Or start with Matthew 28:18 so you get:

"Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”

Jesus us commands this with all authority in heaven and earth- that's quite a bit of authority to defy if as a Christian you decide not to "make disciples of all nations"


There's no doubt evangelism and talking about one's faith is a critical part of the Christian life. However, context matters. Just because someone at my work does not bring up Christianity when we are talking about our project plan does not make them a non-Christian. If we are hanging out at lunch and the conversation somehow makes its way to a discussion about faith and belief and the person remains silent, then there's an issue there. The line is somewhere in the middle.

Really, Christians should always be sharing their faith, but if I were to march into a project meaning and start using it is a platform for sharing my faith, people would come to believe (rightly so) that I was not someone they could rely on to stay on task and get my job done. I would also likely turn a lot of people away from the very goal by offending their sensibilities. Honestly, sharing faith can be offensive, but if it is I want the message itself to be offending, and not the way or time that I choose to share it.

And sharing faith should always be the end goal, not the means of achieving other things. This is where I think politicians get into trouble. If that morning where I went to hear Bush's testimony at Second Baptist he'd spent the time talking about his personal faith experience and how he'd come to a saving relationship with Christ I think that would have been very edifying and uplifting. I would have viewed him as a politician second and a Christian first. If I disagreed with his policies then I would simply not vote for him- but that would be decided away from the church. The important matter was that he was a Christian brother and we were in agreement on the most important thing in life.

But that's NOT what his speech was about. He didn't talk about personal impact, but rather how his plan for administration would include things of my faith (he didn't even really own the faith himself at any point I remember). He never let us forget he was running for office, and he was giving us reasons to vote for him. He was asking for our votes because of our faith. That's NOT what Christian testimony is supposed to be about.


On a side note, it's a bit strange how this thread turned to be a little more religious focused when it didn't start out that way at all. It certainly wasn't my goal, even when in my first wall of text post. I was simply viewing abuse of religion as a political platform as a symptom of a horribly broken system- albeit one that hits me very personally and to which I am very sensitive.