The Purpose Of Governments

When we read the New Testament, we don't see anyone advocating anything like this. The letters to the churches don't say: Let's choose from among ourselves a candidate for a new Caesar, get a bunch of money together, prop him up and start making changes at the government level to force people to lead more moral lives against their will.

Jesus and Paul's direction had to do with violence, sedition, and revolution against the government... Being a "Good" citizen of the government you HAVE. This has nothing to do with preventing participation in the political process that is specifically declared a "Right" of citizens....

Nowhere do I see a firm command from God to ignore civic responsibilities that have been laid in our hands. That's being a poor steward.
Look at the parable of the stewards.... Those to whom much is given - much is required....
 
Here are a couple examples....
Agricultural subsidy to buffer people against the CONSEQUENCES of crop failures
Banking "Reforms" to buffer people against the CONSEQUENCES of financial failures
Disaster Relief "Reforms" to buffer people against the CONSEQUENCES of disasters
Gigantic Military to Buffer people against Consequences of powerful adversaries sent by God...

A couple of poor assumptions there.
Agricultural subsidies have nothing to do with crop failures. They are there to support commodity pricing so that a farmer can make a decent profit off of whatever he is growing. If the crop fails the farmer still earns nothing.

Banking reforms were "supposed" to prevent bankers from making risky or illegal bets on the market. As long as the FDIC is solid the reforms have no effect on customer deposits, regardless of any possible banking failures.

Could you name one "Disaster relief reform"?

Despite what most would believe, the military exists to promote the interests of big business. Read "War is a Racket" by General Smedley Butler.
 
What is the purpose of government? Depends on the government.
The US government was "supposed" to exist to support "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness", i.e. manage trade, support the common good, keep the locals from being robbed or murdered.

Seems to have wandered from it's original purpose quite a bit.
Most worldly governments practice the old mantra "the purpose of power is power" or
"government exists to make sure that the government continues to exist".
 
A couple of poor assumptions there.
Agricultural subsidies have nothing to do with crop failures. They are there to support commodity pricing so that a farmer can make a decent profit off of whatever he is growing. If the crop fails the farmer still earns nothing.

Banking reforms were "supposed" to prevent bankers from making risky or illegal bets on the market. As long as the FDIC is solid the reforms have no effect on customer deposits, regardless of any possible banking failures.

Could you name one "Disaster relief reform"?

Despite what most would believe, the military exists to promote the interests of big business. Read "War is a Racket" by General Smedley Butler.

See... This is what I am talking about... We get so numb that we can't even recognize that the unspoken argument behind every single program like this is that we NEED Government to Protect US against God....
 
See... This is what I am talking about... We get so numb that we can't even recognize that the unspoken argument behind every single program like this is that we NEED Government to Protect US against God....

I don't see how you come to that conclusion. Government programs have nothing to do with God whatsoever.
They are all based (at least partially) on the assumption that there is no God or that He does nothing.
There is not a single program that has as it's purpose "defence against God".
 
Government programs are made to increase our reliance upon Government under the guise of "Save Us from the Last Big Problem".....

Don't you find it ironic that every single "Magic Fix" fixes nothing...

There is no less damage done by natural disasters now that we have FEMA....
The major change with "disaster relief" is that NOW - volunteer organizations are PREVENTED from participating in disaster relief.... Why would that be? Why would the specific policy of Government be to PREVENT volunteer, not-for-profit organizations from providing disaster relief?
 
Government programs are made to increase our reliance upon Government under the guise of "Save Us from the Last Big Problem".....

Don't you find it ironic that every single "Magic Fix" fixes nothing...?

No, I don't find it ironic at all. You are assuming that the persons in power actually intend to "fix" things.
Things are broken because that is exactly how they are intended to be. There is nothing particularly difficult or mysterious about managing
a country, but as long as the purpose is to enrich the 1% and impoverish the rest nothing will ever be fixed from most folks point of view.
You are correct about the "powers that be" wanting a dependant population, makes them much easier to control.

There is no less damage done by natural disasters now that we have FEMA....
The major change with "disaster relief" is that NOW - volunteer organizations are PREVENTED from participating in disaster relief.... Why would that be? Why would the specific policy of Government be to PREVENT volunteer, not-for-profit organizations from providing disaster relief?

That's because FEMA doesn't want genuinely concerned people getting in the way of their hamfisted attempt at establishing martial law.
If New Orleans was a display of FEMA's abilities we would be better off with them staying home.
 
Jesus and Paul's direction had to do with violence, sedition, and revolution against the government... Being a "Good" citizen of the government you HAVE. This has nothing to do with preventing participation in the political process that is specifically declared a "Right" of citizens....

That "there is no authority except from God and those which exist are established by God" should give us pause to be skeptical of your theory about the purpose of government. That is to say, yes, this teaching is about preventing "violence, sedition, and revolution against the government," but not only those things. It also gives us direction about what we are expected to do with the "much" we have been given.


Nowhere do I see a firm command from God to ignore civic responsibilities that have been laid in our hands.

I think it's okay for Christians to be involved in government. Perhaps with our influence, we can even help return some degree of compassion to policies that led to nations' abandonment of their people in favor of what's been spun as "economic growth."

But can we find a "firm command" somewhere in the teachings of Christ for us to force unbelievers to behave like believers, against their will?

As someone who has been responsible to oversee exactly that in various circumstances, I can assure you that such a thing only makes people resentful of Christianity, and causes them to hide better, not change. That sort of obligatory obedience to "moral" rules can do nothing to change a person's heart, or spare them from any degree of wrath. Let's instead follow the "firm commands" we actually do have: "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations," not obligatory followers of "moral" laws.
 
That "there is no authority except from God and those which exist are established by God" should give us pause to be skeptical of your theory about the purpose of government. That is to say, yes, this teaching is about preventing "violence, sedition, and revolution against the government," but not only those things. It also gives us direction about what we are expected to do with the "much" we have been given.




I think it's okay for Christians to be involved in government. Perhaps with our influence, we can even help return some degree of compassion to policies that led to nations' abandonment of their people in favor of what's been spun as "economic growth."

But can we find a "firm command" somewhere in the teachings of Christ for us to force unbelievers to behave like believers, against their will?

As someone who has been responsible to oversee exactly that in various circumstances, I can assure you that such a thing only makes people resentful of Christianity, and causes them to hide better, not change. That sort of obligatory obedience to "moral" rules can do nothing to change a person's heart, or spare them from any degree of wrath. Let's instead follow the "firm commands" we actually do have: "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations," not obligatory followers of "moral" laws.

Very nice to hear from you! I missed reading your insights and learning from your wisdom!
 
What is the purpose of government? Depends on the government.
The US government was "supposed" to exist to support "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness", i.e. manage trade, support the common good, keep the locals from being robbed or murdered.

Seems to have wandered from it's original purpose quite a bit.
Most worldly governments practice the old mantra "the purpose of power is power" or
"government exists to make sure that the government continues to exist".

Would it be possible that government exists to control chaos?
 
As someone who has been responsible to oversee exactly that in various circumstances, I can assure you that such a thing only makes people resentful of Christianity, and causes them to hide better, not change. That sort of obligatory obedience to "moral" rules can do nothing to change a person's heart, or spare them from any degree of wrath. Let's instead follow the "firm commands" we actually do have: "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations," not obligatory followers of "moral" laws.

That's a very good point... The rational endpoint of strict observance of Moral law for the sake of Moral law is a gigantic legalistic "Morality Police" that only serves to push people further from God..... As you said - it only trains people how to HIDE....

That's not really what I am after..

The fundamental change that destroys nations is when they cease to define "Rights" as things the Government Can't Do to the People and people Can't do to eachother - and starts defining "Rights" as things the Government and people must provide to other people....

Once you start declaring "Legal Claims" of Provision by others to be "Rights" - you are heading down the path of Nimrod.......
 
Why not try to push our Government back in the direction of PREVENTING the Wrath of God from Occurring.... That was the direction of the Government in the Torah.... To PREVENT the Need for God to take wrath upon the people.....

Because it would be "immoral" to support a compulsory government to do anything arbitrary

A government who uses arbitrary violence to "transform" a country is an illegitimate government, for they use unjust law to manufacture a proposed justice.

Oliver Cromwell tried it with intensity
 
Because it would be "immoral" to support a compulsory government to do anything arbitrary

A government who uses arbitrary violence to "transform" a country is an illegitimate government, for they use unjust law to manufacture a proposed justice.

What does that even mean? I tried to unravel it 3 times and got a headache.
 
What does that even mean? I tried to unravel it 3 times and got a headache.

Haha, yeah take it easy on us GreatFiction! I think he's trying to say is that the government should reflect the will of the people, instead of the people being expected to reflect the will of the government.

Which actually brings me to what I wanted to talk about...

The fundamental change that destroys nations is when they cease to define "Rights" as things the Government Can't Do to the People and people Can't do to eachother - and starts defining "Rights" as things the Government and people must provide to other people....

Once you start declaring "Legal Claims" of Provision by others to be "Rights" - you are heading down the path of Nimrod.......

I see where you're headed with that, but I'm not sure that's an issue with "government," necessarily. After all, even Torah law outlined some "rights" as things the Government and people must provide to other people. Take tithing and offerings, for example. Certain people had the right to be provided for from tithes and offerings (widows, foreigners, Levites, etc).

But I will agree in this way:

A representative government should reflect the will of the majority. If the majority of people are concerned with the group as a whole above their own self-interests, then a representative government should function well to serve the whole. But if the majority of people are primarily concerned with their own self-interests, a representative government is going to end up being stretched pretty thin across everyone's perceived rights.

But the problem comes from the hearts of the people, in my opinion, which can never be changed, and should never be changed, by government intervention, not if the government is truly a representative government.
 
So... If the Majority wants to institute official Idol worship and decides it's right to kill all the Christians - then this is "Right" and the Government should facilitate it?.

Unfortunately, the people tend to be massively fickle.... Literally, Sheep is not a bad analogy....
 
So... If the Majority wants to institute official Idol worship and decides it's right to kill all the Christians - then this is "Right" and the Government should facilitate it?.

Yes, a people among whom a majority share an evil value may very well have a government that reflects that same evil value.

I suppose the discussion is, can a people be made to overcome that evil value by government mandate? Or should we, as Christians, instead be seeking to win people for Christ, and see them transformed by the Spirit? What's your experience: which has been the most powerful force in influencing your own perspectives... your government, or your God?

People can be fickle, sure, like sheep. But maybe the best solution for that is to introduce them to the Good Shepherd?
 
Last edited:
No...
I asked whether the Government must be bound to follow the will of the people...
NOT..
Whether the elected representatives of a Government generally be made up of it's constituency....

"Everyone doing what is right in their own eyes" is a sign that society has run off the rails....

In the bible....
Democracy is NEVER advocated....
The will of the people is always suspect.....
And the Final Arbiter is God....

Now... There are clearly checks and balances....
Everyone was to hold everyone else accountable....
Theoretically - this was to include everyone - great and small including strangers as well...

They were to bring the witness and the defendant before the Judges - who were to make judgement according to God's law... and then the People were to execute the judgement....

Now.. There's not good evidence that they did this past Joshua.... but that was the direction, at least....

and I wonder if it's one of the reasons that the ENTIRE NATION was judged - rather than just the rulers.... If the people had no direct responsibility, God should only have judged the Rulers... but the People were really the ones who bore the brunt of the judgements.....
 
Last edited:
Back
Top