Would Christ Vote?

[SaysWhat]

Mao Zedong was elected by over 600 delegates in the 3rd congress of the communist party after their revolution overturned thousands of years of imperial rule.

by contrast, in the american system the popular vote is technically meaningless - the president is chosen by 538 state electors who are under no compulsion to vote in a way that reflects the expressed wishes of the small percentage of people of their respective states who turned out. the constitution of the united states doesn't even require those electors to be chosen by voting. the states can flip coins if they want.

538 < 600

Each electoral is voted on by the same people who are among the popular vote. I don't think there's any system that everybody can have their choice.

 

[posthuman]

Maybe they should have stuck with common sense instead of their limited knowledge of the forces governing this universe.

common sense was that any one of Jesse's sons would be a better king. but they didn't hold an election - the prophet cast lots, and saw that God chose David.

when they held an election God said they had rejected Him by doing so, and they chose Saul.

 

[posthuman]

Each electoral is voted on by the same people who are among the popular vote.

and none of the electors are required to vote for who the people voted for, and none of the states are required to hold popular votes to choose electors.

 

[SaysWhat]

and none of the electors are required to vote for who the people voted for, and none of the states are required to hold popular votes to choose electors.

Each state is it's own popular vote. The voting process with its electorals is set up so the smaller states can have a say in the outcome. It's not perfect by no means but it pretty fair.

 

[posthuman]

Each state is it's own popular vote. The voting process with its electorals is set up so the smaller states can have a say in the outcome. It's not perfect by no means but it pretty fair.

but none of the states have to choose their delegates this way, and the electors are free to be unfaithful.

it's what we have always done - but get someone who does not care how things have always been done, put them in unfettered control of the government with a lot of influence over state governments and courts, and he or she could easily get rid of the popular election altogether and have states loyal to himself or herself simply appoint people to cast their votes exactly as he or she tells them to, no matter what the people say.

our system is actually pretty vulnerable to someone very shrewd and influential to corrupt it.

 

[SaysWhat]

but none of the states have to choose their delegates this way, and the electors are free to be unfaithful.

it's what we have always done - but get someone who does not care how things have always been done, put them in unfettered control of the government with a lot of influence over state governments and courts, and he or she could easily get rid of the popular election altogether and have states loyal to himself or herself simply appoint people to cast their votes exactly as he or she tells them to, no matter what the people say.

our system is actually pretty vulnerable to someone very shrewd and influential to corrupt it.

the Constitution does not require electors to vote for the candidate chosen by their state's popular vote, though some states do.

Its extremely rare that it happens, they mostly definitely will be fined, disqualified, replaced or even be prosecuted by that state.

 

[keepingthingsreal]

You are looking at Christ 's actions when He came to save the world. Start looking at His actions when He returns and you will see His ruling of the world is the true politics. Foreign policy will be done a little differently. Instead of trade embargoes, He will withhold the rain which, is way more effective.

Zechariah 14:17
And it shall be that whichever of the families of the earth do not come up to Jerusalem to worship the King, the Lord of hosts, on them there will be no rain.

We live in a fallen world, corruption is everywhere. If one is going to withdraw on the basis of something being corrupt in places, we will not be involved in anything. The whole point of my statement is to get in there to prevent the corruption overtaking the system and controlling it without any checks or balances. Why my statement should boggle your mind boggles mine. Should we (Christians) stand against nothing and let the corruption take over?

I'm in my Father's business which is one of redemption and reconciliation, not "eek, I don't want to get my hands dirty".

You go your way and I'll go mine.

ps. In my country, our politicians are called ministers. Our chief, equivalent to your President, is called the Prime Minister.

pps. It might also be worthwhile understanding what I mean when I use the word "politics".

Definition - The art or science of government or governing, especially the governing of a political entity, such as a nation, and the administration and control of its internal and external affairs.

Your way is a way of failure, and the evidence is everywhere to be seen.

Whereas you look to politics in order to forcefully regulate the actions of the unwilling, I look to the gospel to potentially change the hearts of those who are willing to receive it.

As far as Christ's future government is concerned, you might want to familiarize yourself with his parable of the talents. When Jesus returns, he will expect what he has given his disciples back with usury or interest, and the type of interest that he is after is the souls of men, women, and children. Only the gospel message, willfully received, can provide him with the same. That you fail to recognize this is truly frightening.

I see no need to converse with you any further on this topic, and I will end by saying that for you to even suggest that I do not want to get my hands dirty is total delusion on your part. You know nothing about me, except that your empty rhetoric does not move me. God knows that I have hazarded my life for the gospel's sake, and suffered great loss in many different ways due to my allegiance to Christ.

Farewell.

 

[Eli1]

Bohr was actually conceding that his own work modeling the atom was wrong, by doing this - but the evidence was undeniable and overwhelming. the universe is constructed in such a way that at its most fundamental levels only God, with complete omniscience and control, can predict it.

reading some of Heisenberg's work is quite interesting, too. it turns out further that without consciousness observing the entire universe simultaneously, it cannot exist. that's right - quantum mechanics shows that there has to be an intelligent, omniscient Creator Who knows what is unknowable and sees what is impossible to observe.

I don't want to deviate from what you're all talking on this thread but the double slit experiment is indeed a mystery which cannot be explained logically.
What is reality at the fundamental level? Blocks or Probability? They tend to go with Probability but we don't know anything for sure.
We have no idea dark matter and energy existed 50 years ago either so you never know what we might find.
And the more you find, the more you're humbled that you know nothing!

 

[sawdust]

Your way is a way of failure, and the evidence is everywhere to be seen.

Whereas you look to politics in order to forcefully regulate the actions of the unwilling, I look to the gospel to potentially change the hearts of those who are willing to receive it.

As far as Christ's future government is concerned, you might want to familiarize yourself with his parable of the talents. When Jesus returns, he will expect what he has given his disciples back with usury or interest, and the type of interest that he is after is the souls of men, women, and children. Only the gospel message, willfully received, can provide him with the same. That you fail to recognize this is truly frightening.

I see no need to converse with you any further on this topic, and I will end by saying that for you to even suggest that I do not want to get my hands dirty is total delusion on your part. You know nothing about me, except that your empty rhetoric does not move me. God knows that I have hazarded my life for the gospel's sake, and suffered great loss in many different ways due to my allegiance to Christ.

Farewell.

Strewth! Some mothers do 'ave 'em. Talk about holier than thou. I don't know you but you know me all so well.

You're comments are laughable.



We were talking about politics and voting not ministering the Gospel. Get in context.

 

[sawdust]

common sense was that any one of Jesse's sons would be a better king. but they didn't hold an election - the prophet cast lots, and saw that God chose David.

when they held an election God said they had rejected Him by doing so, and they chose Saul.

Didn't know God called out the USA to be His nation among all the other nations? I thought you had a bunch of founding fathers draw up a constitution etc.

You must be very confused about your history if you think the USA is supposed to be a theocracy.

 

[posthuman]

We were talking about politics and voting not ministering the Gospel. Get in context.

we were talking in a Bible discussion forum.

what if anything at all secular politics have to do with the work of Christ in the ministry of His gospel is the context.


so, what's your take on secular political campaign contributions?
if voting for a man to gain worldly power is doing the work of God in your view, is ((for example)) giving Trump $100 to pay his legal debts equivalent to tithing?

 

[posthuman]

Didn't know God called out the USA to be His nation among all the other nations? I thought you had a bunch of founding fathers draw up a constitution etc.

You must be very confused about your history if you think the USA is supposed to be a theocracy.

there's no democracy in the kingdom of God.

so maybe you're a bit confused if you think any pagan nation, for example america, is that kingdom.

this is a Bible discussion forum, btw. so i'm going to keep talking about the Bible if you don't mind

 

[sawdust]

there's no democracy in the kingdom of God.

so maybe you're a bit confused if you think any pagan nation, for example america, is that kingdom.

this is a Bible discussion forum, btw. so i'm going to keep talking about the Bible if you don't mind

You're the one who seems to be confused. You keep saying we shouldn't take responsibility for electing those who determine the direction of our countries and constantly comparing your nation to the only theocracy instituted on this Earth as if somehow God gave you your laws written on stone and therefore have no need of any form of governing because the Lord God is doing it all for you or not doing anything for you, as according to you, all politicians are evil.

Secular politics saved Paul at least one scourging (Acts 22:24-29) and a mob lynching (Acts 21:31-33)

I hope and pray you never have to rely on the laws that protect you that were instituted by your secular government.

I know it might be shocking for you to hear, but God can use the "pagans" to reach His goal of establishing His Kingdom and He is more than capable of using our governing systems (politics) to install those who can tear down the country or build it up just as He did with the kings of old.

Isaiah 45:1
“Thus says the Lord to His anointed, To Cyrus, whose right hand I have held— To subdue nations before him And loose the armor of kings, To open before him the double doors, So that the gates will not be shut:

 

[posthuman]

Secular politics saved Paul at least one scourging (Acts 22:24-29) and a mob lynching (Acts 21:31-33)

and the very same Paul told us 'obey the rulers because God has appointed them' speaking about exactly those secular governmental leaders that abused and persecuted him.

but you say overthrow them and put ones that tickle your ears into power.

that's fine and well, but touching on the thread topic, you have no basis for arguing that engaging with secular politics is in any way a Christian activity - even in the simplest way as a voter, setting aside trying to become one, or spending your time trying to campaign for one.

your only appeal is to emotion and a tacit assumption that the church should choose and appoint the worldly government. this isn't scriptural, and the record of history, as i have said at least once already, is that every time the church involves itself in the government of the secular world, it ends horribly corrupting the church and being quite a disaster for the population writ large.

moreover the record of history shows that the church grows and becomes stronger in its faith when it is persecuted, and is weaker and more full of heresy when it is not. so the central assumption of your argument wherever it isn't an enforced legalism on a pagan population, which is clear failure, fails also in that what we have seen in the way time and circumstances actually happen, is that it is not necessarily good for the church when the world pretends to act like it is part of it.

 

[tourist]

but none of the states have to choose their delegates this way, and the electors are free to be unfaithful.

In certain states the electors must vote for the one who won the state. Don't believe that there have been that many faithless electors in the political history of the United States. There have only been a total of 90 faithless electors who did not vote for the winning candidate in the political history of the United States. The outcome has never been changed due to faithless electors.

 

[posthuman]

You keep saying we shouldn't take responsibility for electing those who determine the direction of our countries

the Bible says God appoints governments.

do you disagree?

 

[posthuman]

In certain states the electors must vote for the one who won the state. Don't believe that there have been that many faithless electors in the political history of the United States.

it's a small percentage, but it is statistically growing in proportion.

less than half of states have any kind of repercussion for being faithless at all, and none have anything more than a slap on the wrist. a thousand dollar fine to a millionaire.

the way out government is set up us overall under the presumption that people are honorable. it doesn't take many dishonorable men to make it completely fall apart - we are watching that happen already. a convicted felon will be our president next year, and force the courts to stop examining him. any other president in our history would have bowed out for the good of the nation, instead this man used every influence and lie he could to gain even more power.

he is extremely shrewd, and it is a poignant illustration of how the system depends on a presumed decency of character. it's really quite amazing

 

[Cameron143]

and the very same Paul told us 'obey the rulers because God has appointed them' speaking about exactly those secular governmental leaders that abused and persecuted him.

but you say overthrow them and put ones that tickle your ears into power.

that's fine and well, but touching on the thread topic, you have no basis for arguing that engaging with secular politics is in any way a Christian activity - even in the simplest way as a voter, setting aside trying to become one, or spending your time trying to campaign for one.

your only appeal is to emotion and a tacit assumption that the church should choose and appoint the worldly government. this isn't scriptural, and the record of history, as i have said at least once already, is that every time the church involves itself in the government of the secular world, it ends horribly corrupting the church and being quite a disaster for the population writ large.

moreover the record of history shows that the church grows and becomes stronger in its faith when it is persecuted, and is weaker and more full of heresy when it is not. so the central assumption of your argument wherever it isn't an enforced legalism on a pagan population, which is clear failure, fails also in that what we have seen in the way time and circumstances actually happen, is that it is not necessarily good for the church when the world pretends to act like it is part of it.

While churches shouldn't necessarily involve themselves in the political arena, every Christian should consider every aspect of society in the world they live in, which includes government. In America, we don't have freedom of religion, but the freedom to practice our religion. This means someone exercising their rights can have an enormous impact on society. One area isn't more than another; only one should be led in what they do. We are to bloom where we are planted.

 

[posthuman]

according to you, all politicians are evil.

name one who isn't.

heck name any human being, apart from Jesus Christ, who isn't.

which planet do you live on, btw?

 

[posthuman]

I hope and pray you never have to rely on the laws that protect you that were instituted by your secular government.

silly little friend.

i do not depend on human regulations to 'protect me'

how long have you been a Christian?
do you know much about this Way?