Who Decides

I think we agree (at least more than disagree).

What I am talking about are people who preach to the world against specific sins. This dies not make sence. The World is set against God. Making the World act morally is not going to accomplish anything except to create a culture of nominal Christianity.

For example, there are people who in the name of Christ rejoice that sinful people were murdered recently at the LGBTQ club. In so doing they say they stand against sin, but in reality they are working against the gospel.

I hate to say this, but one reason many believe Christians are hypocritical hate mongers is we have hypocritical hate mongers within our congregations.

 

Christians should not be condoning any sin in their lives or their churches.

The LGBTQ movement is nothing new. Paul wrote of the sin in particular. They not only sin but they advocate their sin. Then he lumped it in with all sin to simply state that all are on an equal footing apart from Christ.

We saw Paul actively combating the sin in the congregations, while reminding his audience that some of them once lived that same life.

My point is that we are to guard our selves, our families, and our congregation.

When we cast pearls before swine we suffer at our own hand.

 

1 Corinthians 5:9–13 I wrote you in my letter not to associate with immoral people; I did not at all mean with the immoral people of this world, or with the covetous and swindlers, or with idolaters, for then you would have to go out of the world.
But actually, I wrote to you not to associate with any so-called brother if he is an immoral person, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or a swindler—not even to eat with such a one. For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Do you not judge those who are within the church? But those who are outside, God judges. Remove the wicked man from among yourselves.

I wonder if part of the problem is we misdefine the congregation. Rather than reaching out to the world it seems we often seek to let the world in, make them a part of our congregation.

I'd much prefer to bake a cake for a gay couple and let them know while I don't advocate the sin I care about them, sharing the gospel with them, letting them know that I operate a Christian business and if they are in need to stop by.

Then I'd prefer to be able to tell them that is what Christians do, that we shun sin but pray the sinner comes to Christ. That Christians are not bigoted, self righteous hate mongers but instead were once just as lost and in need of a Savior as are they.

I guess I couldn't do that last part as that would be lying. But that would be my preference.

 

I'll address the two points.

1. We will never agree on this part because I do not believe the church should try to change the world via political means. This is a personal conviction for me as well (I don't vote).

But that's fine. I just wanted you to know that we disagree and each of us should follow our convictions. That at least may give a little more perspective on my comments (why I see things as I do).

2. I agree the cake makers should not be forced to participate in any ceremony. I was just dealing with it as if they were just baking a cake for a gay union (something a cake really has nothing to do with...people get married all the time without cakes).

If I made plastic wedding figures I would allow them to be sold to anybody wanting them. But I certainly would not participate in a gay union.


That said, people should follow their conscious. If they believe baking a cake for an atheist wedding is wrong, then they shouldn't bake the cake. But they also shouldn't complain if consequences come due to that decision.

 

Paul didn't use legal means as a defense. He used legal means to get to Rome in order to spread the gospel.

That motivation is the difference. Paul (and many Christians who have gone before) were focused not on themselves, their rights, their safety but instead on the work of the kingdom. Today we are fo used on defending our rights, our interests, our safety above all.


There is a third choice (one I have taken). It is to abstain from participating in secular politics, not moving, and not having anyone around me who "gets political" on my behalf. I do keep up a little bit so that I am not unaware.

At one time I was very much into politics. I was a Republican (still hold those values). But what I have found since abstaining from politics is that much (on both sides) is inflated. And this to a degree that many Christians cannot understand how the church can be a force for good in this world except via politics.

But to address your points, I live in a very political area. I do not have anybody else around me willing to get political for me.

 

No, people get political on their own behalf - supporting what they believe to be the best political outcome.

I benefit from their actions. There is a difference.

I understand why people would disagree with me and seek to influence the world through secular politics. I respect that decision. Everybody should act as they believe God is leading them.

It is interesting to read different positions. We can read the early Christian position (around 200 AD) defending the reasons Christisns do not vote or serve in public office. And we can read about politicians who were godly men working to make our nation better.

In the end, however, we must be obedient to God's direction in our lives and encourage our brothers to be obedient to God even if our obedience is different.