• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Christian Leaders corrupted by Politics

sealchan

Well-Known Member
Oh and...

Matthew 4:8-10
Matthew 4 NIV
8 Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor. 9 “All this I will give you,” he said, “if you will bow down and worship me.”

10 Jesus said to him, “Away from me, Satan! For it is written: ‘Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only.’ ”
 

Shiranui117

Pronounced Shee-ra-noo-ee
Premium Member
There's nothing wrong with praying for the lawful authorities of the land--after all, as Jesus said to Pilate, they would have no authority unless it were given to them by God. But showing partiality towards one candidate or another or aligning an entire church with a political faction is just wrong.
 
In this video a CNN reporter schools a pastor in basic Christian values showing just how far some Christian leaders have fallen under the temptation of Satan to seek power in politics...

Franklin Graham wants the nation to pray for Trump on Sunday. Some Christians aren't happy - CNN

Just thought I would share (my disgust), but, of course, any and all sincere comments welcome.

I quite agree. I don't think there should be no Christian politicians, because I think Christians should use whatever skills they happen to have to help improve the world. But Christianity always does itself immeasurable harm when it connects itself to a political movement. God doesn't have a political party, and a sincere Christian can just as easily be a Republican or a Democrat. Worldly ideologies are inferior and shallow compared to Christian truth, but they have the power to corrupt the Gospel.

In my own country, the United Kingdom, the Christian church did itself similar harm by allowing itself to be co-opted as a justification for war. The only time in British society that there are now outward displays of religiosity are during Remembrance Day, when we remember those who gave their lives during the world wars of the twentieth century. These are noble celebrations of brave men and women, and I take part in them enthusiastically, but I can't help feeling that there is something of a confusion of patriotism and faith going on.

In my home town, there is a war memorial inscribed with the biblical but rather un-Christian boast 'Saul hath slain his thousands, and David his tens of thousands.' Just as Franklin Graham tries to persuade Christians that they are doing God's will by supporting a political party, in Britain we were persuaded that we were doing Christ's work by defending our nation in war. But war, even if it is sometimes necessary, does terrible things to men's souls - it is the enemy of goodwill, charity and innocence. Moreover, our politicians then co-opted this cult of just war to legitimise their own conflicts, far less moral or clear-cut than the Second World War - Malaya, Suez, Iraq.

The results were inevitable. The churches were full before 1914, half empty before 1939, and three-quarters empty after 1945. The statistics are that clear, and that harrowing. Let the church always be wary of aligning itself with a political faction.
 

whirlingmerc

Well-Known Member

Enoch07

It's all a sick freaking joke.
Premium Member
Gotta love it. Atheist preaching to the Christian's in a vain attempt to shame them. It's about the most stupid thing I ever saw. Newsflash nobody gives a p00p about your idea of how Christian's should or should not act. I don't allow other Christian's to judge me, I'm not about to allow gentile scum to do it either.
 

sealchan

Well-Known Member
The Bible says to pray for all leaders.

Sure. But for the purpose of this thread I am more focused on the video which shows an interaction between a reporter and the evangelist Franklin Graham Graham is, in that conversation, on the wrong side of the discussion because he is more concerned with apologetics on behalf of the president than he is on representing the teachings of Jesus...that is shameful.
 

whirlingmerc

Well-Known Member
Indeed it does. I regularly offer prayers that our political leaders may be guided to make the right decisions. In that respect Franklin Graham is right. My question would be, if Hillary Clinton were the president, would he be asking us to pray for her? I think he should, but I suspect he probably wouldn't.

He should be asking for prayer for all leaders if he is not.

There is a National Prayer Breakfast which has local state and Federal prayer breakfasts and it is broader and reaches out more unpolitically and is stronger in that sense.

As far as criticism and defense, even through Trump might ironically be less abrasive to Christian views one can hardly say he's above criticism himself. A Christian leader should be 'speaking the truth in love' to all.
 

sealchan

Well-Known Member
Gotta love it. Atheist preaching to the Christian's in a vain attempt to shame them. It's about the most stupid thing I ever saw. Newsflash nobody gives a p00p about your idea of how Christian's should or should not act. I don't allow other Christian's to judge me, I'm not about to allow gentile scum to do it either.

That is a very disrespectful way to participate in a discussion forum and name calling is a poor excuse for making a point to say the least.

To be so judgmental is to belie the fact that other's judgments do, in fact, get through your personal defenses I think.
 

sealchan

Well-Known Member
Indeed it does. I regularly offer prayers that our political leaders may be guided to make the right decisions. In that respect Franklin Graham is right. My question would be, if Hillary Clinton were the president, would he be asking us to pray for her? I think he should, but I suspect he probably wouldn't.

The context for the prayer was the unprecedented "attacks" against the president that he perceived. And yes there are unprecedented attacks but the president is largely responsible for this through his rude, bullying behavior which is highly hurtful to thousands, even millions of American citizens.
 

Enoch07

It's all a sick freaking joke.
Premium Member
That is a very disrespectful way to participate in a discussion forum and name calling is a poor excuse for making a point to say the least.

To be so judgmental is to belie the fact that other's judgments do, in fact, get through your personal defenses I think.

Deal with it. The hypocrisy is so thick its not even funny. It's an intellectually dishonest tactic and a load of BS and I have no problems calling it out for what it is. Don't like it? Don't do it.:shrug:
 

sealchan

Well-Known Member
If a priest ever endorsed a nominee or a party, I'd walk out of mass in a hurry, and then he'd be hearing from me. However, in over 50 years of attending mass that has never happened.

Sure and I did not intend to mean "all Christian leaders". By leaders I meant prominent people in public view. The vast majority of preachers and pastors, I hope, do not do this because they are not seeking to influence political choices in any direct way.

Even in this case I think that Graham isn't explicitly trying to support a political party or agenda but he is implicitly doing so because he so obviously has made the teachings of Jesus secondary to his concerns in this matter/interview.
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
There's nothing wrong with praying for the lawful authorities of the land--after all, as Jesus said to Pilate, they would have no authority unless it were given to them by God. But showing partiality towards one candidate or another or aligning an entire church with a political faction is just wrong.
There have been an awful lot of despots through history, who've caused an awful lot of misery.
Makes one wonder what God was thinking when He sanctioned them.
Should we support both sides in a war, inasmuch as both are led by a vicar of God?
 

sealchan

Well-Known Member
Deal with it. The hypocrisy is so thick its not even funny. It's an intellectually dishonest tactic and a load of BS and I have no problems calling it out for what it is. Don't like it? Don't do it.:shrug:

You merely suggested an irony but didn't explain or support it. As such it is merely your opinion. It appears that you are assuming that one's religious affiliation qualifies one's ability to represent the teachings of a religion.

Would you care to support or elaborate (that is, make a rational case for your opinion) or are we to merely be impressed by the presumed authority of your perspective?
 
Last edited:
Top