The Political Affiliation of The Bible

Post Reply New Topic

One of the oldest questions in politics is, "what is the political position of The Bible?" In order to answer this question I have read The Bible and have selected verses that I think indicate political affiliation.

OLD TESTAMENT

Exodus 20:15 "Thou shalt not steal."

The Israelites were not entirely socialistic - they had personal property.

Leviticus 20:24 "But I have said unto you, Ye shall inherit their land, and I will give it unto you to possess it, a land that floweth with milk and honey: I am the LORD your God, which have separated you from other people."
Deuteronomy 7:1 "When the LORD thy God shall bring thee into the land whither thou goest to possess it, and hath cast out many nations before thee, the Hittites, and the Girgashites, and the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites, seven nations greater and mightier than thou;"
Deuteronomy 20:4 "For the LORD your God is he that goeth with you, to fight for you against your enemies, to save you."
Lamentations 4:2 "The precious sons of Zion, comparable to fine gold, how are they esteemed as earthen pitchers, the work of the hands of the potter!"

These verses all appear to promote patriotism and militarism. Deuteronomy 7:1 points out that the Israelites were against nations "greater and mightier" than them so they had a good reason to be militaristic. It is wrong to compare them to bullies. Patriotism is a natural human response to outside threats - whether they be real or imagined.

1 Chronicles 16:3 "And he dealt to every one of Israel, both man and woman, to every one a loaf of bread, and a good piece of flesh, and a flagon of wine."

The "he" in this verse is King David. He gave free bread, meat and wine to everybody. This is clearly an example of redistribution of wealth.

Psalms 92:2 "To shew forth thy lovingkindness in the morning, and thy faithfulness every night,"
zechariah 7:9 "Thus speaketh the LORD of hosts, saying, Execute true judgment, and shew mercy and compassions every man to his brother:"

These verses promote generosity in general.

FINAL VERDICT ON OLD TESTAMENT: The Old Testament promotes patriotism and militarism and does not promote socialism or laissez-faire capitalism.

NEW TESTAMENT

Matthew 5:9 "Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God."

Jesus promoted nonviolence.

Matthew 6:6 "But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly."

Nobody cares that you are praying. Pray quietly.

Matthew 7:6 "Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you."

If someone doesn't want to hear about Christianity then don't talk about it with them.

Matthew 14:19 "And he commanded the multitude to sit down on the grass, and took the five loaves, and the two fishes, and looking up to heaven, he blessed, and brake, and gave the loaves to his disciples, and the disciples to the multitude."

Jesus was quite generous.

Matthew 19:21 - 24 "Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me. But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions. Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven. And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God."

If rich people want to go to heaven they have to sell everything they own and give the money to the poor.

Matthew 22:21 "They say unto him, Caesar's. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's."

Jesus wants God to have nothing to do with government.

FINAL VERDICT ON NEW TESTAMENT: The New Testament is an early example of anarcho-pacifist literature.

It should be recalled that even in the Old Testament, justice and charity for the poor was always important. In Leviticus, in fact, the people are commanded to leave part of their grain for the poor, initiating the first so called "welfare state."
But you're not going to get any fundies to admit to that.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

DarthMetaKnight, although I am unsure about whether your case on all desired points is the best, I am not overly opposed to your final conclusion, and so regard any efforts at this point in time to be nitpicks.(Note: If that point gets more elaboration, then I might find some areas for meaningful criticism, but at this point I don't have a large enough objection) Interesting post.

Very few naturally occurring social structures come close to matching the artificial dichotomies of 20th / 21st century polar politics. Largely because they are worked out over centuries of pragmatic development instead of some innerleckshel's study or - these days - blog or - those days - the British Museum.

Jesus is the government.

I would have put it slightly differently: God is the Boss. The World is His Property and He can run it anyway He likes. God is not Love, God is Power.

ruveyn

yet another atempt at reading a meaning into something that almost suredly wasnt there when it was written.

"Political Affiliation" is a man-made thing. It doesn't strike me as very mature to suggest the Bible has a political affiliation.

If anything, it favors the Jews as a people. That's really it, and it's nothing more than God's plan for His chosen people. The only parts that involves people outside Israel are one or two prophets and the writings of Peter and Paul. In the latter case, it has to do with how the Greeks should relate to the teachings of Christ. Paul, for example, dealt with that tiny little detail of circumcision.

Incidentally, I read somewhere that the nekked wiener was considered shameful by the Greeks, so culturally circumcision was almost like one people dominating another rather than merely a painful procedure. Christianity is much more palatable in that the emphasis is on faith rather than Hebrew ceremonial law and to a large degree preserves native cultural identity.

So, really, the Bible more seems to transcend political affiliation. I think in the US conservatism is more compatible with the Bible than liberalism, though, because the Bible does affirm certain behaviors as sinful behaviors. You can't really have a lifestyle consistent with Christian (Biblical) teaching if you ignore those teachings or rationalize your way out of them--either you buy into the whole thing, drink the Kool-Aid, or you're just picking and choosing and not really following Christ.

I do love the ancient Hebrew justice system, though, as outlined in the Bible. Economics, too. I and my family are ALMOST debt free--we follow the principle of refusing to take loans with interest and paying off current debts, settling delinquent bills whenever possible. "The borrower is slave to the lender." I believe it was Paul who instructed Christians to buy their freedom if at all possible (because Christ purchased our freedom), but if we remain slaves/servants to be the best servants we can be.

The Bible emphasizes faith in God to provide everything, rather than faith in one's own abilities. Western politics and economics is centered on what man can do for man and what a person can do for himself. Economics is about personal/corporate acquisition of wealth. Christianity is about denying the self and the use of wealth solely for the benefit of others. To a capitalist, Biblical principles are economic suicide. Socialist systems resemble Biblical models on the surface, but I think the internal motivations of socialism/communism are far removed from Biblical teaching.

Yes.


I find it ironic that even people who scoff at it will still try to compare themselves to it!


Yes. The "politic" of Scripture is monarchy.

Agreed.

The OP is just one more lame attempt to justify one particular set of secular beliefs with religious nonsense.

If anything, the Bible's politics heavily emphasize an Imperialist Patriarchal Theocracy - in other words, the Bible preaches a global, male-dominated church that controls every aspect of every person's life.

Sort of like having Glenn Beck as Pope.

Your own extrapolation is no better!

It is accurate, however.

I don't think either the Old Testament or the New Testament advocates anything resembling a political system. Most of the New Testament occurs within the context of the Roman occupation of Judea, and its major figures were Jesus and his apostles and later St. Paul. In the Old Testament, Israel had a dynasty of kings and later judges, but I don't think it specifically advocates for those as forms of government.

Bits and pieces of the Bible can be used to justify parts of both conservatism and liberalism, but they really were different times.

In Ancient Israel the land was divided up by lottery without any regard to an individuals ability to pay because the land was free. Sure sounds like Socialism to me.

Potentially, however, it is likely that the notions of people of the time would also relate to politics. One cannot just say "It's gotta be wrong", but instead, there have to be reasons why the interpretation of the politics in the book would not match those of the people of that belief, because it isn't as if the issues of government were entirely ignored, or that there were no moral teachings which could potentially have political ramifications. It is possible though that the degree of information is indeterminate, and given that the OP did put forward some basis for the interpretation, I'd suggest pulling that apart.


Ok, the Bible is a man-made thing. Who wrote down the words? Men did. Whether you want to say that God has some authorship is fine, but, people wrote down various things and these things did not outright ignore legal issues, moral issues, or political actions.

Oddly enough though, I think your post seems to have some contradictory elements, and I don't think most of what you say gives you much power to reject the OP's efforts. You engage in a very similar effort, but with less precision or certainty of outcome.


No it isn't. Learn to read as this isn't the first time you've seemed to jump to a conclusion. Nobody seeking to justify secular beliefs using religion is going to say that a religion has contradictory teachings, as nothing follows from a contradiction. The OP says EXACTLY THAT by claiming that the Old Testament has a political theology that is the OPPOSITE of the New Testament.


That's basically what the OP stated was the Old Testament's political theology: "The Old Testament promotes patriotism and militarism". It is true he didn't go as far as you did, but he said the same thing. He simply didn't say this was the case for the New Testament, which... is a contestible teaching, but I think it is reasonable to believe that the different parts taught different things.


The Old Testament clearly holds certain political notions as implicit, and clearly advocates certain legal characteristics. So, those can be extrapolated into a political system or way of thinking. The New Testament is more difficult though because there is no political power held by the church and nor is there any expected in the future. The interpretation of "anarchism" though isn't unreasonable given that the church seems to dislike legalism, tends to dislike involving the court system, and seems to belittle the goodness of political power(which is likely a result of the political powers being opposed to that church for as long as the church could predict the future).

----
In short, I agree with the idea that we can extrapolate a political theology from the mindsets and social theories of the people. This may not be consistent across the Bible, but the writers do not ignore politics, and they have expressed opinions on political matters. The major problem is really the multiple instances of God's commands in the OT as a justification for political action, as that undermines our ability to determine a "theory of social action" because of the proclaimed need for an outside actor for certain decisions.

I am not a christain, but I used to be.....and I still think there is a lot of intrestings stuff in the bible, so I do read it on occasion or try to look up certain parts to quote for the purpose of conversation when it comes up. But I don't think there is a specific political leaning of any kind.....as its a collection of ancient texts written by various people. There are examples of many things though.

I would say at the risk of being attacked.
That Jesus may have been on the left , in the sense he seemed to be all about helping others...not judging others or putting yourself above them and of course treating others as you would want to be treated ect. A political system based on that probably would not fall under conservatism. If the guy was real I can see why the Romans were not to happy with him, he kind of challenged the way things were being ran.....so they killed him and blamed it on the Jews.

I don't buy into the religious side, the way it is presented....so my veiws on this could be a bit weird as I just look at it as history to analize but that is what I think.