When Politics Trumps Truth (not about Donald)


An article on the front page of yesterday’s Sydney Morning Herald reported on attempts by Christian group to join with Muslims and Buddhists – all for the aim of opposing the “godless” Labor Party in the approach Australian Federal election.

I have to wonder what kind of alliance those “Christians” are looking for. Clearly they don’t recognise the hypocrisy of cosying up to “godless” Buddhists, and Son of God denying Muslims.

They display hypocrisy in the name of pushing a political agenda – diluting Spiritual truth for an attempted political outcome. Forging a religious alliance that compromises their own professed religion.

By making their opposition to secular “godless” politicians their priority, they willingly yoke themselves to unbelief., in the process undermining the gospel and casting aside whatever Christian witness they claim to have.

5 thoughts on “When Politics Trumps Truth (not about Donald)

  1. When I was bringing up my children and was a home educator, one of the home-school groups I belonged to was Christian in orientation (because of the founders) but didn’t require people to be Christian to join or participate [which basically worked out to mean that you might not want to join if you’re unhappy around Christians… or these Christians — which mostly meant they weren’t going to have somebody harassing them in their own environment]. [Another, which I joined later, was probably at least half atheists… and might’ve stated that they weren’t a religious organization.] We home educators (of all kinds) occasionally tried to influence our state legislators (and did so successfully), but we didn’t do it based on anybody being godless or not Christian or on our group being Christians or on us appealing to representatives to prove they’re god-fearing Americans or not godless. I really appreciated having people who cared about everybody’s rights in that context. I had gone to the Christian association’s first meeting ever, while I was already a home-schooling mom, but I don’t think I then joined as a charter member. I might have (I do know I didn’t immediately start doing things with them — I was uncomfortable around a lot of Christians and didn’t want to get in too deep. They turned out to be a pleasant social group after all, though.)

  2. The thing I found objectionable about the Christian group mentioned in my post, is that ordinarily they wouldn’t want to identify in anyway with the other religious groups, but in this case they seek them as allies because it’s politically expedient. My next post refers to a similar organisation also trying to exert political influence with (in my opinion) misguided motives.

  3. “I have to wonder what kind of alliance those “Christians” are looking for. Clearly they don’t recognise the hypocrisy of cosying up to “godless” Buddhists, and Son of God denying Muslims.”

    I have to wonder what so many “Christian” churches/organizations think will be accomplished by participating in “interfaith dialogues” with Muslims (almost always initiated by Muslims, by the way, as a pretext for “reaching out to the community”, and usually held in the local mosque). The Muslim participants are not challenged about the many deceptions of Islam, namely, denying the most essential doctrines of the Bible: the crucifixion (the Quran says it never happened), the deity of Yeshua, and that God has a Son. (As Philip Haney says, if you ask a Muslim what the Quran says about the crucifixion, you will get one of two responses: a conversion or a confrontation.) The Gospel is never presented or discussed. These essential doctrines are considered blasphemy and punishable by death under Sharia (Islamic law) if one expresses belief in them. Naive and Biblically illiterate churchgoers think they are being “tolerant” (because “tolerance” is a virtue for them), and that these “dialogues” will somehow bring “understanding” between faiths, when the tenets of Islam are anything but “tolerant” toward non-Muslims (and tolerance for idol worship is not a Biblical concept).

  4. The way Christians relate with Muslims (or any other religion) can be tricky.

    Firstly, there is no room for compromise, like the example given in my original post where Christians were seeking “spiritual” allies with Muslims and Buddhists for political expedience.
    But secondly we need to maintain a respectful and friendly attitude to the people following those religions, no matter how disrespectful ,and unfriendly they may seem in return. However, disrespect and unfriendliness are not a trait displayed by a great number of Muslims anyway.

    …speak evil of no one, to be peaceable, gentle, showing all humility to all men. For we ourselves were also once foolish, disobedient, deceived,…

    The article I originally referred to showed one extreme of Chrisitan relationship to Muslims – that extreme being reflected in the “firstly” comment above.

    However I have also seen the opposite, and no less disturbing attitude being displayed, after the horrific terror attacks in Christchurch, where compassion shown to the grieving Muslim community was portrayed as being a betrayal of Christian faith.

    I see that attitude is the betrayal of Jesus, not the compassionate response to the vicitms of an evil act.

  5. Regarding my previous comment about the response to the Christchurch terror attacks – what I found worst about the Christian attitude was that it was so critical of the SECULAR government expression of compassion towards grieving Muslims.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s