] should be committed to racial justice and the poor?" How often, how well, do people of good will accomplish this punishing summons to the Cross. Not many.
The parable of the Good Samaritan cannot often be referred to in the Southern Baptist Convention or in the Prosperity Gospels. That's because it doesn't square with Republican orthodoxy. The evangelical "Christians" tell us that they are the true believers, but how does one square that kind of arrogant nonsense with the realities of everyday life? When Jesus, with the coin, said that we must "render up to Caesar what is Caesar's and render up to God what is God's," how often is the parable parsed so as to come out on the right (no pun intended) side of the political spectrum.
I'm cynical; I say that America is no more invested in Jesus Christ than it is Mammon. Jesus had something to say about that too.
Didn't He?
32
As usual Tim Keller comments are wise and biblical.
The only disappointing point is the silence about abortion and related matters. This is disingenuous because Presbyterian Evangelical churches are strongly against abortion but he is silent.
Why is he hiding his real opinions?
7
@Galeazzo: abortion fits right in there, but it is not necessary to add a distracting topic and it doesn’t change the content of what Tim has written. It should be noted that it is not a simple topic. Let’s not forget that Republican governments have not been any better than Democrat in reducing abortion rates. People currently doubt Christians’ commitment to support those who get into difficult situations, whether of their own making or not. I suspect that there needs to be a greater focus on improving the care for the living before people will change their hearts in this one. Let’s make a woman’s choice easier first. Men need to step up and also reject the “conquest culture”’that has been in the news recently.
3
@Galeazzo Scarampi
Um, because abortion is not the point of his Op-Ed, but politics v'v Christian practice is?
Doesn't seem difficult to grasp.
1
@Galeazzo Scarampi Does every article have to cover every topic?
I think Religious people, Christian, Muslim alike, work to have their beliefs codified and stuffed down other people's throats.
The correct question to ask about abortion is not: "Do you think abortion is good?", it's "What should the law be?"
Are we really going to imprison women and doctors? Who will you release from prison to make room? An important aspect of Roe is that it allowed doctors to make decisions without fearing a career-ending prosecution. There actually are obstetrical emergencies.
The Clinton/Gingrich Restoration of Religious Freedom act has caused more divisiveness than any other piece of legislation in my lifetime. We are re-litigating what was settled law. Do what you want on private property and keep off public. If you want to be political, pay taxes.
America's secularism is her unique feature in the world and it keeps the peace.
87
@Mel
"America's secularism is her unique feature in the world and it keeps the peace."
To call America secular is to deny reality. Think about it: The official motto of the US is "In God We Trust." Congress opens with a prayer. About 30% of Americans identify as "evangelical." Everywhere you turn, it's "God" and "Jesus" and "War on Christianity" and "War on Christmas."
There are many other countries that are far more secular than the US. I live in one - Canada.
6
@GrumpyOldePhart: The French Revolution produced science-based measurement and fact-based government.
@GrumpyOldePhart
The official motto of the United States is not "IGWT."
Never codified by law, E pluribus unum was considered a de facto motto of the United States until 1956 when the United States Congress passed an act (H. J. Resolution 396), adopting "In God We Trust" as the official motto because regressive conservatives were obsessed with "godless" communists and thought having "God" on their side was to their advantage.,
Surely looking after your fellow man and the environment, should be basic christian values. Caring for life once you have drawn breath outside the womb, should involve a living minimum wage, excellent, well funded public health, education and infrastructure. Consumers need to be protected. One would imagine Jesus would be opposed to high income and wealth inequality.
Ghandi admired Christ. His issue was that christians were so unlike Christ.
168
@Barry of Nambucca
Please provide support that Christ anywhere suggested the government should look after anyone. There is none. ALL of Christ's commands are individual imperatives -- you and me individually should do them. The government is not you and me. Notably, the party that leans to less government (albeit only theoretically) gives more to charity (every year) than the other party that leans to government doing most things.
I realize that the author is sincere and honest here. However, I would ask: what other part of our culture hasn't really changed in 500 years, and essentially still exists in a medieval form? Do doctors still apply leaches? Do lawyers still recommend witches be burned at the stake? Their lack of adaptability is why they apply so poorly to politics in 2018, because they were devised to deal more with 1518.
I am not anti-religion, but the major choices of religions we have are currently terrible, mostly because they haven't evolved as human knowledge and consciousness has evolved, mostly because they are hog-tied to an unmovable Scripture that cannot be questioned or even debated. Humans probably need religious expression, but the current choices we have are like trying to find a fine and healthy meal, and the only choices we have are McDonald's, Burger King, and Taco Bell.
35
What should the role of Christians in politics be? - NONE
There should be clear separation of church and state (inclusive of within the public school system) and furthermore, there should be an absolute end to tax exemption status for religious entities, (some fronting as nothing more than political arms funded by dark money) where the taxpayer is funding someone's faith.
Faith is within and can be as personal as anyone wants it to be, whereas organized religion of any kind is seriously on the wane, with Atheists becoming the fastest growing group.
If governments around the world were made up of the people, run by the people and enacting policies for the people (all the people, and not just all of one kind), then there would be absolutely no need for charity of any kind.
To be ''Christian'' is to be ultimately Liberal (there can be conservative viewpoints of financial matters - I will grant that). To be Liberal is to be charitable already - with your time, energy and desire to make this world a better place, for not only thy fellow neighbor, but for family, and ultimately for oneself.
It can be the most simple thing of kind word spoken, it could be allowing a woman to have control of their own body, or ultimately it could be the strive for peace and not war.
We all preach within our own way, yet again to be ''Christian'' is to listen, feel another's pain, and try to alleviate it.
There is too much pain in the world caused by all religious faiths.
55
@FunkyIrishman
Will make a deal -- the left can have all the non-financial issues as long as the right gets all the financial issues. Less government spending will allow us all to be more charitable. Notably, the right consistently gives more to charities than the left. Hopefully you are giving a large double digit percentage of your annual income to charity -- lest you be a hypocrit. Zero evidence liberals are more charitable -- unless you are suggesting they are more charitable with other people's money (aka socialism). Being charitable is a voluntary act, not one compelled by force or confiscation (government).
What should the role of Christians in politics be? - NONE
There should be clear separation of church and state (inclusive of within the public school system) and furthermore, there should be an absolute end to tax exemption status for religious entities, (some fronting as nothing more than political arms funded by dark money) where the taxpayer is funding someone's faith.
Faith is within and can be as personal as anyone wants it to be, whereas organized religion of any kind is seriously on the wane, with Atheists becoming the fastest growing group.
If governments around the world were made up of the people, run by the people and enacting policies for the people (all the people, and not just all of one kind), then there would be absolutely no need for charity of any kind.
To be ''Christian'' is to be ultimately Liberal (there can be conservative viewpoints of financial matters - I will grant that). To be Liberal is to be charitable already - with your time, energy and desire to make this world a better place, for not only thy fellow neighbor, but for family, and ultimately for oneself.
It can be the most simple thing of kind word spoken, it could be allowing a woman to have control of their own body, or ultimately it could be the strive for peace and not war.
We all preach within our own way, yet again to be ''Christian'' is to listen, feel another's pain, and try to alleviate it.
There is too much pain in the world caused by all religious faiths.
8
The test of a democracy is how the minority(ies) are treated; if any of their freedoms are compromised because of the actions or power of the majority.
American Fundamentalist Christians (and to an extent some who adhere to Orthodox Judaism and Islam) seem to be unaware of this fundamental principle.
In the absence of compromise by the majority on this 'meta-issue', as Rima Regas points out, the inevitable outcome would seem to be revolution. I would add "and/or civil war" to the end of the sentence.
8
@Karl Gauss: yes, we all have our scriptures and axioms, as you have shown. I hope that you consider where you are imposing your morality on them.
After that I hope you will seriously consider what your Creator desires of you, rather than the other way round. Take a look at the Gospels. They really are unique. If you know Jesus you will know the Father. It is a great discovery.
@Karl Gauss: The US revolution was unique in its time to base legitimacy of government on specific powers delegated to it by the people, not God. These powers were deliberately limited to prevent majorities from tyrannizing minorities.
3
Funny I always thought highly religious people would be more liberal in their politics. Love thy neighbor, thou shall not kill and all. But every highly religious person I meet tend to be the opposite.
As an Atheist I do what is right and moral because I know it is the correct thing to do. Not because i fear burning in a fiery pit in some afterlife.
330
But you shouldn’t be able to impose your “right and moral” (social programs/$15 minimum wage , for instance) any more than Evangelicals get to impose theirs (restrictions on abortion, the Ten Commandments in public spaces, etc.).
1
Or because some preacher told me to.
1
@John g, as a Christian, I do what is right and moral because I know it is the correct thing to do. And when I fail in that, I know that I am loved and forgiven. And when my neighbor fails, I know that they are also loved and forgiven. The fiery pit deal is not something that concerns me. There are many flavors of religious people out there, I'm sorry if you've run into the judgy kind. Jesus preached not against sinners, but against the hypocrisy of the religious leaders of his time, a fact that should give us pause.
2
Christians fit into the political system because Christian citizens of the USA, like all citizens, are part of a democratic republic in which church and state are fundamentally separate.
Christians today, like all other citizens, suffer under a decrepit two party duopoly, which used to function as an effective and positive two party system, but is now helping weaken, erode and corrupt American democracy.
9
Thank you for this article, from a Christian in the Bible Belt who is deeply disturbed by the evangelical/fundamentalist cult mentality that violates the separation of church and state to the great detriment of both. Senator Kennedy of Louisiana in the hearing yesterday was a prime example of the arrogant assumption of God's role and voice by these southern hypocrites. I was born and raised in the south and have long wondered why the fundamentalist "luminaries" like Franklin Graham and the televangelical prosperity gospelers preach the GOP from their pulpits. I've finally found the simple answer: follow the money. These men are in it for the money, and easily corrupted themselves, are birds of a feather with their GOP representatives.
509
Please don’t drag religion down into the same gutter as politics. Some of us find it extremely annoying at times but we still have respect for the concept, much unlike partisan politics.
3
The politics and religion of a person are of no concern of mine as long as he or she acts within the bounds of secular law and common decency. If that person's behavior conflicts with the rule of law, there are remedies on both sides of the conflict within the secular legal system.
The problem arises when churches or groups of "believers" try to enter the political arena to impose their delusions on society by attempting to influence or dictate the things that are properly owed to Caesar, including social issues. The glory and truly revolutionary achievement of the establishment of the American nation was the fact that it was explicitly a secular state without a national religion. All of Europe was astounded that there was a counrty without an established
religion. The French especially rejoiced that there was such a thing just as they did in the belief that slavery would be abolished as well. They were disappointed in the latter then and we should all tremble now at the prospect of a religious or religion-influenced state.
14
“Secular Law and common decency” is another way of setting out a belief and morality system. You are aware of that aren’t you? Are you aware how much of your system is based on the Judeo-Christian belief system? Why should you accept some and not the rest? (A rhetorical question, of course)
Surely the core of Christian values is summed up in the stories of Lazarus and the rich man and the Good Samaritan. Hard to believe that Evangelical enthusiasts for "the prosperity gospel" and "small government" are living the implications of these stories.
63
@Fred White Not to mention that one of the most revered of OT figures was a guy named Joseph- Whom God raised up to essentially rule all of Egypt & who promptly instituted taxes during a time of plenty to prepare for a time of famine.
Thank you for this helpful and thoughtful attempt to remind us that Biblical and historical Christian positions do not align with the American Party system or even with smaller political organizations. Christians can reasonably disagree about many political matters.
Christians do bring some specific considerations to political issues, though. One is humility. Christianity teaches that we are fallible and, on our own, in the world, imperfectible. We have, as the Buddhists call them, "tendencies" to go wrong--pride is probably the most important one. It includes a feeling and acting as if one were superior to others, as if one's own perspective and experiences and inferences could be counted on in a special way, different from others.
This "sin" is connected with another idea: the idea that we are all equally God's children, one family, and that we should love each other, take care of each other, each and every one. How to do this best--we can differ on that, and we all have different abilities, but that we should love one another is absolute.
Politics exacerbates pride and rarely has use for humility. American party politics divides people into identity groups and demographic groups and constituencies. Some people's pains, desires, perspectives are more important than that of others.
It seems to me that a Christian politics has to be case by case, committed to truth, love dignity, opportunity, justice for each and every one. And it is impossible to be perfect in this.
10
@Nathan: The moment one introduces a divine creator who made the universe with some purpose in mind, Pandora's box of projection explodes into political controversy.
3
Trump is a man who would seem to embody the deadly sins of pride, lust, greed, gluttony and anger. Not laziness though, he can’t be accused of that one.
1
Oh … I don't know.
One of the more memorable and historically acute images is that of Christians burning Jews at the stake. Have things really changed that much?
18
@Richard Luettgen
"Christians" burning each other at the stake, too.
5
@Barry C
Actually, the "Christians" doing the burning didn't regard the burnees as other 'Christians", but as apostates and heretics. As far as that goes, it wasn't that long ago that an evangelical Christian woman, in discussing religion with me, wouldn't refer to Catholics as "Christians".
Ya gotta love "Christians".
Ah Richard, I begin to understand you better now. Please identify the place in the New Testament where Christians are told to burn Jews at the stake, and you will have a point. Otherwise you are just pointing to bad actors. If we look into historical events we will see bad actors under every banner. Atheists have some egregious ones in the last century.
1
The level of religiosity in US politics is only matched by many Islamic countries and the close ties religion has with influencing and dictating government policy. Religion has no place in politics. The Founding Fathers knew this but were tepid in the language inserted into our constitution.
All religions are based on myths, legends and superstitions. There is little evidence that the Buddha and Jesus and other religious figures were real people. There are no bodies and no historical evidence other than religious texts written by religious zealots. With the sacking of the library at Alexandria by early "christians" much of the west's ancient history was lost. There certainly are lot of stories but few, if any, can be verified. Actually the Greeks, and to a large extent the Romans, have everyone beat when it comes to gods. They had one for every occasion. That was the only way they were able to explain the world around them.
Faith is believing in something when there is no proof of its existence.
In the US we are free to believe or not believe. But those who "believe" should not take the high road just yet and assume they are a better person or know more than those who do not believe. The jury is still out. All that we know today, revealed by rationale thinking, science, mathematics, etc. has negated the majority of beliefs that were held by ancient people. We are the product of the enlightenment and we continue our rationale and scientific journey to find Truth.
76
@Ron: I find "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" the most transparently brilliant phrase in the whole US Constitution, as amended. If something is a matter religious faith, it is not admissible in politics and law.
6
The Library of Alexandria was sacked by Julius Caesar or Aurelian, long before Christians had armies, thou great guardian of Enlightenment knowledge. The fire had nothing to do with suppressing knowledge.
1
@Ron
I don't know about that Ron. Any brief survey of the history of India shows how pervasive, militant, violent and influential extremist, fundamentalist Hindus were, and still are.
Our founders, quite wisely, separated church from state.
Certain religious groups, quite unwisely, have tried to force their will on a pluralistic society over the last decades, egged on by wealthy special interests.
They've not only tried to force their views on abortion, but on everything else, by taking control over education at the local and state levels, especially in key states like Texas. Over time, this has had definite repercussions nationwide, particularly on our common font of knowledge.
One area that is now in contention is science as it pertains to the environment, and the recent roll-backs by the EPA and this week's dissolution of the position that advises the chief of the EPA on science.
But this isn't about religion. It's about control, using religion as a guise.
We've lived relatively peacefully as a nation for hundreds of years, under the general understanding and agreement that politics and religion are separate, as long as everyone is free and able to practice as they see fit.
Since this hasn't been the case, our civics and politics have degenerated into the mess we see today. It won't end well. When things reach the level of oppression, usually, revolt ensues.
It is my hope that the left will find the courage to reframe the political discussion on religion, instead of ignoring it, or worse, using religious terminology. It has no place in American politics.
---
Things Trump Did While You Weren't Looking
https://wp.me/p2KJ3H-2ZW
190
@Rima Regas: The "Establishment Clause" of the first Constitutional amendment is the ONLY law that legally mandates the means of separating church and state US: a general prohibition of all faith-based legislation.
4
@Steve Bolger
Yes, and it worked until a concerted effort to circumvent the spirit and letter of it.
One example is G.W. Bush and funneling social safety net aid via his "faith based initiative."
A current example is Education Secretary DeVos looking into ways of voucherizing religious education by getting around Congress from the Department of Education.
1
Before we can enjoy freedom of religion we must have freedom FROM religion. @Rima Regas
4
"Jesus forbids us to withhold help from our neighbors, and this will inevitably require that we participate in political processes." I don't see that the first part of that sentence logically leads to the second part. There are many non-political ways to help our neighbors.
11
@crimhead: The "render unto Caesar" remark suggests that Jesus understood the need for a public sector of an economy to look after general public interests in a more organized and effective way than the rather short-range practice of helping one's neighbors.
7
@crimhead There are no non-political ways to help a neighbor. Helping a neighbor is inherently political. They are the polis.
2
Sensible and wise advice from the founder of Redeemer, but one that does not solve the problem that in a modern Democracy one can only vote for the names and affiliations on the ballot, and in the U.S. that means either Republican or Democrat.
And in this flawed and constricted reality, in order to vote, Christians are forced to make choices and prioritize certain issues over others - which articles of faith they chose to elevate reveals the focus of their faith.
Unfortunately, the reality is, too many American Christians have opted for issues such as abortion over charity, traditional marriage over social justice, be-separate over love-thy-neighbor etc ... Christian may not fit into the two-party system, but to refuse to withdraw from the political process as Tim Keller advocates means choosing one party, and the choice most Christians have made is known.
Why, even Tim Keller's Redeemer Presbyterian Church still bars females from being ordained as pastors and elected as elders - as part of their core belief. No surprise if they end up voting Republicans in their engagement with politics.
100
That's the point. There are reasons for Christians to go in different directions about some matters depending on how they place issues in a hierarchy. I am certain that many Christians think about whether we are treating immigrants humanely and use that as an important principle. I am also certain that many Christians place a concern for religious freedom at a very high place on their list. Others place homelessness and hunger high on their lists, and this might be a place where many converge on their views. Yet others are concerned to preserve strong protections for religious schooling, and that might be another place people diverge.
9
@Jamie: "Redemption" is a fantasy about what takes place after death. In reality, our souls are software we build from our experiences in life to cope with our circumstances. They do not survive the death of the brain they are encoded into,
1
@Nathan: "Free exercise" of religion does not allow for religious coercion.
Jesus's apparent admonition to "render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's", his driving of the money-changers from the Temple, exhortation that we are our brother's keeper, and his Sermon on the Mount don't seem like calls to establish a grand winner take all market-based society that must be a capitalist nirvana in order for animal spirits to run unfettered, arrogating ever more market power to the already ultra-well off.
Quite the opposite - in fact, Jesus sounds more like an early-day 're-distributionist'.
That's just us, of course; your mileage may vary.
339
@R. Law
Redistribution begins with my charitable contributions, and these are focused and sacrificial, aimed at points of the greatest leverage.
I don’t need a government to fog up what I am called to do by my faith.
3
@Stuart - The conduit, be it charity or otherwise, through which needs are identified and met is beside the point.
The question is whether the wealth a society produces is captured by a relatively small group of people who preposterously pretend they are the point of an inverted pyramid holding up the rest of society, or whether they recognize they sit at the pinnacle of a normally-aspected pyramid, benefiting at least a little from all those below.
As in the engineered world where pyramids are based on logic and math, the natural world shows that the tip of an iceberg is held up by what is below it - not the other way 'round.
For 'trickle-down-ism' to work, re-distribution (for lack of a better word) has to occur through some conduits or others.
8
@R. Law: The US has been crucified on a cross of gold from the beginning.
4
A superior column. As a one-time Roman Catholic, decades long searcher for meaning in life, flirter with Judaism, Stoicism, Buddhism, and atheism, I realized in the last six months that I had overlooked what had been in front of me for decades due to family ties: Greek Orthodoxy.
I also realized that no political party fit either my prior life or my current one. Though a registered Democrat for years, I was far to the left of the party on most issues, and certainly not in keeping with my newfound Greek Orthodoxy. For me, the Scriptures and the life of Christ make clear that neither party serves a Christian agenda, and in reality, should not. "Render unto Caesar" was not an idle comment, and I remain an ardent supporter of separation of church and state.
As a result, I will be re-registering as an independent. I see the true divide in this country as that between the plutocrats and their bigoted, ignornat supporters and pretty much everyone else. I find aiding the poor, treating all people as equal and saving the environment entirely Christian. I will follow my faith in how I act and vote, but expect no secular institution to do that, unless its supporters happen to force that on them through their own processes.
I truly believe that is the only real way to be both faithful to one's religion and a good citizen. And I thank Mr. Keller for his column.
115
@Publius: We all conduct rituals of various sorts. None of them emotionally affect nature. They do bond people.
1
@Publius its nuts that anyone has to register a party affiliation at all to vote.
2
@Publius Yes: it is both unrealistic and unreasonable to expect people's faith not to influence their political decisions. A lot of the commenters here confuse the separation of church and state with the separation of religion and politics. The former is an institutional wall; a person's religious faith can no more be sealed off from their beliefs about the just society than the secular morals of a non-religious person can be so sealed off. The critical thing is humility -- a healthy sense that no one individual human has all the answers -- and empathy -- a sincere attempt to understand how others feel. Contemporary politicized evangelicalism has neither attribute.
2