Of Politics and Religion

When it comes to the subjects of politics and religion, there is no shortage of quotes or advice. Mark Twain [no fan of either] once said, “In religion and politics, people’s beliefs and convictions are in almost every case gotten at second hand, and without examination.” [I believe he was right on that one!] And you have probably heard, at one point or another, someone say something along the lines of, “You should never discuss politics and religion in mixed company.” We could go on, but I will just say that this article is going to blatantly disregard that last quote; this article will deal with both politics and religion and my aim is to point out some similarities that we might learn some important lessons about the matter of denominationalism and factionalism among professing believers.

I am thoroughly interested in both subjects and I find it ironic that there is an oft-repeated cry for what is called -either “bipartisanship” [in politics] or “unity” [in religion] and — not unrelated to the previous point — the promotion of what is often called “diversity” [in both fields]. Let’s take a look at these two issues and how both politics and religion fare as they are in this country, with the two-party system [in politics] and denominationalism [in religion] and how “diversity” affects each.

First, consider that, in politics in this country, there are two major parties — the Democrats and Republicans. [For those who are wondering, I am registered as unaffiliated with either party; I am associated with and promote neither party.] While many who make a living in the field of politics and political commentary hail this as a good thing, what does it give us? What are the results of this two-party system?

If you are keeping current with politics, you know there is a stalemate on the federal budget. This is merely one example to which we might point but, the fact is, there are always stalemates and compromises because of the two-party system. Instead of men simply considering an issue on its own, what we often get is heated discussion and stubbornness simply because one party does not want the other to gain some sort of political advantage. Instead of smooth cooperation [that “bipartisanship” they so often tout], what we get is deadlocked legislation and not much being accomplished.

In the realm of religion, we have this same impasse because of denominational creeds and “partyism” among brethren. On a larger scale, we have division among those who profess to believe in Jesus as the Christ and they separate themselves along the lines of their creeds. Oh, some groups will occasionally work together and some have even claimed to have broken down those walls of division that existed because of the creeds, but those creeds still exist and as long as they do, there will never be any real unity.

On a smaller scale, we have divisions among brethren simply because of their earthly and/or business associations. Right now in this country, you could drive a Mack truck in between those who dare to criticize institutions such as Florida College or the Truth Foundation, and those who rabidly support these institutions. Within cities and towns across this country and even within individual congregations, there is a division between these brethren simply because they either support or oppose these human institutions. More times than I care to count, I have heard or participated in discussions where some would never dare touch what the Scripture says about them; it was only a matter of whether or not you supported them or not. Lines are drawn and exclusions are made if one doesn’t “line up” with one group or the other, and good men and women everywhere are being treated like second-class brethren simply because they dared take a stand against one or the other groups. If I may quote James: “My brothers, these things ought not to be so” (Jas. 3:10).

Then there is this call for “unity” while, at the same time, a promotion of “diversity” within political parties and among professing believers. In the recent political happenings, we had what was first a minority group within the Republican party [the “Tea Party”] who demanded more fiscal responsibility and won some important Congressional seats. At the time they ran for office, though, others within the Republican party tried to silence them or paint them as extremist wackos because they feared losing their own political power. Lost in the many discussions was the apparent fact it was what the people wanted them to do. On the other side, in the Democrat party, dissension is simply not tolerated and much behind-the-scenes political wrangling takes place to make it appear that the party is “united” and that they are all on the same page. And this while they tout their “diversity.” Ironic, is it not?

In religious circles, on the larger scale, we have many who tout “unity in diversity” as almost the motto of the modern church where all religious people should accept without question anyone and everyone, from practicing homosexuals to those who promote human creeds over the inspired word of God, to “modern” thinking on the role of women in the church — and on and on. Even as they promote this “unity in diversity,” we see only more divisions taking place because some will not abide with plainly sinful behavior as an acceptable practice among professing believers, while more and more are making their churches conform to the world’s ideas.

On a smaller scale, we have a generation of young people coming up who are now wanting to throw open the doors and welcome into the church anyone who claims to believe in Jesus, asking why anyone “makes a big deal” over issues such as modesty, drinking alcohol, or using musical instruments in our worship. Some church leaders, more interested in appeasing the crowds and keeping up the attendance than in taking a stand for the truth and pleasing God, are kowtowing to them and appealing to those who protest to not be so “narrow-minded” or “exclusive with the truth” and a flood of unscriptural practices and doctrines have entered into churches where once they stood for the simple and plain truths of God’s word. While the numbers are certainly increasing for some of these churches who have compromised the truth, not one soul has been added to the Lord because of it, and many faithful brethren have been forced to go elsewhere in their desire to appear “loving” and “welcoming” to any who come.

Friends and brethren, our Lord prayed for unity, but not for what now exists in the religious world today. The unity He prayed for was this: “that they may all be one, just as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You” (John 17:21). That is nothing like what now exists in this country. The modern “unity” is not unity at all, but a demand that no one criticizes another and that the only ones who should not be tolerated are those who expose error.

I am convinced many avoid religious and political discussion because they are either uninformed or unwilling to challenge their beliefs. This kind of thinking will not discover truth. Let us take up the word of God, let it be our rule and guide, and let us be the people we should be.

Steven Harper