What does the Bible say about politics?

The word “politics” comes from the Greek word politika, meaning “affairs of the cities.” In the Western context, much of our political theory derives from the thought of Plato and Aristotle (who introduced the term in his classic work, Politika). Merriam-Webster defines the term as “the art or science of government,” or “the total complex of relations between people living in society.”

In this sense, any form of social organization, such as bands and tribes, is a form of politics. As a result, unless we can find a way to live in complete isolation from others, we cannot avoid some form of politics in our daily lives, much less in our larger society.

Historians identify four types:

• Democracy: Political power is vested in the people of a state who elect leaders accountable to them
• Authoritarianism: A strong central power, such as a political party or the military, rules the state
• Totalitarianism: The extreme form of authoritarianism in which all power is held by a dictator who prohibits opposition
• Monarchy: A person reigns as head of state

Of course, these can be combined or aligned with each other. For example, a monarch can rule by the support of the people (democracy), via a political party (authoritarianism), or through despotic totalitarianism that allows no dissent. An authoritarian party or totalitarian ruler can be elected by democratic means. And leaders elected democratically can then abolish elections (as with Hamas in Gaza) and move toward authoritarianism or totalitarianism.

Interestingly, the Bible does not condone or condemn any of the four political forms. Unlike many other religious books, it does not contain or describe a specific political system. Rather, it provides abiding principles that are relevant to each and every political context and environment.

All human life is sacred

The first and most foundational biblical principle with regard to politics comes early in Scripture:

God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them (Genesis 1:27).

The Hebrew word translated “man” means “all humans,” which the text reinforces by adding, “male and female he created them.” This fact comes before the first political organization was a consideration and is foundational to all human flourishing.

With regard to politics, the sanctity of human life means that leaders, parties, and governments exist to serve their people. CS Lewis observed:

The State exists simply to promote and to protect the ordinary happiness of human beings in this life. A husband and wife chatting over a fire, a couple of friends having a game of darts in a pub, a man reading a book in his own room or digging in his own garden—that is what the State is there for. And unless they are helping to increase and prolong and protect such moments, all the laws, parliaments, armies, courts, police, economics, etc., are simply a waste of time.

The sanctity of all human life is an especially vital consideration in light of the advances of communism, theocracies, and autocracies in the last century, theories that declare just the opposite to be true.

In Communist China, North Korea, and Cuba, the people are a means to the end of the government’s authority and actions. Elections, if they are held, are tightly controlled by the ruling authorities. The government can issue edicts regarding the number of children a family is allowed to have, the jobs and homes they are allowed to hold and occupy, and other details of their daily lives. 

This is because, in theory, they believe that what is good for the state is ultimately good for its people. If the state thrives, this “rising tide raises all boats.” Even if the people must suffer as individuals, they will benefit in the collective, or so the theory claims.

We see a similar system in Iran, where a theocratic government led by an unelected Supreme Leader rules the nation. Elections are held, but presidents and other officials lead only as they are permitted by the theocratic ruler. 

The theory, akin to Communism, is that the theocracy represents Allah and rules by the dictates of the Qur’an in ways that benefit the nation and its people. They ask: Why would you want the laws of men (democracy) when you can live by the laws of God?

Russia is yet another example that is different but similar. At this writing, more than a million Russians have died in Russia’s war with Ukraine. Their autocratic ruler, Vladimir Putin, is convinced that this war is necessary to protect Mother Russia from further incursions by Western enemies. He is acting without regard for the lives and well-being of his people in the claim that the war will ultimately benefit the nation as a whole.

In each of these approaches, the Genesis 1:27 elevation of individual people as made in God’s image is ignored or rejected, with tragic consequences for billions of people. Yet, even in a democracy such as ours, the sanctity of life is a fragile assertion, one challenged by postmodern relativism and the rejection of biblical morality. 

Abortion on demand, for example, violates the sanctity of the preborn child in deference to the (supposed) well-being of its mother. Euthanasia violates the sanctity of the infirm in deference to their (supposed) cessation of suffering and lessened burden on others. LGBTQ ideology that violates the religious liberty of those who dissent does so to the (supposed) benefit of LGBTQ individuals who are otherwise “victimized” by society.

As you can see, any political system and action that results in the flourishing of the people must be rooted in the sanctity of human life.

Leaders should serve those they lead

A second biblical principle grows from the first: leaders, however they come into leadership, should serve those they intend to lead.

We find this principle illustrated most vividly in John 13, where the divine Son of God washed the feet of the very men who would betray and abandon him that night. Then he said to them, “If I then, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also ought to wash one another’s feet. For I have given you an example, that you also should do just as I have done to you” (vv. 14–15).

The principle of servant leadership is taught across Scripture:

• “Let the greatest among you become as the youngest, and the leader as one who serves” (Luke 22:26).
• “Do nothing from selfish ambition or conceit, but in humility count others more significant than yourselves” (Philippians 2:3).
• “Whoever would be great among you must be your servant” (Matthew 20:26).
• “I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep” (John 10:11).

Oswald Sanders, in his now-classic Spiritual Leadership, claims that “true greatness, true leadership, is found in giving yourself in service to others, not in coaxing or inducing others to serve you.” Max DePree, the former CEO of Herman Miller and author of bestselling leadership literature, defines leadership:

The first responsibility of a leader is to define reality. The last is to say thank you. In between the two, the leader must become a servant and a debtor. That sums up the progress of an artful leader.

This approach to leadership is especially vital in a postmodern culture.

Leaders attain their positions through four means:

• Charismatic: follow me because you like me
• Transactional: follow me to get a raise or promotion
• Positional: follow me because my title and office give me the authority to dictate your actions
• Servant: follow me because you believe that my leadership is in the best interest of our mission and collective flourishing.

Here’s the problem with the first three:

• Charismatic leaders are effective only so long as they are popular. When they must take less popular positions or fail in personal ways, their leadership falters.
• Transactional leadership is less effective today, when followers are less motivated by finances or upward organizational mobility.
• Positional leadership is less effective in a culture that challenges authority claims as the improper imposition of personal power motives.

But when people believe that our leadership serves the collective mission and their personal flourishing, they are much more motivated to follow.

This is true regardless of the political system. As history shows, even monarchs, dictators, and authoritarian parties can be overthrown or opposed in ways that severely limit their leadership. Because neither divine nor human nature changes, the biblical emphasis on servant leadership remains relevant and vital today.

Staying connected to the issues of the people and serving them effectively is vital not just for political leaders but for political parties as well. In a recent New York Times article, David Brooks writes:

There have been only a few world-shifting political movements over the past century and a half: the totalitarian movement, which led to communist revolutions in places like Russia and China and fascist coups in places like Germany; the welfare state movement, which led in the US to the New Deal; the liberation movement, which led, from the 60’s on, to anti-colonialism, the civil rights movement, feminism, and the LGBTQ movement; the market liberalism movement, which led to Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher and, in their own contexts, Deng Xiaoping and Mikhail Gorbachev; and finally the global populist movement, which has led to Donald Trump, Viktor Orban, Brexit and, in their own contexts, Narendra Modi, Vladimir Putin, and Xi Jinping.

He explains that the global populist movement, which began in the early 2010s, “was driven by a comprehensive sense of social distrust, a firm conviction that the social systems of society were rigged, corrupted, and malevolent.” For example, he cites a recent poll in which 69 percent believed the “political and economic elite don’t care about hard-working people” and 63 percent said “experts in this country don’t understand the lives of people like me.”

In Brooks’ view, “the Republicans have adjusted to the shift in the zeitgeist more effectively than the Democrats.” As a result,

The Democrats’ first core challenge is that we live in an age that is hostile to institutions and Democrats dominate the institutions—the universities, the media, Hollywood, the foundations, the teachers union, the Civil Service, etc. The second is that we live in an age in which a caste divide has opened up between the educated elite and everybody else, and Democrats are the party of the highly educated.

He concludes that “parties on the left can’t get a hearing until they get the big moral questions right: faith, family, flag, respect for people in all social classes.”

His argument illustrates my point: leaders can best lead those they serve when they serve those they lead.

Effective leaders maintain personal integrity

Just as Scripture consistently elevates the importance of servant leadership, so it teaches the significance of personal integrity for those who lead. For example:

• “When the righteous increase, the people rejoice, but when the wicked rule, the people groan” (Proverbs 29:2).
• “It is an abomination to kings to do evil, for the throne is established by righteousness” (Proverbs 16:12).
• “If a ruler listens to falsehood, all his officials will be wicked” (Proverbs 29:12).
• “An overseer must be above reproach” (1 Timothy 3:2; cf. Titus 1:7).
• “With upright heart he shepherded them and guided them with his skillful hand” (Psalm 78:72).
• “Not domineering over those in your charge, but being examples to the flock” (1 Peter 5:3).
• “Show yourself in all respects to be a model of good works, and in your teaching show integrity” (Titus 2:7).

The leader’s personal character is especially foundational to success in a culture that disparages positional authority. Sanders quotes the great military leader Bernard Montgomery: “Leadership is the capacity and will to rally men and women to a common purpose, and the character which inspires confidence.” The second is essential to the first.

Warren Bennis (1925–2014) was the University Professor and Distinguished Professor of Business Administration and Founding Chairman of The Leadership Institute at the University of Southern California. In 1976 he warned about the “unconscious conspiracy” in every organization to maintain the status-quo for the future benefits of current participants. The solution is for leaders to empower their followers to fulfill the organization’s collective vision for the benefit of its members and customers. To do so, leaders must embody four critical competencies:

• Management of attention
• Management of meaning
• Management of trust
• Management of self.

In a culture that depreciates leadership by position, it is essential that we earn the right to lead by virtue of our personal character. We cannot ask people to do what we are unwilling to do, or go further than we are willing to lead. What the leader is, the organization becomes.

DePree cites Mahatma Gandhi’s list of the seven sins in the world:

• Wealth without work
• Pleasure without conscience
• Knowledge without character
• Commerce without morality
• Science without humanity
• Worship without sacrifice
• Politics without principle.

Because character is so central to effective leadership today, spiritual formation is now indispensable for leaders.

The Stoic philosopher and Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius famously observed, “The happiness of your life depends upon the quality of your thoughts.” The same is true of political flourishing.

People should support and pray for their leaders

Leading as servants with integrity is vital, but it is also difficult for fallen humans. The “will to power” is ever with us, our desire to be our own god (Genesis 3:5) and make people a means to our ends.

As a result, Scripture calls us to pray for those who lead us:

First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people, for kings and all who are in high position, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way (1 Timothy 2:1–2). 

Note that Paul issued this call to intercession at a time when Nero was the Roman emperor. One of the cruelest, most despicable of all tyrants, Nero eventually ordered Paul’s execution. Nonetheless, the apostle urged us to intercede for him and for “all who are in high position.”

Note the phrase “high position.” Its use shows that even when we cannot be grateful for the person, we can pray for the position. This is true of parents, employers, pastors, and all other leaders. Such intercession is vital for several reasons:

• It enables God to lead and bless those for whom we pray.
• It softens our hearts toward those with whom we disagree (it is difficult to slander someone for whom you are truly praying).
• It shows our leaders our support (as Justin Martyr and other early apologists demonstrated in their letters and intercession for their rulers).
• It unites us in intercession (Paul’s words are for all Christians, not just some believers).
• It positions us and the people who govern us to receive God’s gracious best.

However, intercession is only one way we are to support our leaders. Paul also taught, “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities” (Romans 13:1). He added, “Pay to all what is owed to them: taxes to whom taxes are owed, revenue to whom revenue is owed, respect to whom respect is owed, honor to whom honor is owed” (v. 7).

Peter, who was also martyred by Nero, nonetheless agreed with Paul:

Be subject for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether it be to the emperor as supreme, or to governors as sent by him to punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good. . . . Honor everyone. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the emperor (1 Peter 2:13–14, 17).

What, then, are we to do when the government conflicts with the Bible and God’s call in our lives?

The answer is found in the last two imperatives in Peter’s letter: “Fear God. Honor the emperor.” We are to “honor” the earthly ruler, but we are to “fear” and revere only the Lord. As a result, when a conflict arises, we must obey our highest authority.

We see this principle on display in Acts 4, when the very apostle who taught us to “be subject” to rulers refused to do so. This was because the Sanhedrin, the Jewish supreme council, commanded Peter and his fellow Christians “not to speak or teach at all in the name of Jesus” (v. 18). Peter and John answered: “Whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you rather than to God, you must judge, for we cannot but speak of what we have seen and heard” (vv. 19–20).

When the authorities tried later to silence the believers, “Peter and the apostles answered, ‘We must obey God rather than men’” (Acts 5:29).

To summarize: we are to support and pray for our leaders, but we are ultimately to serve our King.

Believers should participate fully in their governance

One last biblical principle applies to all political forms but especially to democracy: God’s people should engage fully in every dimension of society, including their governance.

This is an important point in a day when the “culture wars” have scarred many of us. We are tired of being labeled “homophobic” for declaring morality that has been conventional wisdom for most of the world across most of human history. We see Christians lambasted in the public square for bringing their faith into their work. And many (wrongfully) interpret the “separation of church and state” to mean the separation of faith and the public square.

The more secularized and immoral our culture becomes, the easier it becomes to withdraw into monastic communities of like-minded believers. But this keeps our “salt” in the saltshaker, our “light” under a basket (Matthew 5:13–16). And it violates the model established by God when his people were exiled in the pagan land of Babylon:

Build houses and live in them; plant gardens and eat their produce. Take wives and have sons and daughters; take wives for your sons, and give your daughters in marriage, that they may bear sons and daughters; multiply there, and do not decrease. But seek the welfare of the city where I have sent you into exile, and pray to the Lᴏʀᴅ on its behalf, for in its welfare you will find your welfare (Jeremiah 29:5–7).

This principle applies to believers in a democracy in a variety of ways:

• We are to pay taxes as owed (Romans 13:7).
• We are to vote and otherwise participate in democratic processes as we “render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s” (Matthew 22:21).
• We are to engage personally in politics as God leads us. I am convinced that God is calling more Christians into public service than are answering his call, and I am grateful for Christians who are working in politics today.
• We are to use our platforms to influence the culture by “speaking the truth in love” (Ephesians 4:15) as we engage the issues of our day with biblical truth and redemptive action.

This last point leads to an especially vexing question: Should Christians try to “legislate morality”?

It is a fact that human hearts can be changed only by the Holy Spirit. Only God can forgive sins, save souls, and transform lives. In this sense, legislating morality does not change people. We still face the same temptations and commit the same sins as our ancestors.

On the other hand, legislating morality can restrict behavior in ways that promote the common good. Speed limits save lives. Laws that prohibit crime and murder are obviously essential to civil society. 

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr was right: “Morality cannot be legislated, but behavior can be regulated. Judicial decrees may not change the heart, but they can restrain the heartless.”

As a result, seeking to create or change laws that benefit humanity is a vital and valuable way Christians can engage in governance.

But this fact leads to a perplexing issue: What about morality that is unbiblical and harmful but not illegal?

Adultery is obviously forbidden by Scripture and damaging to marriages and families. However, forbidding it by law would be problematic at best. Imagine a society that scrutinized and regulated private behavior in this way.

I likewise believe cigarette smoking and abusing alcohol to be harmful to those who consume them and to society at large. However, for the government to make them illegal would be an intrusion into personal lives on a level that could be more harmful than helpful.

Similar arguments can be made about abortion, same-sex marriage, and euthanasia. 

These are very complex subjects that are beyond the purpose of this paper to discuss in detail. However, I want to be clear: I passionately believe that the sanctity of human life prevails from the moment of conception to natural death, and that same-sex marriage is not only unbiblical but damaging to individuals and to society.

As a result, I wish abortion were illegal (except to save the life of the mother), same-sex marriage had never been legalized, and end-of-life medical intervention was limited to providing palliative care for terminally ill patients.

However, the US Constitution is a secular document in which the word “God” nowhere appears. As a result, debates over moral issues on which it is silent must be held on secular grounds. You and I likely want every American to live by the Bible, but Muslims would like the same regarding the Qur’an, and Mormons regarding the Book of Mormon.

I believe the Supreme Court erred when it discovered a constitutional “right” to abortion in Roe v. Wade and a constitutional “right” to same-sex marriage in Obergefell. I do not believe its legal reasoning to have been sound, and think in both cases it usurped authority that should have resided with the states. I was therefore glad when Roe was overturned and would wish the same for Obergefell.

But if the latter is to occur, it must be on legal and secular grounds, not the imposition of biblical values on secular society. Otherwise, we move from democracy to theocracy. And such imposition of interpretive values with which we agree opens the door to similar imposition of interpretive values with which we may not.

God is still king

We have been discussing politics from a biblical perspective, but I left the best fact for last: the world and everyone in it is ultimately governed not by human authorities but by the king of the universe.

Over and over, the Bible proclaims the fact that God is king:

• Jesus announced, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand” (Matthew 4:17).
• He taught us to pray, “Your kingdom come, your will be done, on earth as it is heaven” (Matthew 6:10).
• He told us to “seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things will be added to you” (Matthew 6:33).
• After his resurrection, Jesus spent forty days with his followers “speaking about the kingdom of God” (Acts 1:3).
• When Paul arrived at Rome, he spent his time “proclaiming the kingdom of God and reaching about the Lord Jesus Christ with all boldness and without hindrance” (Acts 28:31).
• When Jesus returns, his name will be “King of kings and Lord of lords” (Revelation 19:16).

The kingdom of God is not like the monarchies we see today, in which the ruler serves a largely ceremonial role. In a biblical context, the king owns everything in the kingdom and rules every dimension of his kingdom every moment of every day.

In God’s kingdom, there is no division between Sunday and Monday or between religion and the “real world.” You are breathing the king’s air right now, wearing his clothes, and using his technology.

Our problem is that, as fallen humans, we seek to be our own kings and lead our own kingdoms. As a result, we must deliberately choose every day to dethrone ourselves and enthrone our Lord. We cannot give God “tomorrow” because it does not exist. We must every day submit to God’s Spirit (Ephesians 5:18) and recommit ourselves to loving our Lord and our neighbor (Matthew 22:37–39).

When we do, we find that we are best able to value all life, serve those we lead, choose personal integrity, support and pray for our leaders, and participate fully in our governance. We become the change we wish to see in our nation as catalysts for spiritual awakening and moral renewal.

Abraham Kuyper, a theologian who also served as prime minister of the Netherlands, testified:

“There is not a square inch in the whole domain of our human existence over which Christ, who is Sovereign over all, does not cry, Mine!”

Is he “sovereign” over you today?