Jump to content
Online Baptist
E Morales
E Morales

Can a Christian be a Liberal Voter?


Published:

I believed, that all christians that do vote, we're all voting conservative. For there is no more in the middle, when it comes to voting. My question is, do christians really know what it is to be a liberal voter, and what it stands for, or supports? 

 

 

 



User Feedback

Recommended Comments



1 hour ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

You might want to read again, for I never used the phrase "Biblical liberalism."  Rather, I purposefully used the phrase "Biblical liberality." 

The "ism" at the end of "liberalism" indicates that it is a system and movement of set beliefs.  Whereas the word "liberality" simply indicates a particular activity of generous giving.

 

 

ok, what is Biblical liberality?

Share this comment


Link to comment
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bouncing Bill said:

ok, what is Biblical liberality?

Now I have to wonder if you have even been paying attention throughout our discussion in this thread, for I have ALREADY defined Biblical liberality in my previous postings.

In my first posting within this thread discussion, I included the following:

On 8/30/2020 at 7:31 AM, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Biblical Liberality - You putting your own hand in your pocket to willingly and lovingly take your wealth for distribution to those whom the Holy Spirit directs you as the "poor and needy" (not the lazy and immoral).

In my second posting within this thread discussion, I included the following:

On 8/30/2020 at 1:41 PM, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Actually, Biblical Liberality, as I have presented above, is the position that EMPHASIZES PERSONAL responsibility, because it emphasizes my own responsibility to take out of my own pocket in order to give from my own heart of my own material possession unto another in need.  Indeed, the Biblical command of Biblical Liberality is so PERSONAL that if I do not personally give of my own personal possession to help those in need, I personally commit a sin in the sight of the Lord my God, and will personally be held accountable by Him.  

In my third posting within this thread discussion, I included the following:

11 hours ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

. . . the two foundational points of Biblical Liberality:

1.  The individual gives willingly out of a personal heart of compassion for the poor and needy.
2.  The individual gives liberally out of their own material possession to help the poor and needy.

 

Share this comment


Link to comment
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Now I have to wonder if you have even been paying attention throughout our discussion in this thread, for I have ALREADY defined Biblical liberality in my previous postings.

In my first posting within this thread discussion, I included the following:

In my second posting within this thread discussion, I included the following:

In my third posting within this thread discussion, I included the following:

 

Thanks for the reply. I agree and I believe part of that liberality is being willing to pool our money, through tithes to the church and taxes to the government to support programs that help the those who are ill, hungry, ill clothed, in prison, etc.

I would rather my tax dollars go to help people than to kill them. 

 

Share this comment


Link to comment
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Bouncing Bill said:

Thanks for the reply. I agree and I believe part of that liberality is being willing to pool our money, through tithes to the church and taxes to the government to support programs that help the those who are ill, hungry, ill clothed, in prison, etc.

And in relation to the idea of "pooling" our material wealth through a government program of charity, I have previously stated the following:

23 hours ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Thus IF governmental liberalism was simply a government program of charity, I would not express direct opposition against it (depending on how and to whom it was administered), any more than I express direct opposition against other charitable organizations.  Indeed, IF governmental liberalism was a government program to which we might WILLINGLY give of our material wealth, such that the government agency, having a larger distribution scope, would then distribute that freely given help unto those in genuine need, I would not oppose it so firmly and fiercely.  In fact, such a government program of charity would be structured upon the two foundational points of Biblical Liberality:

1.  The individual gives willingly out of a personal heart of compassion for the poor and needy.
2.  The individual gives liberally out of their own material possession to help the poor and needy.

Yet this is NOT the character of governmental liberalism, even as I have previously presented:

23 hours ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

HOWEVER, governmental liberalism is NOT structured simply as a government program of charity.  Governmental liberalism is structured as a FORCED system wherein the government FORCIBLY TAKES an individual's material wealth away through taxes, and then gives unto the "poor" that FORCIBLY TAKEN wealth, which is not actually the government's own material wealth, but was actually someone else's material wealth.  Even so, governmental liberalism does NOT fulfill either of the two foundational points of Biblical Liberality.  First, it is NOT structured for the individual to give willingly out of his or her personal heart of compassion, since it FORCIBLY TAKES through governmental mandate.  Furthermore, it is NOT structured for the individual to give out of his or her OWN wealth, since the government (the individual persons that make up the government) is not giving out of its own wealth, but is giving wealth that it has taken from others.

Even worse, as I have also indicated previously, the present movement of governmental liberalism in our country is very much anti-God and anti-Biblical morality.  Indeed, throughout the historical record we find that governmental liberalism in its various forms is quite usually anti-God and anti-Biblical morality.  Such is NOT a governmental movement that is worthy of support from the godly.

Share this comment


Link to comment
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

And in relation to the idea of "pooling" our material wealth through a government program of charity, I have previously stated the following:

Yet this is NOT the character of governmental liberalism, even as I have previously presented:

Even worse, as I have also indicated previously, the present movement of governmental liberalism in our country is very much anti-God and anti-Biblical morality.  Indeed, throughout the historical record we find that governmental liberalism in its various forms is quite usually anti-God and anti-Biblical morality.  Such is NOT a governmental movement that is worthy of support from the godly.

Are there any social government programs in force at the moment you support, such as food stamps, WIC?

Share this comment


Link to comment
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Bouncing Bill said:

I would rather my tax dollars go to help people than to kill them. 

As for myself, I am quite happy for my tax dollars to go to help people (if they a Biblically appropriate for that help) AND to kill people (if they are Biblically worthy to be killed).

Let us consider what God's Own Word states concerning the divinely established purpose of human government.

Romans 13:3-4 -- "For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil.  Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power?  Do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: for he is the minister of God to thee for good.  But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil."

We notice herein that God has ordained human government for two basic purposes:

1.  To be a minister of God for good and praise unto those who do good.
2.  To be a minister of God for vengeance and wrath unto those who do evil.

Killing those who are Biblically worthy of death IS one of God's own purposes for human government.  If we do that which is evil, we SHOULD be afraid of the government.  The Lord our God intends that the government should NOT bear the sword in vain.  Indeed, the Lord our God has divinely ordained government to be "a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil."  As for myself, I desire that the government of my country faithfully fulfill both sides of the role that the Lord our God has given it.  Furthermore, I desire for my tax dollars to be used for that very purpose (both sides).

Edited by Pastor Scott Markle
grammar

Share this comment


Link to comment
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Bouncing Bill said:

Are there any social government programs in force at the moment you support, such as food stamps, WIC?

Although I believe that such programs have administrative problems (bureaucratic inefficiency, fraud, etc.), I do NOT stand directly against such programs.  When I was a child, my family was a recipient of WIC.  As an adult, I have purposefully refused to take the benefits of such programs (even though my yearly income would have made us eligible).  I believe that it is my responsibility first and foremost to support my family through diligent work and careful financial management.  Furthermore, I believe that if my family can live comfortably thereby, then it is simply wrong for me to take "welfare" help from the government.  Indeed, I believe that governmental "welfare" help is supposed to be for those who CANNOT, not for those who WILL NOT.

Edited by Pastor Scott Markle
added the last sentence.

Share this comment


Link to comment
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Although I believe that such programs have administrative problems (bureaucratic inefficiency, fraud, etc.), I do NOT stand directly against such programs.  When I was a child, my family was a recipient of WIC.  As an adult, I have purposefully refused to take the benefits of such programs (even though my yearly income would have made us eligible).  I believe that it is my responsibility first and foremost to support my family through diligent work and careful financial management.  Furthermore, I believe that if my family can live comfortably thereby, then it is simply wrong for me to take "welfare" help from the government.  Indeed, I believe that governmental "welfare" help is supposed to be for those who CANNOT, not for those who WILL NOT.

I agree. 

Share this comment


Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree. There were no programs such as WIC or food stamps when I was a kid. I went to school with kids who were almost always hungry. When I was preschool a person had to have ration stamps to buy many items. I never saw a candy bar or chewing gum until WW II ended.

We are who we were when and where we grew up. There were poor houses where people were sent. Those days and experiences probably influence my view of helping others through government programs. Yes, there is inefficiency and fraud. That would be true of non-government programs also. I do not see that as an argument against helping others.

I also believe that churches, synagogues  should cooperate with each other. The church I attend is part of a consortium of 6 churches and synagogues. Together we run a food bank. There is government surplus food as well as food bought by the churches. We also cooperate together housing homeless people during the winter. 

I find it sad that suddenly a trillion dollars can be found to help business, but not 100 million to help people. I am not saying that businesses do not need help during this time of Covid-19 ... but so do many people caught innocently during this time of pandemic. I have little sympathy for companies who money from the pay protection program (PPP) to repurchase their own stock. I also have no sympathy for companies who gave their executives large bonuses with this money that was supposed to protect workers pay. 

Our country is rich enough that no one should go to sleep hungry cold. Our country is rich enough that no one should die needlessly for want of medications or surgeries. But it happens. I've seen it at the free clinic where I volunteered for a number of years. 

We Christians should work hard to help others both materially and spiritually. 

Share this comment


Link to comment
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Bouncing Bill said:

Our country is rich enough that no one should go to sleep hungry cold.

The bible says if a man is not willing to work he shall not eat. So no its not true that “no on should go to sleep hungry”.

Share this comment


Link to comment
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bouncing Bill said:

What is said in the final judgement? So it is true you shall be judges on how you treat others and feeding them is one of the criteria in the judgement. 

Matthew 25:35 

For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me,

Proverbs 19:17 

Whoever is generous to the poor lends to the Lord, and he will repay him for his deed.

Proverbs 22:9 

Whoever has a bountiful eye will be blessed, for he shares his bread with the poor.

Proverbs 28:27 

Whoever gives to the poor will not want, but he who hides his eyes will get many a curse.

Isaiah 58:10 

If you pour yourself out for the hungry and satisfy the desire of the afflicted, then shall your light rise in the darkness and your gloom be as the noonday.

Luke 3:11 

And he answered them, “Whoever has two tunics is to share with him who has none, and whoever has food is to do likewise.”

 

Edited by Bouncing Bill

Share this comment


Link to comment
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Biblically, there is a distinction between those who are poor because they CANNOT from those who are lazy and WILL NOT.  In order to be strictly Biblical, we must develop an understanding and behavior that includes both sides of the distinction.

2 Thessalonians 3:10............ if any would not work, neither should he eat................

Share this comment


Link to comment
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, heartstrings said:

2 Thessalonians 3:10............ if any would not work, neither should he eat................

And our country is rich enough that no one who is ill or going hungry should be neglected. Yes, there will be some fraud. It is better to err on the side of feeding and aiding people than to let innocent go hungry or to die. 

Share this comment


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, it is best to seek obedience unto God's Holy Word in ALL matters, both in helping the genuine needy, as well as in confronting the unworthy lazy.  The precepts and principles of God's Holy Word are not to be compromised either on the right hand or on the left.  When God's Word states -- "If any WOULD NOT work, NEITHER SHOULD he eat," God's Word is providing a clear instruction concerning our behavior toward the unworthy lazy.  Any individual, group, or program that does not seek a legitimate application of this Biblical principle in its giving policies toward the poor and need is not following God's own standard in the matter.  Obedience to God's Word matters!!

Share this comment


Link to comment
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Actually, it is best to seek obedience unto God's Holy Word in ALL matters, both in helping the genuine needy, as well as in confronting the unworthy lazy.  The precepts and principles of God's Holy Word are not to be compromised either on the right hand or on the left.  When God's Word states -- "If any WOULD NOT work, NEITHER SHOULD he eat," God's Word is providing a clear instruction concerning our behavior toward the unworthy lazy.  Any individual, group, or program that does not seek a legitimate application of this Biblical principle in its giving policies toward the poor and need is not following God's own standard in the matter.  Obedience to God's Word matters!!

Just curious, who determines how much or little work meet the criteria for no food?

Share this comment


Link to comment
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Bouncing Bill said:

Just curious, who determines how much or little work meet the criteria for no food?

In relation to my own God-given responsibility of stewardship over the material wealth that the Lord our God has entrusted to me, I must determine the answer to that matter for each case through the entire body of principles in God's Word concerning work ethic versus laziness, as well as through prayerful submission to the guidance of the indwelling Holy Spirit.

Share this comment


Link to comment
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

In relation to my own God-given responsibility of stewardship over the material wealth that the Lord our God has entrusted to me, I must determine the answer to that matter for each case through the entire body of principles in God's Word concerning work ethic versus laziness, as well as through prayerful submission to the guidance of the indwelling Holy Spirit.

Tell me about the 'entire body of God's Word' word. What is the criteria for determining whether an individual would be allowed to have food or not? What would you look at in  making such a determination.

Share this comment


Link to comment
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Bouncing Bill said:

Just curious, who determines how much or little work meet the criteria for no food?

Just curious, do you think God would put in his word that “if a man he would not work that he should not eat” if It could not be determined who falls into the category?

Edited by Jordan Kurecki

Share this comment


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you think God would put many more references into feeding the hungry if he did not mean it? 

The final judgement says nothing about being judged because you fed and took care of people. Rather judgement is against those who did not feed the hungry. Was God serious about this or just jesting?

Share this comment


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Matthew 25:31-46 -- "When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory: and before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: and he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the leftThen shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: for I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.  Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?  When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?  Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?  And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye [personally] have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren [note that the specific recipients here are not just any poor and needy, but are specifically the Lord's own BRETHREN], ye have done it unto me.  Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: for I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.  Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?  Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these [the word "these" is a demonstrative pronoun grammatically indicated the same ones mentioned earlier], ye did it not to me.  And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal."  

Helping any poor and needy is NOT the relevant factor in this judgment.  Rather, helping the poor and needy OF THE LORD'S BRETHREN is the relevant factor in this judgment.  (Now, the question does remain whether in this context the Lord was speaking concerning His Jewish brethren, or His Christian brethren.  In either case, whether one does or does not help unsaved, non-Jewish poor and needy, it has NO bearing on THIS particular judgment.)  

Share this comment


Link to comment
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Matthew 25:31-46 -- "When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory: and before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: and he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the leftThen shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: for I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.  Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?  When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?  Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?  And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye [personally] have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren [note that the specific recipients here are not just any poor and needy, but are specifically the Lord's own BRETHREN], ye have done it unto me.  Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: for I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.  Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?  Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these [the word "these" is a demonstrative pronoun grammatically indicated the same ones mentioned earlier], ye did it not to me.  And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal."  

Helping any poor and needy is NOT the relevant factor in this judgment.  Rather, helping the poor and needy OF THE LORD'S BRETHREN is the relevant factor in this judgment.  (Now, the question does remain whether in this context the Lord was speaking concerning His Jewish brethren, or His Christian brethren.  In either case, whether one does or does not help unsaved, non-Jewish poor and needy, it has NO bearing on THIS particular judgment.)  

I see you take a liberal interpretation of this. I respectfully disagree. 

Share this comment


Link to comment
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Bouncing Bill said:

I see you take a liberal interpretation of this. I respectfully disagree. (emphasis added by Pastor Scott Markle)

At this point, I am guessing that your use of the word "liberal" above is a mistype, and that you actually meant to use the word "literal."

Share this comment


Link to comment
Share on other sites



Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Add a comment...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...