Kevin McCarthy promises to start every Congress with prayer

I thought they already did that. Expect a generic prayer which will never include the name of Jesus Christ.

peace to you

 

". . . McCarthy, who is a Baptist, was elected to GOP majority leader Thursday in his fourth term in the House, the fastest ever ascent to the pivotal leadership post. . . .
Kevin McCarthy to Religious Conservatives: 'Proud to Be a Christian' - Roll Call


We will see.

 

I guess that’s important to you.

I suspect it will only annoy God if it is done as a show (Matthew 6:5) or if it is done without a focus on justice and care for the poor and cleaning up corruption (Amos 5:12, 21-24).

Dragging the name of Jesus into the fray as a mascot for a political program that fosters contempt for others (Matthew 5:22); telling lies, making claims and promises not based in reality (Matthew 5:33-37); and partisan politics (Matthew 5:43-47). It will likely end in God’s judgment, both now and on the final day.

Everyone in Congress who wants to pray to Jesus can already do so — and start each session that way. There is no New Testament mandate to use one’s power to try to get unbelievers to go through the motions of prayer. It only makes hypocrites of them if they pretend, and it also hardens them against the true gospel of Jesus. As a Baptist, McCarthy should know that, but he’s probably ignorant of his own religious history (best case), or he simply doesn’t care.

This simply sounds like a way to exclude persons who are not “Christian nationalists.” Every real Christian should be opposed to it.

 

Every prayer that doesn’t focus on Jesus Christ is hypocritical and is “going through the motions”.

peace to you

 

I agree.

I have no use for the prayers of civil religion. I would prefer that they stop that show.

 

Bottom line, it’s less about showing honor to our Lord and asking His blessing/guidance and more about stroking evangelicals for support.

Don’t misunderstand me, if the name of our Lord were spoken in a prayer before congress, I would be astonished and be prayerful that it was sincere, and not just for show, as you pointed out earlier.

But we are not a Christian theocracy. The government is secular. The “prayer” will be general and designed not to offend anyone, except evangelicals who long for the name of Christ to be lifted up among our political leaders with reverence and sincerity.

peace to you

 

Its a ridiculous notion that just because it is done in the halls of government that prayer must necessarily be a "show". It has no basis and appears to only be an argument against what is not wanted whether it is a show or not. In other words it gives the appearance of an intellectually dishonest argument made to criticize what is not wanted regardless of its true value and is being hidden by feigned virtuism. The argument itself is exactly what it accuses others of being.

 

Is it?

I can't remember if you are a KJV-preferred person or not, so I'll use the KJV to avoid complaints. If you are going to quote Jesus, please do it accurately:

Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world.​

Of course, "nations," does not mean the modern nation-state, but let's pretend it does. The justification for government-promoted "prayer" -- discipleship and teaching -- conveniently skips over the part about baptizing everyone (since you claim to be a baptist).

God has only authorized one theocracy, and it was ancient Israel. The Kingdom that Jesus has established is distinct from the governments of this world. It does not need or want "support" from the government of the United States. The governments of this world rule by the power of the sword. The Kingdom of God does not wield a sword and fight for itself. Jesus will do all the fighting and sword-wielding that is necessary:

Jesus answered [Pilate], My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence. (John 18:36)​

Any use of government power and influence to presume to prop up the Kingdom of God is anti-christ.

You can only think that if you are unfamiliar with the New Testament. You are simply advocating a civil religion, not the gospel of Jesus.

And Christian nationalists are worse than pagans, since they claim to know the truth and are spreading falsehoods. They will be judged much more severely.

Sure, but Kevin McCarthy (or anyone else) should pray on his own or with like-minded believers, not make a show/demonstration/confrontation of prayer. That demeans prayer, harms the witness of Jesus, and makes it more difficult for those of us who evangelize to communicate with the lost who believe (for good reason) that Christianity it about manipulating others.

 

As usual, you are distorting what it being said and beating up on your straw man very impressively.

No one should have an issue with prayer in the "halls of government." It is when that prayer is in front of a microphone (is God hard of hearing?) and during official time that it is clearly a show.

But of course, you know that. You are not that foolish.

You are accusing me of doing that you have just done.

I don't know what "virtuism" is, but I imagine it has something to do with virtue. Perhaps you were trying to claim "virtue signaling," which is the right-wing claim that accuses people who hold righteous convictions that right-wingers don't like as being insincere.

 

Thought it always had.

 

I guess I’m a little cynical these days. I ask a lot of questions and I tend not to trust the politicians.

Why is MaCarthy making this statement in the first place? The congress has always opened in prayer. Did Polosi do away with opening the congress with prayer?

When the new congress opens in prayer, will it be significantly different from what has happened over the last 50 years? 100 years?

If MaCarthy is maintaining the same policy, what is the purpose of the statement?

peace to you

 

Since God didn't write the Bible in English (including King James English), we need to look to the Greek word behind "nation." It means people group (ἔθνη is the actual word), not a political entity. So God's word is true and your misunderstanding of it is false.

Not if you are using the power or influence of the government to do it. On a practical level, it doesn't work. On the level of the New Testament teaching, it is heresy.

However, there is an institution established by God to fulfill the Great Commission... that's the church. We should not confuse the work of the church and the state.

There is no such thing as a "Christian state" in a biblical sense. There are plenty of nations that have attempted those very things and it has always harmed the church and the witness of Jesus.

Pastors and Elders are not Christians? More seriously, there is nothing wrong and many things right with Christians serving in leadership in a nation. But serving in that fashion doesn't give them the authority from God to use the power of the government to presume to advance the Kingdom of God.

That can certainly happen without opening each Congressional session with prayers.

It is a basic principle of government that there are consequences for not obeying the laws established by the lawmakers. These consequences eventually involve the use of force, even up to the death of the one who violates the laws. That is what has been called "the power of the sword" for hundreds of years. I am simply referring to that basic reality. Of course, if you don't understand that reference, that would explain why you don't understand why this is a big deal.

Not yet. However, human history has a lot of examples of that sort of thing.

Their state churches they established were. The Massachusetts Bay Colony persecuted Baptists - imprisoning, beating, and exiling them for worshiping in a different way. That's basic Baptist history. They also persecuted Quakers and other religious groups that did not align completely with the Congregational Church.

I agree.

There is no denying that the Bible had a great influence on English Common Law, since the church and state were merged. Of course, the Church of English had all sorts of issues and non-biblical practices, and they didn't mind executing Christians who deviated from them. And, you must remember, the Church of English broke from the Roman Catholic Church because Henry VIII wanted a divorce.

But while there was a heavy influence upon Common Law in the colonies that became the U.S., there were other influences from the Enlightenment, John Locke, Baptist and Methodist influences for separation of church and states, as well as numerous other sources.

So it is a gross overstatement to claim that the U.S. Government was "founded on the Bible via Common Law." It doesn't stand up to the slightest unbiased historical scrutiny.

I need to bring your attention to an important distinction - the gospel of Jesus is not a set of values. It is something far greater, broader, and deeper.

Christ does not want us to promote morality at the expense of a calling into the Kingdom of God. Humankind can't live up to the Law in our own strength, so we have to engage with God's grace offered to us in the Kingdom for transformation. Promoting morality (presumably through public praying in Congress?) is just a new legalism that leads to death.

Jesus and the New Testament writers disagree with you. And Jesus is the Final Judge. Christian nationalists claim they can see and they are more blind than pagans.

I'm not sure who you identify as "defeatists Christians." Perhaps those who have followed Christ's command to "crucify themselves" and to "take up their crosses" in discipleship to the One Who has already defeated the evil one? Disciples of Jesus are not ruled by fear nor a need to control other people. They don't seen God as an idol that has to be put back in His "rightful" place in government, or need the nation to see our religious exercises. They are called to love people, announce the present reality of the Kingdom of God, and to prophetically confront government figures (even Trump) and those who presume to be religious leaders who attempt to lead people astray.

If that's a "defeatist," then that's what you should be too.

Why are you so afraid of "satanic secularism" if you are aligned with Christ? There's nothing to fear. Tell the truth and let the power of God work through your Christian influence, not human power.

You better reread your New Testament, since that's not going to happen. It will be worse for you after this exchange, since I have given you more information and you are responsible for how you handle it.

Sure, I agree. But he is not "just like all other Christians" when he is part of the government and feels the need to use his position to undermine the gospel witness with his actions -- actions that Jesus rejected.

What a surprise. Lost people are acting like they are lost. What is truly surprising is that self-professed Christian are rejecting the teachings of Christ and increasing the chaos.

I agree. Of course, you are the only one who has used the phrase "private morality." If you are using that as a counter to using the House Chamber as a pulpit to violate the spirit and teaching of Christ, then you are not talking about morality at all.

Maybe not for you. But Jesus had quite a bit of success engaging with people, as did Paul, the rest of the apostles, and the early church. I also do quite well with evangelism, although it has gotten much harder in the last seven years.

No sugarcoating here, but I also don't make them try to choke down a hateful spirit, hypocrisy, and the arrogance of contemporary right-wing politics.

I wish you would actually engage with the scripture instead of just telling me how great you think it is. I have quoted the teachings of Jesus to you and you have ignored them. Stop "thumpin" your Bible and put down your gun, open the pages of the New Testament and led the Spirit teach you.[/quote]