Share This Episode
Outer Brightness  Logo

What About Politics? (Articles of Faith Series)

Outer Brightness /
The Truth Network Radio
November 2, 2020 8:57 am

What About Politics? (Articles of Faith Series)

Outer Brightness /

On-Demand Podcasts NEW!

This broadcaster has 57 podcast archives available on-demand.

Broadcaster's Links

Keep up-to-date with this broadcaster on social media and their website.


November 2, 2020 8:57 am

In this episode the sons of light attempt to tackle a subject that always creates more heat than light and may be more contentious even than religion: politics. What does the Bible say about political involvement and activism? More than one might think. Let's take a look together.

YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
So What?
Lon Solomon
Insight for Living
Chuck Swindoll
Viewpoint on Mormonism
Bill McKeever
Our Daily Bread Ministries
Various Hosts
The Daily Platform
Bob Jones University
Line of Fire
Dr. Michael Brown

With all things were made through him and without him was not anything made that was made was life the life light shines in the darkness and the darkness has not overcome it.

We were all born and raised in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints in court in Salt Lake City, Utah, commonly referred to as the Mormon faith. All of us have left that religion have been drawn to faith in Jesus Christ based on biblical teachings name of our podcast outer brightness reflects John 19 calls Jesus, the true light gives light to every we have found life beyond Mormonism to be brighter than we were told in the light, we have is not our own. It comes to us from without. Thus, outer brightness. Our purpose is to share our journeys of faith in what God has done in drawing us to his son. We have conversations about all aspects of the transition fears, challenges, joys, and everything in between were glad you found us and we hope you'll stick around listening. However, this contrast for post-Mormons who are drawn by God, to walk with Jesus rather than turn away out of this brightness brightness wailing and gnashing of teeth. Here, except when Michael's angry that is angry that is angry. That is why Matthew, the nuclear colonist Michael BX Mormon apologist on Paul Bunyan United States the 2020 election cycle has been particularly contentious.

Donald Trump is perhaps the most reviewed and reviled US president in my lifetime.

I guess it depends on who you ask. We had economic challenges caused by covered 19 disputes over that as well. Police brutality has been protested and there's been rioting and looting and vigilantism on display in the streets of many US cities. The country seems to be crying out for justice. There are disagreements even over what constitutes justice in high-profile cases of my children have recently taken a good government and politics in high school, one during the 2016 election cycle and one during the 2020 election cycle. I commented to them that this must be what it was like to live through the 1960s, there is not been in my years on the spinning globe, a time when US political divisions and activism have been as fractious as they are today, the 12th of yes article of faith states we believe in being subject to Kings, presidents, rulers and magistrates in obeying, honoring and sustaining the law during times like these Christians rightly ask themselves what role should my faith plan politics does the Bible have anything to say about this. Post-Mormons may be asking some of the same questions in our conversation today, I am my cohost Michael and Matthew tackle some of those questions where mainland we attempt to make a biblical case for educated involvement in politics for advocating for peaceful and just society. Thank you for listening is actually a good time to do it because I Angela and I actually when did early voting today so we are with our civic duty and I went ahead and wrote myself and the president is the light idea is that man as well. I think were good to go yeah you know there's this thing called campaigning and you should've come up with this idea. Like a couple months ago we could've actually gotten you into the White House.

But now that might be in my district at this point, but Cialis this kind of reminder, our listeners, like how old we are, select what was the first US presidential election. You remember voting and go to first Michael for me. The first election I remember being excited about was was that 20 2012 when it Mitt Romney was running for president still held a gas and I was really excited about the idea of the latter-day St. getting in and that was probably the first year that I watched all the debates in.

I was just on top of everything and felt really interested in the politics of the country so that was the first time that I'm about as well. Yes, all as far as like so was requesting an executor when I first remember being involved are being interested in politics or you answer and would like one when the first with the first election was a devoted and first presence election about it in so I suggest Mark coming up so why do remember that 2000 like a huge year eight for elections and action is looking in the to the history of that and that's the first time, where Republicans were solidified as being red Democrats or solidifies Big Blue because the past 30 years. Before that, that kind of gone back and forth like some news anchors or news sites.

They did it one way and that he did. Another way is actually opposite for long time. So Republicans are blue and Democrats are red and I never had to do something like the Tory party in England having similar similar political stances to the Republicans.

I think so. That's what made them blue but then Mike went 2000 came along.

That's what Fixed it. Republicans are red and blue spouses, aside there, but yes, a 2000 probably the biggest one that I remember in history as far as the first one I voted in I know it's gonna sound bad but every time there's an election, there's always some excuse that I had where I didn't vote. So first time I turn 18. That was the that was after 2004 election, right, with Bush and Kerry and then did so the next time that I could vote would be 2008 and I was on my mission and I didn't get you know like the chance devoted and set set all that up. I can just ignore it doesn't 12 at Arnold my excuse was that I think it was more just like ambivalence because of my Guam in Utah. Everybody's gonna vote for. You know, for Romney, and then doesn't 16, I was a conference was set to go to a conference in Vegas for school and is exact same night is election night and I forgot to do the early voting thing yet to set up like a month or something. Something advance. I totally forgot about that so I went to the conference Mike shoot. I can't believe I forgot, so I've never actually elected are voting for president ever set foot on terrible about that but Sam, long-winded answer cannot get on the on the inter-web can see in New York where your early voting options are. You can do at this time. Bama register to vote, so also the selections of hope will be my first awesome yes I I've always kind of remember being sent me a moderately interested in politics even at a young age. Like when I was a kid we had a my parents and my older sister and I had a paper route that we would do in the mornings before you go to school (would help my parents given about hurtful papers and we delivered the desert and the solid Tribune and helpful papers and then drive around and deliver them before went to school and so member you know meeting where especially folding papers like reading articles about Reagan and Mondale and McKenna 784 and then the first member really being interested in in the 92 election H. W. Bush and Bill Clinton and man Ross Perot when he was using another back out again and again. It was a fun thing to see you like 1/3 party candidate jump in Jamaica splash was interesting at first I voted in after I turned 18, was Clinton versus Bob Dole 96 so that I have always been willing as an adult I was been really interested in, try to pay attention. You know this is like political radii try to listen to both sides like all the senses back in the day. I was like Sean Hannity but I will solicit the like NPR try to get both sides of things and so do the same today but yeah so you talking about the 12 article of faith today so how did you understand the 1212 LDS article of faith is when you were latter-day St., have you as you apply it, then Matthew your first should've had the guide open hex after Google but the article of faith is rulers and principalities and powers are powers not know if let's read it. I don't need to go ahead and read it. Yeah okay yeah we believe in being subject to king's presence. Rulers and magistrates in obeying, honoring and sustaining the law is closely got in the ballpark but yeah I mean I thought it was kinda self-explanatory.

You know like your just asked as latter-day Saints to be good citizens of whatever nation were in so that in strictest or you know you strictest kind of North America centric where were, like a lot of the church is based in America, but since it's been expanding throughout the world.

You know that the rules apply to wherever you go. So as long as as long as it was, not contradicting what the LDS leaders taught that you shall bathe the leaders so I quickly where serving a mission abroad would do the same so we don't really care taxes that the mission office can I do that thing. But you know we are supposed to be kind and respectful to authorities and police officers, things like that and yeah not not not break the law on any kind of severe way or commit any infractions or felony things like that. Michael yeah so I also believed in not committing felonies and yes so that he believes that the Constitution of the United States is inspired by God in section inspired document and so you believe the law itself I mean is is pretty pretty close to that. It's the law was very much in line with obeying the commandments of God and in the church. It all kind of balance to the same category. I don't think I started to have any issues at all until the Supreme Court even voted that that gay marriage is legal that started to come in going against my beliefs, I think.

Up until that point I didn't think there were any issues that I thought I'd come across a problem with the 12 article of faith like yeah I mean obviously if you're a God-fearing person that you should keep the law.

I mean, you know the law is always good. The laws always bright, so yeah I think that's pretty much how I viewed it at the time was similar to the two of you understood it as is like an injunction to come to respect the government authorities and in obeying the laws of whatever country you live, then later as I started to learn more about Mormon history in the LDS church's practice of polygamy and the legal trouble, but that got them into another new and then later in in Utah territory or desert territory kind of bothered me a little bit that there seem to be some areas where the LDS church leadership kind of went against what stated there in the article of faith in terms of keeping polygamy secret, both before was practiced openly at the beginning in 1852 I think it was and then not even towards the end of its practice unit with the manifesto and your post manifesto, polygamy, like I must've started to bother me a little bit because it seemed to go against what the LDS 12 article of faith, stands for and I also read the book come think the guys name for member correctly is Thomas Alexander and history of Mormonism from Sam's like 1832 early 1900s or something like that and it was supposed to part of a series of books on LDS history that was going to be published when Leonard Arrington was the church historian, but the series never came to be and so some of the authors who had been commissioned to write books in that series went ahead and released what they have done on the round and in my book by Thomas Alexander was one of them in a Kenneth really kinda cover that period of change from cannabis the smaller set to a larger kind of on the cusp of becoming a large larger religion in the world and in the country and so there were a lot of interesting things I learned from that and some of the admixture that you somebody you read about like a book like that in Utah territory, especially where it's almost was like a theocracy that kinda bothered me as well. With regard to the 12 article of faith, but just know, for the most part when I was LDS. I think I'd like to see a lot of Latter Day Saints online kinda presented today.

You know, is kind of like just put out there like you know we we believe in respecting the law being by citizens and so I think that that's kinda what it is. Yet this came to me what you were talking to Paul and that is like when you're Mormon it's it's really natural to follow your leaders in the church mean obedience is just hammered into you your whole life and I think it just kinda naturally flows that you would also just be obedient to civil authorities as well. I mean it's just really natural fit.

No way she paired all. So is it is a post-Christian. Is there anything in the 12th article of faith that you disagree with. Now yeah sort of good that way. I think that it's it's important to obey God rather than man. I think I realize now that men are fallen, and that men make mistakes.

And so as long as the law is you know is something that I can sustain as a Christian then absolutely I'm behind 100%, you know. So like things like not stealing or killing from people on my dentist yeah I think anyways that mean I was cutting too late. Even as a latter-day St.

I mean, I don't think it really follows to obey the law no matter what it is.

I mean they have extermination order in Missouri for Latter Day Saints and although the 12 article of faith didn't exist yet, at the time and principal of something like that were to happen again. It was a latter-day St. supposed to do you like going exterminate the other people in their board because it's the law, or because it's illegal to do it so yeah I would say that I disagree sometimes with an article of faith. Now yes okay is a letter to same like I think I can imagine I will what I thought I was positively, I think.

Implicit in there is that you wouldn't do anything that is contrary to what God is commanded. They doesn't say that explicitly it just says, being subject to rulers in obeying honoring assisting the law, but I think you know it we want to be careful not to misrepresent Marty since I think you know, even if it doesn't expressly say that in the 12 article faith. I think it's implicit that you wouldn't. If the government like Michael's explaining.

If the government tells you to do something that's unlawful, according to God's commands and you shouldn't follow that law so so know what I mean. I don't think I would really go against that principal of of what it says there, I might disagree without supplied you know, according to what we view and what the Latter Day Saints Bayview letting the principal and in and of itself that's taught in the article of faith is correct.

Yeah, I think I agree with this. Scott Solomon just just just read is kind of a straightforward statement about the concept of being a responsible and upright citizen of whatever type of government is ruling in the country where you live, whether that's monarchy or democracy. What have you know there's there's nothing there but I disagree with percent but like Michael noted, you know if if the law of the land is contrary to God's law, then you know there are some there is some implications for that as Christians I think so playoff that does does the Bible say anything about Christian involvement in politics and if so what you really think yeah so this is the question I can prepare for the most that I kind of thought or brought up all came to mind were three big examples of either people that demonstrated their involvement in politics and government or taught about them. And the biggest one from the Old Testament would be Daniel. Daniel lived during the time when the Babylonians a captured Jerusalem and the kind of took over and now the tribes are scattered and things like that and so they were now the ones who had civil authority over Israel and so at that time they were not the ones in power. They were the ones who were in the minority.

There are lots were subject to the Babylonians. And so the book of Daniel we see that he was willfully submitting to the rulers to the rule and the authority of the Babylonians, so he was not invoking anarchy here is not invoking revolts against their leaders. He was submitting to them.

Not only that but he cooperated with them and he kind of worked his way through the political hierarchies and he made his way all the way up to to the king and gain his favor help again. If I missing the details. Please correct me but basically worked his way up to the king Nebuchadnezzar and when the king asked for.

So you there are several examples were Daniel demonstrated how Christians are how believers in God because we believe we in the same God. The Daniel did how we are to behave when we are in a government authority that's that's not Christian is not believing. So there's one example where there are several wise men who tried to give the explanation to the napkin as his dream and the king kind of threatened to put them to death because he did not interpret his dream correctly. So instead of going to death the Daniel kind of convinced the king to spare their lives and that he offered to interpret the dream correctly.

Not only that, but he had his three friends.

Everybody knows Emma Shadrach me shack and Abednego.

But that's the name the Babylonians gave them so.

There are also called Hanan I and Michelle and Azariah things a grandson so they were Hebrew names so they were also friends of Daniel and they were going be punished by the government because they did not absently refuse to bow down to the idol that Nebuchadnezzar had made, and because of that there threatened to put to death.

And that's when they were placed in the furnace and God protected him by his miraculous power that he protected them in their lives. And then we see Christ to his and in the furnace with them. So that's a second example of their demonstrating that they were submitting to the authorities.

However when they're asked to commit idolatry. They refused. We see is his and Beatty's urgent needs. The Empire that came after Babel, Babylon's meetings right was Beatty's things on.

So when they donate conquered Babylon, and they can't took over, you know, Daniel was still faithful to the rulers in power so he was still submitting to them. But then again, they were also threatening anyone who would pray openly to God that they would you put the lines down, so Daniel he openly disobeyed the rule where the decree open up his windows and he prayed out loud to God and you didn't do so bashfully. He did so no, because, as was his faith.

That's what you thought was right and he was threatened to be put to death.

And we know the story about to be placed in the lion's den, and he was kept safe. Also by God's intervention so that's that's Daniel's example so that the second example that I think of was Peter and the apostles. So not only by their examples by the teachings so they also during the book of acts they submitted to the government of the Roman government and but there were many times were there imprisoned for what they're teaching. They were there also miraculously freed so in acts chapter 5. That's when they were preaching and then I believe it was the Sanhedrin that complained and they didn't they didn't appreciate what was being taught about Christ in Jerusalem. So they had them placed in imprisonment and they were they escaped that basically that this prison was destroyed and they escaped. So then I said hey, these guys escaped only put in jail and there, responsible for the councils of as Michael said earlier, we must obey God rather than men so they submitted to the government when in all things except for those cases where they were told not to preach the gospel or they were told not to do what God commanded them to do, which was in that case, preach the gospel and throughout the epistles in the New Testament we see that both Peter and Paul.

They taught that slaves should submit to their masters just as Christians are commanded to submit to the rulers, so there's kind of make it so you can like a hierarchy that whoever has authority over us is to submit to that authority in Romans chapter 13 that's one of the great texts this topic, Paul says, let every person be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment and Peter agreed with this by saying in first Peter chapter 2 verses 13 to 14 quote be subject for the Lord's sake to every human institution Weatherby to the emperor as supreme, or to governors sent by him to punish those who do and to praise those who do good" and finally, I wanted to mention to the Jesus and will probably have a feeling Michael's going to go in more depth in chapter 22 in terms of rendering to Caesar what is Caesar's, so I won't get into that, but a lot of people like to claim that Jesus was like some kind of anarchist that he was trying to overthrow the government or something like that and the early July socialist or hardest, socialist, sorry. Yeah Jesus is kind of malleable is kind whatever people wanted to be. Unfortunately, rather than trying to understand them in his context, but yet he never he never espoused any kind of anarchy that I think you never really espousing open revolt.

I think he was a perfect is a perfect example of submission when he submitted to willingly to father. First of all, and also when he submitted to the authorities when he was presented to pilot Jesus admitted that pilot only had a 40 because God gave it to him as John chapter 19 verses 10 to 16 says, Pilate said to him, you will not speak to me.

Do you not know that I have authority to release you went and authority to crucify you Jesus answered him, you would have no authority over me at all unless it had been given you from above. Therefore, who delivered me over to you has a greater sin. So even there. Jesus admitted that the only authority the pilot house because it was given to him by God. So we see here that even Jesus is admitting along with Peter Paul and spoke earlier that authorities have this authority not just from people, but from God. And that's really the difference that government has in the mind and the worldview of the Christian versus the atheist or secularist view is that were not all just know that authority doesn't just come by the people alone.

It's like we just come together and say hey this is your leader now only because we chose him. Even if we do electoral vote for a leader.

Ultimately, if they only have the authority because God allows him her grandson that authority so sides, along with an answer, but those are the three major points are counted. Talk about Sgt., just a quick Mike before.

I know you I think it's interesting to note that that that concept right that the authority of the earthly rulers given them by God. That's something that's very consistent from Jesus to the apostles right you see Paul and Peter both give similar messages in their epistles.

I'll touch on that when I when I talk about little bit but I just think it's interesting to note this note that at this point. So Michael had a quick question for Matthew play devils advocate second air really good answer for this. I'm asking. I'm not trying to corner. You are anything but so did say that God gives the authority to these people, but in a system like ours, assuming that they God's going to be the next president in the White House X Trumper Biden are all member. So why, why do we need to go vote so I think that God is nasty. I was never voted see so that I don't need to ask you why he's already answered my question is not loading. There's no need to because you can't supplant God's will.

Right. I mean I guess I can play the hyper Calvinist you know we don't need to print the gospel. We don't need to vote. I'm just gonna let the elect come to my house that if they want to be baptized yet know for sure God deftly does use means to accomplish his will. So it's not just the God compasses wealth or miraculous intervention, but also through Providence so the reformed tradition as I set out very high view of Providence because all things under God's sovereign authority so all events are under God's purview and he works all things according to the counsel of his will, and so even when we see like in the instance of acts chapter 2 raise X chapter 1, I forget which where they were trying to fill the role of the apostle due to the death of Judas Iscariot. They drew lots no. Not sure exactly that means if they'd like had straws, or they roll dice, whatever, but it just says that they drew lots between two candidates and it said that it fell upon Matthias to replace you so II don't think that that was just random chance that you happen to be. Matthias was chosen. I think the God you know actually in his Providence. Provided that that's what occurred. He would be as possible so in the same sense we can see that God can use the means of election and the other of the voting process where representation of the people is done by voting or however it isn't any government that is used by God to accomplish as well so if we vote for someone who is not a great candidate to be president than that is still God's will and there's a quote that I've post on Facebook and and elsewhere that's came from John Calvin course at horse bronchi when I think is right.

In this respect. Ray said to an effect that one way that God demonstrates his wrath against us or his people is in giving us idolatrous or unjust rulers. So if we vote for somebody who is an unjust ruler. That's basically because of our decision of our heart heartedness of our wanting to have a ruler over us.

That is not a suitable ruler.

So God can use that to chasten us and bring his wrath upon us. In a sense, not not wrath like death but wrath in terms of punishment is answer question it. It's basically an inroad in the days just God uses means to accomplish his purposes like cancer a lot, especially at the end you kind of specifying that just because God put somebody in power. It does not mean that that is a good person for us. You don't necessarily like that. It's a blessing because God didn't you know the example. It kinda comes to my mind is Pharaoh because I was reading I been reading accidents right and yet says this because I raised you so again God put Pharaoh in that position but it was for the combined sprays demise and the demise of Egypt and so and I know try not to sound like an anarchist. In this episode, playing doubles and we get against you guys a little bit really think there are some just something that kinda need to be looked at but I'm not an artist statement right now just leave no Leslie, where is he going that is not right now or you're not yet well I'm I'm still Dr Pepper right now say need to change your name tag right now. If you're not the anarchist soldier back over to Mr. Pam yeah you and anarchist comes out.

But just as you've got Moses that he was told to go to Pharaoh and say let my people go, and he's basically saying that this is what's going to happen if you don't do it and so it's not as big of a submission to me. They don't just leave without his his go-ahead so there is still some submission there, even to Pharaoh. It seems like you can correct me if I'm wrong, but there's also a lot of them going against him in other ways you know instance, there are going with God and in business more with God against Pharaoh and Apple first part of Exodus and so I just I see that I'm like there's there's definitely a time it seemed like to me where you got this wicked ruler in this case students different because God is telling Moses specifically to do this is not just musing lots of wicked rulers on Montana obey him, so I don't know if there would even be a parallel to that now you know this coming.

The Bible yet. I guess you know what his thoughts on if the leaders are telling us to do something that is completely un-biblical made. Isn't that the same thing as Moses coming out and saying you know we need to leave Egypt now is a good question to the next question right is there does the Bible say anything about civil disobedience right because you think of somebody like Mike Dietrich Bonhoeffer Wright who openly kinda came out in the dolly and against the Nazis in Germany right as as a Lutheran pastor and was imprisoned and ultimately put to death for you. Think of you think of somebody like Martin Luther King Jr. right pushing for justice for his people within within the confines of our structure of government right so you know what you what you do when when the civil authorities are pushing you to do something that you don't agree with me and I think there's there's opportunity to abstain from know what what may be required of you like like Daniel right hands, but I think there's their ways to do it like Daniel was able to do it and and gain influence right.

It wasn't his wasn't an open violent rebellion against the authorities.

It was a simple, I'm not going to do that because it goes against my my beliefs, my conscience so that the rethink what had a lot of thoughts about it and I think Yegor points so what you're saying Paul that there that it's not there is not of any kind of like a stamens is you cannot December. The government is kind of I meant a little bit Peter and the apostles Arizona prison for preaching the gospel and they said that they would rather obey God than men so they were they were submissive to the point where they're asked to do something against God's law against what God had commanded them, specifically the apostles to do was to go forth in the great commission. He said to the apostles, but I was also to the whole church not to go preach the gospel baptize those who believe make disciples of all nations so they couldn't go against that.

It is interesting when you see throughout, and I said it said the I word sorry but there's a really great series from RC Sproul letting a link to both of you. It's on the church and state, and he admits that it's very complicated. It's not easy and there's it's it's difficult in practical situations to to implement what seemed like a simple principle okay recently submit to the rulers, except when they contradict the Bible. Great got it not so easy in practice. There are even some Christians not only back then. At that time. Even today who believe that the American Revolution was, not biblical because you know that the whole kind of rallying cry was no taxation without representation okay but where in the Bible doesn't say that you can revolt from your read your rulers.

Just because you don't have representatives in the government did not mean so there's some that say that even the founding fathers and those who were rebelling against the British government.

They did not have the right to do so on their Mac revolution is also called Presbyterian rebellion and there were a lot of people that feel that they had the right to rebel against British government because they feel the government should submit to the authority of Christ and one thing that I was going to quote was the great commission. So let me pull it up quick so this is a great commission in Matthew 28 so says starting in verse 16 now the 11 disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain to which Jesus had directed them and when they saw him Jesus, they worshiped him, but some doubted. And Jesus came and said to them all authority in heaven and on earth has been given to go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them them in the name of the father and of the son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold I am with you always, to the end of the age. And so there were a lot of Scottish Presbyterians who were called Covenanters who felt that the British government was not submitting to the authority of Christ, and they felt that they had kind of broke in a covenant or they had not made a covenant with God that they should have so by virtue of the fact they did not have to submit to that authority doesn't make sense, but it's interesting because then what we do have today is a mean we have God in we have we still have in our Pledge of Allegiance have gone on our money. But in essence were slowly removing specifically the triune God, the God of the Bible out of politics is interesting that they revolted over, you know, in that time. I wonder what how they would've reacted today, so there's different ideas as to reasons why someone made dissent from authority and they felt that that was a reason then that he and like I said many Christians disagree with them and said we should be submitting to this authority and that's why many Christians were loyalists, so it's difficult to really kind of pin down exactly when rebellion is allowable or not. From a biblical viewpoint.

So that's that's true, it is a difficult question, I think, is there a couple of passages I think in the New Testament, specifically that while they don't know really state explicitly Michael how we should live in a in a republican democracy. What we have here in the United States. They didn't kinda give guiding principles for how Christians should engage politically regardless of the type of government that they are under one of them and the first one really isn't necessarily political but it's kinda gives the same principle that is stated elsewhere in other passages that are more more explicitly related to governing rulers of the first. His first Thessalonians 4, 9 to 12 pull out a quick solution here Paul is writing to the believers at Thessalonica and he says now is to love the brethren, you have no need for anyone to write to you, for you yourselves are taught by God to love one another. You didn't practice it toward all brethren who are in all Macedonia, but we urge you, brethren, to extol the Excel still more and to make it your ambition to lead a quiet life and attend to your own business and work with your hands, just as we commanded you, so that there is this concept of leaving a quiet life that you kinda see in various passages throughout the Pauline epistles, John MacArthur says about that bit you live in a quiet life. It refers to a person who does not present social problems or generate conflict among others, but whose sole rest easy in the midst of difficulty and the other passage that is a little bit more explicitly related to civic responsibility of Christians is Titus 3123 to get the okay I got the KJV had something I had written that says this is a true saying, if a man desire the office of bishop nonce I must be wrong. It's gonna be chapter 2. I apologize. I must've must've my notes yet this chapter.

Two. Sorry. So chapter 213 Titus I exhort you, therefore, first of all kinds, which, therefore, that, first of all seven conditions, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men. For kings, and for all that are in authority that women need a quiet life in a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty for this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior cc again this concept of leaving a quiet life and read a little bit more for MacArthur and that she says on on verse two specifically related to the idea of praying for kings and all who are in authority is quote because someone powerful and influential political rulers are hostile to God, they are often the targets of bitterness and animosity. But Paul urges believers to pray that these leaders might repent of their sins and embrace the gospel, which meant that the effusions would even to pray for the salvation of the Roman Emperor Nero cool and vicious blasphemer and a persecutor of the faith, and any comments on that lot. That phrase a quiet and peaceable life is quite refers to the absence of external disturbances. Peaceable refers to the absence of internal ones on remains uncompromising in its commitment to the truth.

The church is not to agitate or disrupt the national life when it manifests loving God and goodness to all and praise passionately for the lost, including rulers, the church may experience a certain amount of religious freedom. Persecution should only be the result of righteous living, not civil disobedience. So I guess that's a tough question answer is, is there a place an argument to be made before civil disobedience thinking in certain cases, there are no casemate you might be my point to Moses right wing when he lashes out against the slave master who is beating one of his fellow Israelites did you do right there to do the wrong mayor noticed it's a tough question to answer right. He was given up not killing the slave master and so this is essentially a murderer but is is is that kind of action against unrighteous acts of government ever justified. I don't I don't want stuff and stuff just to make special look at those New Testament passages where the argument seems to be that the best way to be an influence is to lead that quiet life right where you are within society. You are respected and you're not bringing shame or dishonor upon the brethren upon Christians right and something that you if you look at our discourse right now, especially in the United States. The question I think can seriously be asked whether Christians are some Christians are leading a quiet life were learning dishonor That is for sure. I mean if I was still LDS and I was seeing some of things that I'm saying on on Christians walls like on Facebook and stuff. I would just doing while they're crazy I mean there's there's a lot of people that are very very vocal about politics and and it's kind of seems like I don't even know if I wanted to talk to anybody until after the election's over, because everybody is so opinionated about about things, but one thing that jumps into my mind is like. I think you have to have some room for dissension because you look at our history and United States wouldn't exist if there hadn't been some dissent to the British government so you know what to say that you know American did the wrong thing and we should which is broken away your for supposed to mean, isn't that correct. I mean, it was definitely a rebellion yellow revolt and we broke away and became our own country. Yet, I think their people are our sample sides of think that maybe it wasn't lawful for them to rebel so and end the end of the series. Ice mentioned by Dr. spots really interesting to listen to this, I recommend that any he talks about how it's not yeah it's it's not us. It's not a black and white issues there's any is a big gray area, especially when we see you know Arctic our country's involvement with other countries, you know, wasn't was it right for us to go into Iraq and even Afghanistan or you know Vietnam is is a right for us to really go to war with other countries. For the reasons that we did. I think there it there can be a casemate for lawful wars but to disqualify you know some people would differ on this opinion and and should we go to war to countries right now where people are being placed in camps today and being killed and being, you know, grapes, and take advantage of and things like that in China you have Muslims and Christians are being placed in camps and being trying to be reeducated to reject their gods and basically accept the state as the God there God you know ship out. I believe that me know how should Christians in that country react and how should we as Christians in a free nation.

How should we react towards that situation you know it it's all very complicated. We thank you for tuning into this episode of the outer brightness podcast.

We'd love to hear from you. Please visit the outer brightness podcast page on Facebook.

Feel free to send us a message there with comments or questions by clicking send a message at the top of the page. We would appreciate it if you give the page alike. We also have an outer brightness group on Facebook where you can join and interact with us and others. As we discussed the podcast past episodes and suggestions for future episodes, etc. you can also send us an email at outer brightness@gmail.com. We hope to hear from you soon.

You can subscribe to the outer brightness podcast on Apple podcasts cast box Google podcasts pocket cast had been specified in stitcher. Also you can check out our new YouTube channel and if you like it be shirts to lay hands on the unsubscribe button and confirm it if you like what you hear.

Please give us a rating and review wherever you listen and help spread the word. You can also connect with Michael. The next moment apologist from water to wine.work blogs and sometimes upon that as well. Music for the outer brightness podcast is graciously provided by the talented Breanna Flournoy and by Adams Road. Learn more about Adams Road. By visiting their ministry page. It Adams Road ministry.com state right now. He and I


Get The Truth Mobile App and Listen to your Favorite Station Anytime