Skip to content

Add your phone number?

Optional. Nothing is sent unless you choose it.
The Historic Faith
Sign in

Jumpstarter 7 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion
Christian Citizenship  /  Voting and Politics  /  Discussion Questions
All Questions
Question 7
David lists actions and values that states permit or require (war, oaths, abortion, pornography, lawsuits, etc.) and then argues a candidate who fully embraced Jesus’ teachings (truthful self-disclosure, fair speech about opponents, enemy-love, forgiveness, non-resistance) couldn’t even win a primary; what does that argument imply about the possibility of “Christian politics,” and how does it challenge common evangelical ideas about “changing the nation”?
Another way to ask: David argues that a candidate who truly followed Jesus’ teachings (like loving enemies and not hitting back) couldn’t even win a primary. What does that suggest about whether “Christian politics” is really possible, and how does it challenge the idea of “changing the nation” through elections?

Direct Answer David’s argument implies that “Christian politics” is structurally impossible without compromising Jesus’ teachings, because earthly systems run on different laws and incentives. It challenges the “change the nation” mindset by saying political platforms cannot consistently embody the full ethic of Christ.

Support from Transcript:

  • He says no earthly kingdom can be combined with God’s because they are “run by different laws and principles,” relying on “armies or national police forces,” not enemy-love.
  • He lists what governments permit: “abortion… premarital sex… homosexual activity… giving of oaths… pornography… lawsuits… gambling… immodest dress.”
  • He also says governments often forbid what God commands, such as “non-resistance,” and their agendas can be “in direct conflict with God’s purposes.”
  • He proposes a candidate who is transparent about weaknesses and fair about opponents and who endorses “forbidding war, oaths, divorce and remarriage…” would have “no chance” to win even a primary.
  • Conclusion: candidates “of necessity… trample on his other teachings,” so “we can’t serve two masters… surrender to Caesar’s laws and values, not to Christ.”
Discussion Follow-ups What teachings of Jesus do we most quickly label “impractical” when we think politically—and why?

Jumpstarter 7 of 10
Back Questions Next