Cultural Engagement: Every Christian's Obligation

[AustinC]

Often, as the church grows culturally more dominant, the church becomes corrupted from within. Many wolves parade as sheep, devouring the flock. We see the corruption of Judaism in the gospels. We see the corruption in Rome. Reformation came 500 years ago yet it is clear we are in need of another reformation today.
The church is historically most effective under persecution, not when it has political power.

 

[Iconoclast]

Abraham kuyper and in his writing the Centennial reader on page 474 said this in light of the conflict that arises in the scholarly realm, Believers may not withdraw to the precincts of the church, rest content with their own faith, and leave the construction of the Temple of learning to unbelievers as if no concern of Their Own.
They may not because scholarly research is not a matter of human Pride but a God-given duty. The honor of God demands that the human mind penetrate the entire system of creation to discover his greatness and wisdom there and to translate these things that the human thought through human words.
Since the knowledge of the unbelieving world cannot help but obscure God's greatness and wisdom, it is the Christian thinkers calling to buckle down to this enormous task which they alone can accomplish even if it did not yield benefit for their own life.

 

[JonC]

The Church is the Church.The world is the world.
God has the church on a .mission.
While Kingdom members are in the world we are to occupy till He comes.lk19:13-14.
We do that as individuals not the Church.
I do not think we are to remain absent and not have believing legislators.
We should bring about change as the gospel goes worldwide.
It does not do any good if the church drops the ball.
When I speak of the "Church" I am speaking about truly regenerate persons.
Nominal professors are not the Church.
We have not had numbers enough to be a major influence so the world of the ungodly grows like fungus.
Scripture looks forward to the nations coming to God and His laws.
It is not going to happen with entertainment,rock bands,puppets,etc.
The concept seems as if it could not happen but that just shows we have to put the hand to the plow.

I agree that "nominal professors" do not comprise the Church. I think that this point is always missed by the World, and often missed by "churches'. But the Church is those who have their citizenship in God's Kingdom (those who have the right to be called "children of God"), and are only the redeemed. This brings up another interesting topic (which I will not go into here) about the purpose of the assembly (for the believer or the unbeliever).

In regards to occupying the World until Christ comes, I understand this to be Christians existing "in" the world but not being "of" the world as we continue the "Ministry of Reconciliation" (2 Cor 5:11-21).

I have very strong views about how this will look. I believe this will be the Church as a "city on a hill", as "salt" and "light", as a people called apart from the World, separated in how they live their everyday lives, not using worldly systems but faithfully existing in and for God's Kingdom. We have, as Paul put it, no right to judge the World. We judge the Church. And as you aptly point out, this would include calling out the difference between "nominal Christians" and true Christians - expelling the wicked from among us.

I believe that Christians participating in politics is compromise. It is, IMHO, fence riding in the sense that it is an attempt to be "of" both the Kingdom of God and the World. I do not believe we are called to change the World for the better, but instead to be a light to a World which is perishing.

Those are my personal views, anyway, and hopefully will help explain some of the positions I take.

It would be interesting to explore just how a Christian political system would look (the laws that would be considered, policies, etc.). I guess it would be stretching this thread too far to venture in that direction, but maybe I'll start one in the future (if no other member does) to look at this hypothetical interaction.

 

[Iconoclast]

Pt2.
What the latter is not all the case on the contrary, thinking Christians can arrive at a conception of things that harmonizes with their faith, that supports and strengthens it instead of undermining it, only one Christian Learning in Ducks us into a well-considered, clearly articulated World in life you. A confessing Christian who lives in this world can not be satisfied with a profession of faith but, like anyone, needs a firm understanding of the world in which he lives. Without the guidance of Christian scholarship, he cannot help it absorb the conclusions of unbelievers. Doing so, he will live with a world and life view that does not fit but comes into conflict with this confession and any number of points.

 

[Iconoclast]

I agree that "nominal professors" do not comprise the Church. I think that this point is always missed by the World, and often missed by "churches'. But the Church is those who have their citizenship in God's Kingdom (those who have the right to be called "children of God"), and are only the redeemed. This brings up another interesting topic (which I will not go into here) about the purpose of the assembly (for the believer or the unbeliever).

In regards to occupying the World until Christ comes, I understand this to be Christians existing "in" the world but not being "of" the world as we continue the "Ministry of Reconciliation" (2 Cor 5:11-21).

I have very strong views about how this will look. I believe this will be the Church as a "city on a hill", as "salt" and "light", as a people called apart from the World, separated in how they live their everyday lives, not using worldly systems but faithfully existing in and for God's Kingdom. We have, as Paul put it, no right to judge the World. We judge the Church. And as you aptly point out, this would include calling out the difference between "nominal Christians" and true Christians - expelling the wicked from among us.

I believe that Christians participating in politics is compromise. It is, IMHO, fence riding in the sense that it is an attempt to be "of" both the Kingdom of God and the World. I do not believe we are called to change the World for the better, but instead to be a light to a World which is perishing.

Those are my personal views, anyway, and hopefully will help explain some of the positions I take.

It would be interesting to explore just how a Christian political system would look (the laws that would be considered, policies, etc.). I guess it would be stretching this thread too far to venture in that direction, but maybe I'll start one in the future (if no other member does) to look at this hypothetical interaction.

I am glad we share a view in part of the Kingdom being prominent in our gospel being presented.
I am constantly reworking my views here as it is a work in progress.
I have posted a few quotes from Abraham Kuyper on what became known as sphere sovereignty.
He ran into opposition it seems, I am not sure why?

 

[Iconoclast]

Often, as the church grows culturally more dominant, the church becomes corrupted from within. Many wolves parade as sheep, devouring the flock. We see the corruption of Judaism in the gospels. We see the corruption in Rome. Reformation came 500 years ago yet it is clear we are in need of another reformation today.
The church is historically most effective under persecution, not when it has political power.

JonC mentioned that in speaking of Wells writings.
A deluded compromise will not work as has been seen in history.
I think I am tracking down a new paradigm.
Individuals proclaiming the gospel of the Kingdom to the lost. Yet at the same time raising up godly men to occupy political positions such as the legislature ,Senate ,Presidential offices.

 

[Yeshua1]

I agree that "nominal professors" do not comprise the Church. I think that this point is always missed by the World, and often missed by "churches'. But the Church is those who have their citizenship in God's Kingdom (those who have the right to be called "children of God"), and are only the redeemed. This brings up another interesting topic (which I will not go into here) about the purpose of the assembly (for the believer or the unbeliever).

In regards to occupying the World until Christ comes, I understand this to be Christians existing "in" the world but not being "of" the world as we continue the "Ministry of Reconciliation" (2 Cor 5:11-21).

I have very strong views about how this will look. I believe this will be the Church as a "city on a hill", as "salt" and "light", as a people called apart from the World, separated in how they live their everyday lives, not using worldly systems but faithfully existing in and for God's Kingdom. We have, as Paul put it, no right to judge the World. We judge the Church. And as you aptly point out, this would include calling out the difference between "nominal Christians" and true Christians - expelling the wicked from among us.

I believe that Christians participating in politics is compromise. It is, IMHO, fence riding in the sense that it is an attempt to be "of" both the Kingdom of God and the World. I do not believe we are called to change the World for the better, but instead to be a light to a World which is perishing.

Those are my personal views, anyway, and hopefully will help explain some of the positions I take.

It would be interesting to explore just how a Christian political system would look (the laws that would be considered, policies, etc.). I guess it would be stretching this thread too far to venture in that direction, but maybe I'll start one in the future (if no other member does) to look at this hypothetical interaction.

We should be involved in the world and using all avaiable means and ways to influence our culture and society, so use the internet to spread the good news, to refute heresy and other cults and religions, and also to be into taking our light into the marketplace, politics, business, entertainment, etc!

 

[Iconoclast]

Another Kuyper thought from pg.475

By contrast, it is our duty to take hold of scholarship as an instrument for propagating our convictions. We can often see how a Christian group that does not feel this obligation isolates itself from the general public, locks itself up in a corner, and maintains itself among the less educated parts of the population but loses all influence over the course of events and public opinion. Naturally, the learned to give this habit their stamp of approval. The universities mark out the direction that the thinking of the people of influence will take. From the University's it spread out among politicians, lawyers, doctors, teachers, and writers, and from these into the press, the primary and secondary schools, the Civil Service come. If University life and its broad influence remain exclusively in the hands of unbelievers, public opinion - also on moral and religious matters– will one day go Wholesale in this direction and work to a great detriment of our Christian circles. There is only one way to Perry this, and that is for Christian thinkers to found the university that one fold another world of seeing and thinking; to transmit this among those who pursue higher education; and soda raise a circle of educated influential people who could turn the public way of thinking

 

[Yeshua1]

Another Kuyper thought from pg.475

By contrast, it is our duty to take hold of scholarship as an instrument for propagating our convictions. We can often see how a Christian group that does not feel this obligation isolates itself from the general public, locks itself up in a corner, and maintains itself among the less educated parts of the population but loses all influence over the course of events and public opinion. Naturally, the learned to give this habit their stamp of approval. The universities mark out the direction that the thinking of the people of influence will take. From the University's it spread out among politicians, lawyers, doctors, teachers, and writers, and from these into the press, the primary and secondary schools, the Civil Service come. If University life and its broad influence remain exclusively in the hands of unbelievers, public opinion - also on moral and religious matters– will one day go Wholesale in this direction and work to a great detriment of our Christian circles. There is only one way to Perry this, and that is for Christian thinkers to found the university that one fold another world of seeing and thinking; to transmit this among those who pursue higher education; and soda raise a circle of educated influential people who could turn the public way of thinking

Think that we can see the clear result of not upholding the light into public education and in entertainment arena now!

 

[JonC]

I am glad we share a view in part of the Kingdom being prominent in our gospel being presented.
I am constantly reworking my views here as it is a work in progress.
I have posted a few quotes from Abraham Kuyper on what became known as sphere sovereignty.
He ran into opposition it seems, I am not sure why?

I am not very familiar with Kuyper, but have been reading up a bit on "Sphere Sovereignty". So I am responding in part to work through "Sphere Sovereignty" (for my benefit and clarity) and to answer your question of why I believe the concept may run into opposition.

If I understand correctly (please let me know if misrepresent the thought) the idea is that there are distinct "spheres" of life and these different areas or realms interact but stay separate. Kuyper believed that there are a variety of God-created structures like family, church, state, business, etc. These are distinct spheres with their own unique method of functioning. Each are accountable to God within their own sphere.

InterVarsity offered this illustration:

We have an example of having a father working for their son. In the home, the father is the head of the household and can properly tell the son what to do and not to do without overstepping any boundaries. However, when at work, the roles must be reversed. The son becomes the authority over the father and can (should) dictate what behavior is appropriate for the father. This can lead to tension, but if we respect the spheres properly, there should be no tension.​

So, if I understand correctly (a BIG if) it relates to the OP in that the sphere of world politics is a distinct sphere which touches and interacts with other realms yet remains distinct unto itself and is accountable to God in its own function and operation.

The Church does not control the State (it is a separate "sphere", no less accountable to God in its operation and function). Therefore the Church has no business (as the Church) in dictating the affairs of the State, however the State is nonetheless responsible to God for its activities. A pastor of a Church functions not as a political figure but as a pastor (accountable to God as the pastor). If the pastor is also a politician then he functions as a politician (accountable to God as a politician).

I suspect there are a couple of reasons Kuyper met opposition. The Reformation carried with it some ideas from the RCC. It reformed some ideas (like communion, atonement, etc.), rejected some things (like the Pope as a vicar of Christ, a works based justification, etc.) and maintained other things (at least initially and to some degree). One of these things the Reformed Church initially maintained was the idea that the secular government (the State) was an "arm of the Church". Those with this view probably resisted Kuyper in treating these spheres as separate from the authority of the Church (just a guess).

I personally have an issue with the idea of these "spheres". I do not agree with the idea that these spheres are separate realms. When it comes to secular government (politics) I place them in the realm of the World (principles and powers that are hostile, at enmity, with God). As such, I view Christians in politics as a compromise that should not be made. I am tempted to appeal to the early church for this model as the early church abstained from politics, from serving in government, from voting, military service, etc.. BUT at the same time that does not mean that we should. The early church worked within its own context and interpreted Scripture through what they experienced. I also have read quite a bit of Anabaptist theology, which could have influenced how I personally interpret this issue. I try to be objective, however we are all influenced by our experiences, to included theological arguments that have been persuasive in our own lives. Still, I do share their interpretation of the role of a Christian. Whether right or wrong, those are my convictions.

Here is where I stand regarding cultural-engagement: I believe that we are to engage culture insofar as we are reaching people in these cultures with the gospel of Jesus Christ. I do not believe we are called to make the World better, but we are called to make the world a better place insofar as the people we reach. The World is condemned and perishing, the Kingdom is here and coming.

I think that the best witness we have is explaining why we hold our positions.

I do not vote or participate in the political system because I am a child of God, a citizen of His Kingdom, and believe for me to do otherwise would be a compromise (one "foot" in both "worlds").

That said, I can appreciate when Christians do participate in politics in order to influence others with the gospel message. I do not have to agree with their actions, but I can appreciate that they are doing it for God, just as I hope they can appreciate that I am refraining for the same reasons.

Sources:

Whatever Happened to Sphere Sovereignty?
Introducing Kuyper's "Sphere Sovereignty" - Emerging Scholars Blog

 

[Iconoclast]

Thanks for the feedback and the links.

I had a devotional book by KUyper that was based on the words near the end of psalm 73.

28 But it is good for me to draw near to God: I have put my trust in the Lord God, that I may declare all thy works.
When i was taught premill ideas, it was all about snatch a few souls out of the fire, before the great tribulation comes, we are doomed.

Drifted into what i called optimistic Amillenial teaching. That the success or lack of success belongs to God, and as long as we are faithful in our proclamation.

When I took a fresh look at Hebrews I found myself drawn to post mill ideas, which i had previously rejected. I was in a church then where the past declared he was postmillenial....he waited for me to stop laughing, then he asked how I saw things.
he then turned around and challenged me to present the postmill view.
I made a bad caricature of it, and his responses left me full of questions. So I began to look again at the basics.
What is the kingdom? when does it start? what is the nature of it?
It is still ongoing so...I am looking at Kuyper to see his thoughts which he tried to implement.
I believe he served as prime minister...so I thought it took courage to attempt to implement what he believed was a biblical position.
I had a chance to ask Gary DeMar about him, but he seemed to dismiss him. he was on my friends radio show, and looking back I did not frame my question the best.

 

[Strannik]

The Church is the Church.The world is the world.
God has the church on a .mission.
While Kingdom members are in the world we are to occupy till He comes.lk19:13-14.
We do that as individuals not the Church.
I do not think we are to remain absent and not have believing legislators.
We should bring about change as the gospel goes worldwide.
It does not do any good if the church drops the ball.
When I speak of the "Church" I am speaking about truly regenerate persons.
Nominal professors are not the Church.
We have not had numbers enough to be a major influence so the world of the ungodly grows like fungus.
Scripture looks forward to the nations coming to God and His laws.
It is not going to happen with entertainment,rock bands,puppets,etc.
The concept seems as if it could not happen but that just shows we have to put the hand to the plow.

Do you not notice that you repeat the mistakes of Catholics and other faiths who believe that Christians can get involved in politics?
I don't want to offend anyone, but you have Baptist presidents in the United States, Baptist oligarchs, and other financial, military, and so on Baptist politicians, and what good is that? is the United States holier and purer than others? Do you have fewer problems with sodomites, murderers, and other sinners?
---------------------------------------
¹⁵ And he charged them, saying, Take heed, beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, and of¹⁵ the leaven of Herod. Mark 8:15
© Библия Онлайн, 2003-2021.

 

[Strannik]

Often, as the church grows culturally more dominant, the church becomes corrupted from within. Many wolves parade as sheep, devouring the flock. We see the corruption of Judaism in the gospels. We see the corruption in Rome. Reformation came 500 years ago yet it is clear we are in need of another reformation today.
The church is historically most effective under persecution, not when it has political power.

I agree. Many Evangelical churches are no longer what they were even some 30 years ago. There is corruption in the Church, through all sorts of liberal-apostate groups.

 

[Strannik]

I agree that "nominal professors" do not comprise the Church. I think that this point is always missed by the World, and often missed by "churches'. But the Church is those who have their citizenship in God's Kingdom (those who have the right to be called "children of God"), and are only the redeemed. This brings up another interesting topic (which I will not go into here) about the purpose of the assembly (for the believer or the unbeliever).

In regards to occupying the World until Christ comes, I understand this to be Christians existing "in" the world but not being "of" the world as we continue the "Ministry of Reconciliation" (2 Cor 5:11-21).

I have very strong views about how this will look. I believe this will be the Church as a "city on a hill", as "salt" and "light", as a people called apart from the World, separated in how they live their everyday lives, not using worldly systems but faithfully existing in and for God's Kingdom. We have, as Paul put it, no right to judge the World. We judge the Church. And as you aptly point out, this would include calling out the difference between "nominal Christians" and true Christians - expelling the wicked from among us.

I believe that Christians participating in politics is compromise. It is, IMHO, fence riding in the sense that it is an attempt to be "of" both the Kingdom of God and the World. I do not believe we are called to change the World for the better, but instead to be a light to a World which is perishing.

Those are my personal views, anyway, and hopefully will help explain some of the positions I take.

It would be interesting to explore just how a Christian political system would look (the laws that would be considered, policies, etc.). I guess it would be stretching this thread too far to venture in that direction, but maybe I'll start one in the future (if no other member does) to look at this hypothetical interaction.

I'm sorry, but Christians in politics, this is a deceptive, heretical utopia imposed by Satan. He also suggested that Christ go into politics:
1) When he openly suggested that Christ would worship Satan and "receive ""power" over the earthly kingdoms and states.
2) When, through simple, carnal people, he wanted to make Christ an ordinary politician, a king in Israel. Jesus is all of that said flatly and directly:
"My kingdom is not of this world."
-------------------

³⁶ Jesus answered, 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. ³⁷ Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice.John 18:36-37
© Библия Онлайн, 2003-2021.

 

[Iconoclast]

Do you not notice that you repeat the mistakes of Catholics and other faiths who believe that Christians can get involved in politics?
I don't want to offend anyone, but you have Baptist presidents in the United States, Baptist oligarchs, and other financial, military, and so on Baptist politicians, and what good is that? is the United States holier and purer than others? Do you have fewer problems with sodomites, murderers, and other sinners?
---------------------------------------
¹⁵ And he charged them, saying, Take heed, beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, and of¹⁵ the leaven of Herod. Mark 8:15
© Библия Онлайн, 2003-2021.

Thanks for your response...but am not following RC. teaching at all, but on the contrary ..the scriptures.
I will demonstrate this when I get online

 

[JonC]

I'm sorry, but Christians in politics, this is a deceptive, heretical utopia imposed by Satan. He also suggested that Christ go into politics:
1) When he openly suggested that Christ would worship Satan and "receive ""power" over the earthly kingdoms and states.
2) When, through simple, carnal people, he wanted to make Christ an ordinary politician, a king in Israel. Jesus is all of that said flatly and directly:
"My kingdom is not of this world."
-------------------

³⁶ Jesus answered, 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. ³⁷ Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice.John 18:36-37
© Библия Онлайн, 2003-2021.

You don't have to apologize to me .

I agree with your post. I also see worldly politics as a "power" of this world of which God warned us. Politics are worldly powers and principles. Politics are the system of this World.

We are citizens of another kingdom, one that is not concerned with the political affairs of a World which is fading, which is condemned.

 

[JonC]

Thanks for your response...but am not following RC. teaching at all, but on the contrary ..the scriptures.
I will demonstrate this when I get online

I concur. You are not following the Roman Catholic Church in doctrine.

But there are ideas that have come out of the RCC (including the responsibility for Christians to be involved in politics) and is one reason I think that Kuyper ran into opposition (against the State-sponsored Church).

I think that Strannik may be pointing out the fact that it was not until the advent of the Roman Catholic Church that Christians became involved in politics. Until that time the Church considered involvement in politics, holding public office, voting, and serving in the military to be forbidden by their calling. Christians were cited as unpatriotic for abstaining to vote (Christians could vote for the Senate, but not for the Emperor, of course). The defense of the early church was that they are in the World but not of the World and therefore was concerned with the affairs of the Church and not the World.

That said, it does not matter where the idea that Christians have an obligation or responsibility to be involved in politics originated. People hold their views for their own reasons - not because the RCC, the Presbyterian Church, or anyone else.

 

[Iconoclast]

Strannik,

Do you not notice that you repeat the mistakes of Catholics and other faiths who believe that Christians can get involved in politics?

Are you saying we should just stand byand be spectators as the ungodly dictate laws for us?

Were we wrong to stop Adolf Hitler?

I don't want to offend anyone, but you have Baptist presidents in the United States, Baptist oligarchs, and other financial, military, and so on Baptist politicians, and what good is that?

Again,,,do you believe we should never have Christians in Government?
Should Christians just be partakers in world flight, like the Amish do?

is the United States holier and purer than others? Do you have fewer problems with sodomites, murderers, and other sinners?

Not sure what you mean here?


---------------------------------------

¹⁵ And he charged them, saying, Take heed, beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, and of¹⁵ the leaven of Herod.

Not sure how this fits in either?

 

[JonC]

Should Christians just be partakers in world flight, like the Amish

Hey Iconoclast,

What do you mean here?

 

[Iconoclast]

Hey Iconoclast,

What do you mean here?

Let me clarify a bit.

We can agree scripturally that there is in scripture teaching about a wicked world system that is in direct opposition to God and His people.
We should not compromise in order to fit into that system. We tell people we are in the world, but not of it.
Amish people in extreme fashion in trying to separate from the world and "worldly" things, behave in odd ways and are guilty of world flight
No cars, no electricity, dress odd, avoid interaction with outsiders.etc. In short they live in a bubble.

Some in fundamentalist circles are doing the same
thing Because sin is present many Christians absent themselves from contact with sinners.
Jesus sought them out, eat with them, and interacted.

If we never venture outside of our Christian bubble..[what bubble?] Christian Church, Christian Home,Christian School, Christian bible study with other christians, Christian hospitality, Christian base groups, Christian friends, Christian softball league,Christian fishing and camping trips,etc when do we engage the lost in the world?

I heard a tragic thing.A person was attending
church. They had an unsaved spouse, but were hoping that by reaching out to other couples they might get their children around young people who were in the church.and also perhaps help with the unsaved spouse to be drawn into interaction with the believers.
They were told by one of the first couples that the husband in the Christian family did not want his children to play with their children because there was an unsaved spouse.....
That is one example of "world flight"

While we agree on some aspects such as gospel and Kingdom representation, I do not think we are to be absent here, and by default be subject to the ungodly at every turn.

Joseph in Gods providence was raised up to political office in Egypt, by Gods design.He did not decline.

I am not advocating compromise of principle, but taking a stand and occupying for God, until He comes.