How Do Christians Fit Into The Two-Party System? They Don’t

New York Times ^ | 9-29-18 | Tim Keller

[DeweyCA]

What should the role of Christians in politics be? More people than ever are asking that question. Christians cannot pretend they can transcend politics and simply “preach the Gospel.” Those who avoid all political discussions and engagement are essentially casting a vote for the social status quo.

(Skip)

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.

(Skip)

One is that it gives those considering the Christian faith the strong impression that to be converted, they need not only to believe in Jesus but also to become members of the (fill in the blank) Party.

(Skip)

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.

Another reason Christians these days cannot allow the church to be fully identified with any particular party is the problem of what the British ethicist James Mumford calls “package-deal ethics.” Increasingly, political parties insist that you cannot work on one issue with them if you don’t embrace all of their approved positions.

(Skip)

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.

[DeweyCA]

Tim Keller is somebody whom I have had deep respect for, but this article is really not worthy of him. If there is any group of Christians that has chosen to openly identify with a political party, it is Blacks who have often opened their pulpits to people like Obama, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson and others.

Keller posits, as his first objection, that if Christians are too identified with a particular party, then some people may not become Christians because they think that if they become a Christian then they also have to become a member of a political party. Well, that would apply to Blacks identifying with the Dems (voting 94% for Dems) much more than white evangelicals identifying with Republicans. Also, that could argue that white evangelicals must spend MORE time and do a better job of explaining WHY their political positions are biblically correct and morally reasonable.

Also, to say that if you are political , then you must adopt ALL of the policy positions of a party as a whole "package deal" is simply naive and not true. Christian conservatives are constantly battling against the "RINO moderates" in the Republican Party. No party is perfect and very few people will agree with EVERY policy of any particular political party. In many elections, people are often forced to choose between the "lesser of two evils." Most white evangelicals choose to support the party that opposes the murder of innocent babies, that opposes the normalization of biblically-prohibited sexual practices, and that wants to continue to protect the rights and freedoms of Christians to practice their faith. They also realize that the Founding Fathers wisely recognized the sinful nature of mankind and developed the concept of limited government so that man's natural lust for power could be kept in check by a system of checks and balances.

Keller also uses an anecdote of a conservative who went to Scotland and found strong Christians who had more liberal views than him. So what?! There have been many strong Christians who have changed from being liberals to being conservatives. And besides, the political situation in Scotland may be vastly different than the specific political situation in America.

This really is a VERY disappointing article by Keller.

[Buckeye McFrog]

translation: So just stay the hell out of politics and let us do our Sodom and Gomorrah thing.

[NorthMountain]

they should not identify the Christian church or faith with a political party as the only Christian one.

We should definitely identify the demonicRAT Party as Anti-Christ; it is the Party of The Beast.

[ml/nj]

THEY is a very interesting word.

ML/NJ

[A_Former_Democrat]

Gee, how would blacks and Latinos and Asian “fit into” the Dimwit Party?

Write an article on that. Or how about how would productive honest people “fit into” the Dims?

[Bob434]

[[then some people may not become Christians because they think that if they become a Christian then they also have to become a member of a political party.]]

Bull- People who CHOOSE not to become Christians are people who reject Christ- period- A political position is not required for salvation- Salvation is between a person and God- NOT between a person, God, AND the public in general- IF a person rejects Christ- they were NEVER going to accept Christ because they Reject Him- period- There are goign to be no excuses for personal rejection in Heaven- one is not going to get a ‘get out of jail free card’ by claiming ‘well i would have accepted Christ if only I was sure i wouldn’t have had to become a republican’ nonsense-

[ASOC]

“Christians” must be involved in ‘politics’ or become victims of same.

I get annoyed when a “Christian” that nobody will get their vote as there are no ‘worthy’ candidates.

Then they bitcj endlessly about the State of the society.

You really don’t have the choice of hiding inside your brand of religion and ignore the society in which you live. To do so is, IMO, suicidal.

[Personal Responsibility]

This is a demotivation attack. The NY Times knows most Christian religious voters vote republican and are trying to convince those voters to stay home.

[Pilgrim's Progress]

When I became a Christian I gained a heavenly citizenship, but I certainly never lost my American citizenship. I still have a responsibility to complete my civic duties, but now there are limitations on what I once could do.

Now my vote MUST be based upon my biblical convictions which is the reason that I could never vote for a pro-abortion, pro-sodomite, anti-government candidate.

Sometimes all I have is ‘the lesser of two evils . . .”

[wastoute]

To date I have only known a couple of libs who called themselves Christian and their real knowledge of The Faith was terribly superficial. Sorry. I can’t see how ANY Christian can support what we have seen. Sorry, I ain’t buying Coons. How a Christian man could bargain in bad faith to do to Kav what Coons has done, well, I just don’t buy it. Never in my life have I EVER questioned another’s Faith but Coons? No, I don’t see how you square your faith by bearing false witness and so thoroughly and knowingly destroy another person. I don’t buy Coons faith. After what I have seen him do I can not.

[Notthereyet]

I agree. It seems as if he is trying to convince Christians that it is actually okay to vote for individual politicians though they be in a political party (Democrat) that is steadfastly against what the Lord God stands for... Many people make the mistake of voting ‘for the individual,’ and that usually means they want to vote for one person usually not in their normal standards. What they often overlook or ignore is when it comes down to brass tacks that one ‘individual’ will vote with the (Democrat) party.

[oldtech]

I’ve often wondered what it would be like to have a no-party system. Of course,that necessitate a LOT of changes. However,it might mean making the vote a lot simpler just voting for the person running for office & not the party.

[oldtech]

I’ve often wondered what it would be like to have a no-party system. Of course,that necessitate a LOT of changes. However,it might mean making the vote a lot simpler just voting for the person running for office & not the party.

[wastoute]

Really. Taking advice from the N.Y. Slimes on faith. Seriously.

[V_TWIN]

From wiki:

“Three days before George Washington took the oath of office as the first president of the United States, Congress passed the following resolution: Resolved, That after the oath shall have been administered to the President, he, attended by the Vice President and members of the Senate and House of Representatives, shall proceed to St. Paul’s Chapel, to hear divine service. Accordingly, the Right Rev. Samuel Provoost (1742–1815), newly appointed chaplain of the United States Senate and first Episcopal bishop of New York, officiated at a service in St. Paul’s Chapel on April 30, 1789, immediately following Washington’s inauguration, with the newly inaugurated President and members of Congress present.”

[Popman]

I find it very difficult to think a Christian can affiliate with the democrat party since they are pro death murdering the most innocent in the womb.

How can one reconcile one of the pillars (abortion) of democrat ideology with “tho shall not kill”

[rjsimmon]

This is a demotivation attack. The NY Times knows most Christian religious voters vote republican and are trying to convince those voters to stay home.

100% spot on! Especially this close to the mid-terms, the author is simply trying to shame Christians into avoiding their civic duties.

[Buckeye McFrog]

Sometimes all I have is ‘the lesser of two evils . . .”

I know the feeling. So many limp-wristed two-faced Republicans I can't stomach. But every Democrat it seems has never met an abortion he wouldn't fund.

[fwdude]

How in the heck did you get an article from the NY Slimes to post here?

[CommerceComet]

I have no trouble identifying myself as a Christian, conservative, and Republican in that order. If there is a conflict between any of them, I’ll defer to the higher calling.