Thats kind of like what the terrorist's do isn't? They mix a heavy political message with their religion and then the next thing you know you have fanatics. What say you about this?
2007-11-30 00:34:17 · 17 answers · asked by TSIRHC 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
It is not only wrong, it is illegal in the USA. When a church is used for political purposes, it must give up its tax exempt status.
This restriction, which is found in federal tax law, is not limited to churches and other religious ministries. In fact, it is applied to every non-profit organization in the country that holds a tax exemption under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code.
Contrary to the claims of many in the Religious Right, the IRS is not singling out houses of worship for special regulation. Thousands of educational, scientific, charitable and literary organizations hold the 501(c)(3) status, and all must abide by the legal requirement barring involvement in elections.
2007-11-30 00:44:49 · answer #1 · answered by 2 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
In his Sermon on the Mount, Jesus commanded his disciples that they were to be both "salt" and "light" in the world. As the purpose of the "salt" is to heal and preserve morality, it is difficult to do that if you do not have political power within the society. So of course the church should be involved in politics, and the ministers should be teaching about it from the pulpit.
If you actually take the time to read your Bible, you will find that many of the greatest Bible heroes were men very much involved in politics. They included:
Joseph, who has a co-ruler in Egypt adminstered a policy that gave the Hittite dynasty possession of much of the weath and land and a rule that would last over 300 years
Moses, who would establish the foundatmental rules and laws of a entire, new nation that would guide the people foe milleniums to come
Joshua, who would serve as both political and military leader of the people during the conquest of Canaan
The Judges, who would adminster the laws for several generations during the early years of the nation Israel
Samuel, who would place the first two kings on the throne of Israel
Nathan, who would counsel David and place the next king (Solomon) on the throne
Elijah, who would continually vex Ahab, trying to turn a whole nation back to God
Jeremiah, who would confront the kings time and warning them of the judgement that was about to come.
Daniel, who would serve as a prince and adminstrator within the government of Babylon,
Zephanian and Malachi, who would support Erza and the rebuild of Jerusalem after the exile
Sorry, but when you actually begin to read the Bible, you will find that God called person after person after person to be involved in the politics and governments of the nations on his behalf.
I also take great offense with the idea that if a person with a religious conviction is involved in politics, that they are a "terrorist".
2007-11-30 09:02:21 · answer #2 · answered by dewcoons 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No concrete answer for this. Really, it depends on what kind of politics. First thing to do before writing a sermon is to ask what God wants me to tell his people. If God wants the preacher to mix politics (again, I did not specify what politics) or even enter politics as a job, then by all means, go ahead.
The preacher, though, must always be vigilant and careful not to stray from God's will.
2007-11-30 09:03:33 · answer #3 · answered by controlfreak 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
No terrorist commit violence in the name of their religion...If a minister uses political messages in their sermon to get their point across it is OK...but if their entire sermon is about political issues, then they are not speaking about Jesus and the Good news message of salvation which should be the purpose of their message
2007-11-30 08:40:00 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Exactly. Politics has NO place whatsoever in a sermon. Many try to justify doing it, but it just doesn't have a proper place.
What troubles me is the last couple years the church has become targeted by political groups and politicians. We have become a demographic group in the sights, and they come pandering.
Yet, at the same time, they all speak of separation of church and state, and pass laws that remove God from whatever the latest thing is...ten commandments, or a monument, or whatever.
2007-11-30 09:02:29 · answer #5 · answered by Jed 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
sure. when those dems get into a pulpit and start promoting the idea of giving away my hard earned money, or killing babies in the name of choice, or trashing traditional marriage, that's politics invading religion to be sure. But then why not. Aren't you injecting politics into religion with your question? Politics = "policy," and everyone under our constitution has a right to try and influence policy. Or are you really saying that Christians should just voluntarily sign up for the concentration camps now, while the good bunks are still available? Not me.
Edit:
Fast & Bulbous, your statement is grossly misleading. To the extent the freedom of speech and freedom of religion clauses empower citizens to speak their mind, even in a religious context, any interpretation of the IRS code that conflicts with those fundamental freedoms is invalid. Furthermore, in our legal system, an individual may act in conflict with an unjust interpretation of constitutional law, may bring that conflict to court, and may seek to overthrow that unjust interpretation, without violating legal ethics whatsoever. Nevertheless, with or without the help of the IRS, you will never be able to isolate preaching the Gospel from the call to do right in society without violating the most basic constitutional concepts and the deepest principles of human civilization.
2007-11-30 08:42:41 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Martin Luther King did so, and his willingness to do this brought positive social and cultural change.
Your judgement would have to be made in relation to particular cases. There is always a calculated risk in extending civil liberties to all citizens regardless of their viewpoints, but the alternative is placing the authority to discern who has this right with the state, which is an invitation to totalitarianism.
2007-11-30 08:44:06 · answer #7 · answered by Timaeus 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
do you think that a preacher shouldn't teach his congregation that murder is wrong,or that stealing is wrong as well. people seem to think that they can have it both ways and they cant.
it is my personal beliefs that homosexuality,abortion are both against Gods will for us. but I do not bomb any thing nor do I stand in the streets with a group trying to make others live or believe as I do. Christian leaders teach and should always have the right to teach that which is against our God even if some may think that it is politics.
I, as a Christian do not have the right to tell anyone how they have to live or what they have to believe and they do not have the right to tell me how to live or what to believe
what I am trying to say is I do not have the right to tell you that you cant be homosexual or that you cant have an abortion but I do have the right to believe it to be a sin.
2007-11-30 12:07:38 · answer #8 · answered by hmm 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I'm grateful this view wasn't popular 240 years ago. During the American Revolution, it was not uncommon to hear preachers advance an independence agenda and even lead soldiers into battle. Come to think of it, that's how Joshua managed to defeat Jericho. He and his soldiers just marched behind the priests. God took care of the rest. Amazing what a little faith will do.
2007-11-30 08:44:15 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Just as there should be no politics in religion, I.E no "I invaded Iraq because god told me to"
Same goes for politics in church, it's a place of worship not Fox news.
It works both ways the priests should do what they are ordained to do and the politician should do what he gets paid to do.
2007-11-30 08:40:18 · answer #10 · answered by Colin M 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋