The Bible and politics
Six biblical studies on political power and authority
Thinking biblically about the exercise of power and authority in human communities is a major challenge for Christians. We live in a world shaped by false post–Enlightenment divisions between private personal faith and public political life. We live in a post–Christendom world where old understandings of the relationship between church, state and society no longer apply. Many Christian politicians are reticent about speaking of their faith and its impact on their political life. If they are asked, then, in the famous words of Alistair Campbell, the answer is likely to be, ‘We don’t do God.’
Our Christian faith is, however, full of political language. We proclaim Jesus as ‘Lord’. We bear witness to the ‘kingdom’ of God. Often, we do not make the connections between these terms and how we think about politics, yet politics is an important aspect of Christian discipleship. In the narrow sense of politics and government, we should all be concerned and involved with the politics of our nation. In the wider sense of how we understand, use and respond to power and authority, our workplaces and our churches are all political worlds.
This set of six readings tries to give a taster and overview of the biblical message by studying a few key, classic passages from different acts of the biblical drama that relate to political power and authority. In Genesis we see the importance of a proper understanding of humankind made in God’s image. The reality of worldly politics and God’s response are then revealed in Exodus. Liberated Israel was shaped by the gift of the law and the early lack of centralized power seen in the period of the judges. That changed with the coming of kingship. This was a highly ambiguous development (as evident in 1 Samuel 8) but one that God took and used to reveal a vision of godly rule in passages like Psalm 72. The political reality was, of course, far from that biblical vision and Israel was judged through exile, where she again experienced pagan rule as described in our reading from Daniel.
True politics is, of course, embodied in Jesus Christ. His saying about ‘rendering to Caesar’ provides our Gospel focus before we conclude with Paul’s account in Romans 13, which has dominated much Christian thinking about politics down the centuries.
Quotations are taken from the New International Version of the Bible.
1. Made in God’s image
GENESIS 1:26–31
The vision of humanity in these verses is vital for all areas of Christian ethics and discipleship, including politics. To understand their political significance, it is important to be aware of some of the ancient Near Eastern parallels. The creation myths of Babylon and Egypt were used to legitimate the existing, oppressive social and political structures of those cultures. In their stories, the kings and rulers were the representatives or even the embodiment of the gods. Human beings as a whole were thus made to serve their politicians and the gods whose image those rulers bore.
In our reading we have a totally contrasting vision of creation. It brings about a liberating subversion of the common understanding of politics in the ancient and much of the contemporary world. Here, humankind as a whole, both male and female, bears the divine image. All human beings, not just those who are rich or powerful, are called to image God.
Much debate continues about ‘the image of God’, with various theories focusing on our rationality as the quality that distinguishes us from the rest of creation, or the relatedness within humanity evident in our being made male and female (v. 27). Whatever the value of these interpretations, a central corollary of being made in God’s image is the calling to rule. This is found in verse 26 and again in verse 28, either side of verse 27 with its account of humanity’s creation and double reference to ‘the image of God’. The author is making clear that human rule within and over creation is part of God’s plan in creation. Indeed, in making us in his own image, the creator God has effectively delegated his own rule over his creation to all of us.
This vision has major implications not only for who has a right to rule but also for how we exercise any authority to rule that we might have in any sphere of life. We should rule in a way that reflects the rule of the God whose image we bear. And so, in the light of Christ, ‘the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation’ (Colossians 1:15), we see that human beings are called to develop a creative politics of humility and service, not one of domination and oppression.
2. Oppression and liberation
EXODUS 1:8–22; 2:23–25
In contrast to the creation vision, this narrative, foundational to Israel’s identity, reveals the mindset of many political rulers in our fallen world. It also reveals the politics of God. In verse 8, regime change, change at the top, results in a new politics. It is a politics of fear, expressed in populist propaganda, leading to division into ‘us’ and ‘them’, oppression and genocide.
In a subtle sign of God’s faithfulness to his promises to Abraham (Genesis 12:2, 15:5), the Israelites have become so numerous that they are perceived as a political threat, an alien community that could choose to work with foreign powers (vv. 9, 10).
The political solution implemented is a sad constant in human history. First there is forced labor to build the status and prestige of the ruler (v.11). Far from solving the problem by depleting the Israelites and eliminating Egyptian fears, the result is the exact opposite and serves God’s purposes (v. 12; cf. Genesis 28:14). Rather than effecting a U–turn, however, the Egyptians’ political strategy is to tighten the screw. This is seen in the repetition of ‘ruthlessly’ in verses 13, 14, and the original Hebrew’s five–fold use of the same root, ‘serve’, which is sadly lost in our varied translations as ‘worked’, ‘labor’ and ‘used’.
Finally, a policy of ethnic cleansing is implemented against future generations. Those called to help bring forth life safely are ordered to become agents of state murder against their own people (v. 16). The designation of the midwives and mothers as ‘Hebrew’ combines the senses of wandering and animal–trading and probably had derogatory connotations, like our contemporary ‘travelers’. The response is a bold act of non–violent civil disobedience as the (interestingly, named) midwives demonstrate that they fear God more than Pharaoh. Their allegiance is first to God, not to political power. The depressing response to such faithfulness, however, is national mobilization to implement ethnic cleansing (v. 22).
Hope appears with Moses’ rescue but vanishes with his violent revolutionary reaction (2:11, 12) and flight. Then God re–enters the drama in 2:23, in response to the apparently non–political act of a groaning and crying out to God from slavery. He acts in four ways: God hears, God remembers his covenant, God sees, and God knows. Although these do not strike us as political actions, they are the origin of the political liberation that follows and the source of the very event that Pharaoh’s oppressive politics sought to prevent: the Israelites will ‘leave the country’ (1:10; the Hebrew phrase reappears in 13:8).
3. Good government
PSALM 72
In the face of much bad government, this and other royal or kingship psalms (for example, Psalms 101 and 110) provide an alternative vision of what politics should be. Presented as a prayer of David for his son Solomon, it closes the second of the five books of the Psalter (Psalms 42 — 72) and so concludes with a doxology (vv. 18, 19).
The opening two verses highlight, in a symmetrical repetitive structure, two central qualities needed for good governance that are frequently paired together in the Old Testament: justice and righteousness. They appear in verse 1 as the only clear request to God (a reminder of the need to pray for these gifts in rulers) and then in verse 2 as a description of the actions of the king. Justice (mishpat) is strictly an act of judgment and speaks of legitimate and authoritative decision–making. Righteousness (sedeq) is not simply a personal moral uprightness, but a matter of acting in the right way in relationships, and so its meaning is also captured in our idea of faithfulness.
Although one of the features of the psalm is its relative lack of militaristic imagery (though note verse 9), it is clear that politics will involve struggle and conflict. The one who rules is to side with and defend the ‘afflicted ones’ (vv. 2, 4, 12) and the ‘needy’ (vv. 4, 12, 13). That stance means being determined to ‘crush the oppressor’ (v. 4). It means a politics that faces up to oppression and violence in society, and works to rescue those who are the victims of such behavior at the hands of others. The description of the king in verse 12 clearly echoes the pattern of God’s own rule, which we saw in his response to the Israelites in Egypt when they cried out to him.
The psalm also points to the need for the ruler to be concerned about the material well–being of the people and provision of food, drawing a connection between what we would call social and economic justice and ecological well–being (vv. 3, 16). In addition to describing the task of rulers, the psalm makes clear — in the descriptions of the nations’ recognition of godly governance (vv. 9–11, 15) — the importance of righteous rulers receiving proper acknowledgment of their rule.
The final words before the doxology (v. 17b) present the righteous ruler as the one through whom God’s covenant promises to Abraham are being fulfilled (Genesis 12:2–3) and, from a Christian perspective, point forward to Jesus, the Messiah, as the true king of the Jews.
(continued....)
Six biblical studies on political power and authority
Thinking biblically about the exercise of power and authority in human communities is a major challenge for Christians. We live in a world shaped by false post–Enlightenment divisions between private personal faith and public political life. We live in a post–Christendom world where old understandings of the relationship between church, state and society no longer apply. Many Christian politicians are reticent about speaking of their faith and its impact on their political life. If they are asked, then, in the famous words of Alistair Campbell, the answer is likely to be, ‘We don’t do God.’
Our Christian faith is, however, full of political language. We proclaim Jesus as ‘Lord’. We bear witness to the ‘kingdom’ of God. Often, we do not make the connections between these terms and how we think about politics, yet politics is an important aspect of Christian discipleship. In the narrow sense of politics and government, we should all be concerned and involved with the politics of our nation. In the wider sense of how we understand, use and respond to power and authority, our workplaces and our churches are all political worlds.
This set of six readings tries to give a taster and overview of the biblical message by studying a few key, classic passages from different acts of the biblical drama that relate to political power and authority. In Genesis we see the importance of a proper understanding of humankind made in God’s image. The reality of worldly politics and God’s response are then revealed in Exodus. Liberated Israel was shaped by the gift of the law and the early lack of centralized power seen in the period of the judges. That changed with the coming of kingship. This was a highly ambiguous development (as evident in 1 Samuel 8) but one that God took and used to reveal a vision of godly rule in passages like Psalm 72. The political reality was, of course, far from that biblical vision and Israel was judged through exile, where she again experienced pagan rule as described in our reading from Daniel.
True politics is, of course, embodied in Jesus Christ. His saying about ‘rendering to Caesar’ provides our Gospel focus before we conclude with Paul’s account in Romans 13, which has dominated much Christian thinking about politics down the centuries.
Quotations are taken from the New International Version of the Bible.
1. Made in God’s image
GENESIS 1:26–31
The vision of humanity in these verses is vital for all areas of Christian ethics and discipleship, including politics. To understand their political significance, it is important to be aware of some of the ancient Near Eastern parallels. The creation myths of Babylon and Egypt were used to legitimate the existing, oppressive social and political structures of those cultures. In their stories, the kings and rulers were the representatives or even the embodiment of the gods. Human beings as a whole were thus made to serve their politicians and the gods whose image those rulers bore.
In our reading we have a totally contrasting vision of creation. It brings about a liberating subversion of the common understanding of politics in the ancient and much of the contemporary world. Here, humankind as a whole, both male and female, bears the divine image. All human beings, not just those who are rich or powerful, are called to image God.
Much debate continues about ‘the image of God’, with various theories focusing on our rationality as the quality that distinguishes us from the rest of creation, or the relatedness within humanity evident in our being made male and female (v. 27). Whatever the value of these interpretations, a central corollary of being made in God’s image is the calling to rule. This is found in verse 26 and again in verse 28, either side of verse 27 with its account of humanity’s creation and double reference to ‘the image of God’. The author is making clear that human rule within and over creation is part of God’s plan in creation. Indeed, in making us in his own image, the creator God has effectively delegated his own rule over his creation to all of us.
This vision has major implications not only for who has a right to rule but also for how we exercise any authority to rule that we might have in any sphere of life. We should rule in a way that reflects the rule of the God whose image we bear. And so, in the light of Christ, ‘the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation’ (Colossians 1:15), we see that human beings are called to develop a creative politics of humility and service, not one of domination and oppression.
2. Oppression and liberation
EXODUS 1:8–22; 2:23–25
In contrast to the creation vision, this narrative, foundational to Israel’s identity, reveals the mindset of many political rulers in our fallen world. It also reveals the politics of God. In verse 8, regime change, change at the top, results in a new politics. It is a politics of fear, expressed in populist propaganda, leading to division into ‘us’ and ‘them’, oppression and genocide.
In a subtle sign of God’s faithfulness to his promises to Abraham (Genesis 12:2, 15:5), the Israelites have become so numerous that they are perceived as a political threat, an alien community that could choose to work with foreign powers (vv. 9, 10).
The political solution implemented is a sad constant in human history. First there is forced labor to build the status and prestige of the ruler (v.11). Far from solving the problem by depleting the Israelites and eliminating Egyptian fears, the result is the exact opposite and serves God’s purposes (v. 12; cf. Genesis 28:14). Rather than effecting a U–turn, however, the Egyptians’ political strategy is to tighten the screw. This is seen in the repetition of ‘ruthlessly’ in verses 13, 14, and the original Hebrew’s five–fold use of the same root, ‘serve’, which is sadly lost in our varied translations as ‘worked’, ‘labor’ and ‘used’.
Finally, a policy of ethnic cleansing is implemented against future generations. Those called to help bring forth life safely are ordered to become agents of state murder against their own people (v. 16). The designation of the midwives and mothers as ‘Hebrew’ combines the senses of wandering and animal–trading and probably had derogatory connotations, like our contemporary ‘travelers’. The response is a bold act of non–violent civil disobedience as the (interestingly, named) midwives demonstrate that they fear God more than Pharaoh. Their allegiance is first to God, not to political power. The depressing response to such faithfulness, however, is national mobilization to implement ethnic cleansing (v. 22).
Hope appears with Moses’ rescue but vanishes with his violent revolutionary reaction (2:11, 12) and flight. Then God re–enters the drama in 2:23, in response to the apparently non–political act of a groaning and crying out to God from slavery. He acts in four ways: God hears, God remembers his covenant, God sees, and God knows. Although these do not strike us as political actions, they are the origin of the political liberation that follows and the source of the very event that Pharaoh’s oppressive politics sought to prevent: the Israelites will ‘leave the country’ (1:10; the Hebrew phrase reappears in 13:8).
3. Good government
PSALM 72
In the face of much bad government, this and other royal or kingship psalms (for example, Psalms 101 and 110) provide an alternative vision of what politics should be. Presented as a prayer of David for his son Solomon, it closes the second of the five books of the Psalter (Psalms 42 — 72) and so concludes with a doxology (vv. 18, 19).
The opening two verses highlight, in a symmetrical repetitive structure, two central qualities needed for good governance that are frequently paired together in the Old Testament: justice and righteousness. They appear in verse 1 as the only clear request to God (a reminder of the need to pray for these gifts in rulers) and then in verse 2 as a description of the actions of the king. Justice (mishpat) is strictly an act of judgment and speaks of legitimate and authoritative decision–making. Righteousness (sedeq) is not simply a personal moral uprightness, but a matter of acting in the right way in relationships, and so its meaning is also captured in our idea of faithfulness.
Although one of the features of the psalm is its relative lack of militaristic imagery (though note verse 9), it is clear that politics will involve struggle and conflict. The one who rules is to side with and defend the ‘afflicted ones’ (vv. 2, 4, 12) and the ‘needy’ (vv. 4, 12, 13). That stance means being determined to ‘crush the oppressor’ (v. 4). It means a politics that faces up to oppression and violence in society, and works to rescue those who are the victims of such behavior at the hands of others. The description of the king in verse 12 clearly echoes the pattern of God’s own rule, which we saw in his response to the Israelites in Egypt when they cried out to him.
The psalm also points to the need for the ruler to be concerned about the material well–being of the people and provision of food, drawing a connection between what we would call social and economic justice and ecological well–being (vv. 3, 16). In addition to describing the task of rulers, the psalm makes clear — in the descriptions of the nations’ recognition of godly governance (vv. 9–11, 15) — the importance of righteous rulers receiving proper acknowledgment of their rule.
The final words before the doxology (v. 17b) present the righteous ruler as the one through whom God’s covenant promises to Abraham are being fulfilled (Genesis 12:2–3) and, from a Christian perspective, point forward to Jesus, the Messiah, as the true king of the Jews.
(continued....)
