[PresbyRev]

Think hard and let go of your secularist mindset.

Christians in a representative democracy are duty-bound to promote civil rulers and civil legislation based on or conforming to God's Law-Word. Discipling and baptizing the nations is not conditional upon living under despotism or tyranny. Representative government with checks and balances was birthed by Reformational Christianity. Your objection is what is truly meaningless.

Abortion, same-sex marriage, etc. are examples of rejecting God's Laws. So is refusing to obey Christ's command to disciple the nations.

[Alberta's Child]

Christians in a representative democracy are also doomed to fail in this endeavor by definition -- if Christ's admonition about "seeking the narrow gate" has any meaning. The notion that 51% of any substantial population has been blessed with God's grace has no basis in Scripture or tradition.

This is precisely why Christianity historically has really only thrived under monarchies; because a monarchy can be a Christian nation even if 95% of the population would never have been Christian if left on their own in a "free" society.

[Alberta's Child]

Christians in a representative democracy are duty-bound to promote civil rulers and civil legislation based on or conforming to God's Law-Word.

Here's a question for you: At what point are Christians in any kind of governing system duty-bound to overthrow their government to promote a civil order based on our conforming to God's Law-Word?

[RobRoy]

Where would the early church have been if they'd put their faith in Rome?