The Social Gospel?

[OnlyaSinner]

[QUOTE="JonC, post: 2894832, member: 12639"
'snip' (from #102)
Was Jesus supporting evil by not changing the secular government?[/QUOTE]
The Sinless One never supported evil, as we both know. However, during Jesus' incarnation there was only one government over Israel, and I've found nothing in scripture that suggests He ever tried to overthrow Rome. The religious "government" was different, and Jesus very much tried to change that, as seen in many passages but perhaps most emphatically the 7 "woes" of Matt. 23. What shattering indictments are seen in that chapter! Yet Jesus hurl those critiques out of malice but out of His love for those religious leaders, that they might understand their sins and then repent. (Did any? We don't know at what point Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathaea believed.)
Today there are two major political parties in the US, unlike the status two millennia ago. Both are very flawed but IMO one is far more greatly flawed than the other. I've voted in every presidential election since coming of age for the one in 1968, and I'm wrestling on what would be the best action this time.

 

[JonC]

We have school choice for the rich. The publicly funded schools are anti-religion schools, but most families have no choice but to send their kids to these indoctrination camps. A clear violation of the first amendment.
[indent[
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances [/indent]

The only way to provide schools which do not violate the First Amendment is to use tax revenue to provide school vouchers so the atheists can go to atheist schools, and religious people can send their kids to the school of their choice.

No. I know many who are not rich but sent both of their children to private schools. They cut back on other things.

Many have worked hard to send their kids to private schools. Sone have even taken second jobs.

Are you going to reimburse those people?

Your idea about wealth distribution, about the government taking my tax dollars and giving it to those who can't afford private schools....or simply won't make the sacrifice or get a better job....is socialistic.


The question you need to ask is WHY does churches who offer a Christian school charge so much that you want the government to give those handouts??

 

[JonC]

[QUOTE="JonC, post: 2894832, member: 12639"
'snip' (from #102)
Was Jesus supporting evil by not changing the secular government?

The Sinless One never supported evil, as we both know. However, during Jesus' incarnation there was only one government over Israel, and I've found nothing in scripture that suggests He ever tried to overthrow Rome. The religious "government" was different, and Jesus very much tried to change that, as seen in many passages but perhaps most emphatically the 7 "woes" of Matt. 23. What shattering indictments are seen in that chapter! Yet Jesus hurl those critiques out of malice but out of His love for those religious leaders, that they might understand their sins and then repent. (Did any? We don't know at what point Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathaea believed.)
Today there are two major political parties in the US, unlike the status two millennia ago. Both are very flawed but IMO one is far more greatly flawed than the other. I've voted in every presidential election since coming of age for the one in 1968, and I'm wrestling on what would be the best action this time.[/QUOTE]
Exactly.

Many of our problems existed in Jesus' time. Abortion, immoral life styles, poverty, unfair taxes, crime....

But it was the Jews who thought Jesus came to fix those problems, those political issues, the government, that Jesus said misunderstood His Kindgom.

 

[JonC]

How foolish of you Jon. Was Christ crucified by the Jews powers were the Apostles persecuted by the Roman powers? You have got to get your head out of the sand.

Christianity has been at odds with the political powers from the start and will continue to be. We are told not to be part of the world not to ignore the evil in the world. We are to fight against it but you have chosen to just bend the knee. By saying you will not support the "lesser evil" you are by your refusal to be engaged are supporting the greater evil.

Jesus was crucified by the Roman government (He was given over by the Jews to be killed by the Roman government)..

Yes, the World has always been at odds with God.

Perhaps this is why God warned us not to become involved in the concerns of the World. Maybe this is why God warned us not to judge the World, and not to resist that evil.

We are to be like Christ, not like the Jews who were disappointed that Jesus had not come to fix the World.

Here is the thing (and the reason you are wrong):

You say if I do not support keeping abortion legal for our nation that I am supporting a "greater evil"

Here your "greater evil" is an economic and immigration policy that you do not like.

I believe that your "greater evil" is no greater than the lesser.


It is not evil to believe nations should open their boarders. It is not evil to believe in a more socialistoc government. It is not evil to be anti-capitalism. I think those positions are inherently flawed and would be bad for our nation, but they are not evil.

It is, however, evil to murder babies. It is evil to support a platform that depends on keeping abortion federally legal and allowing the people decide whether to murder these children.

It may be necessary for that power to gain more power, but it is no less evil.


You have put your hand to the plow and turned back, allowing the concerns of the World to choak out your testimony.

I cannot, and will not, support either party because doing so compromises my faith. Both sides support allowing abortion. Both sides are evil.

Not choosing one evil is not choosing the other. The reason is I am not of the World. I voice my vote according to my spiritual citizenship. My voice is heard within those who profess to belong to the same Kingdom (your replies are evidence).


When you stand before God and He asks exactly why you supported allowing citizens to decide whether to kill babies all you will be able to say is you viewed the other sides economic and immigration platform as a greater evil.

 

[JonC]

You continue to ignore context but I am seeing that is a common tactic on this board.

Since you are so insistent on "resist not evil" I have to conclude that you do not lock your doors and just leave your keys in your car doors unlocked. You are being selective in your use of that out of context quote.

You have failed to make your case of stand back and do nothing. The bible has made my case that we are to be involved. Scripture says we are to be the salt and light that you claim we are not to be.

I have not, but as usual you have ignored the context.

You have also....once again...made a false accusation in the form of a strawman arguments.

I never claimed that we should "stamd aside and do nothing". Quite the opposite, in fact. I said that we cannot become salt that has lost its flavor. We stand in Christ, we do kingdom work. We do not support kerpibg abortion legal in order to bring about better economic policies.

Resist not evil is consistent with Jesus' sermon on the mount. It is consistent with Paul's instruction that the affairs of the World is not his business. It is consistent with Jesus' warning not to become involved with the concerns of the World.

You are comfortable supporting a platform that vows to let the people decide if they want to murder babies. The reason is you value economics and immigration policies over the lives of these children (dead babies won't affect you, but inflation will).

What we see in this election is where peoples hearts really are, where their treasure rests.

For most here it is in their personal finances. They, like you, view abortion as a lesser evil when compared to economic policies that could impact their wallet.

You and I are different. There is nothing you can say that will make me change my mind that of all issues in this election abortion is the greatest immoral topic.

 

[Silverhair]

Jesus was crucified by the Roman government (He was given over by the Jews to be killed by the Roman government)..

Yes, the World has always been at odds with God.

Perhaps this is why God warned us not to become involved in the concerns of the World. Maybe this is why God warned us not to judge the World, and not to resist that evil.

We are to be like Christ, not like the Jews who were disappointed that Jesus had not come to fix the World.

Here is the thing (and the reason you are wrong):

You say if I do not support keeping abortion legal for our nation that I am supporting a "greater evil"

Here your "greater evil" is an economic and immigration policy that you do not like.

I believe that your "greater evil" is no greater than the lesser.


It is not evil to believe nations should open their boarders. It is not evil to believe in a more socialistoc government. It is not evil to be anti-capitalism. I think those positions are inherently flawed and would be bad for our nation, but they are not evil.

It is, however, evil to murder babies. It is evil to support a platform that depends on keeping abortion federally legal and allowing the people decide whether to murder these children.

It may be necessary for that power to gain more power, but it is no less evil.


You have put your hand to the plow and turned back, allowing the concerns of the World to choak out your testimony.

I cannot, and will not, support either party because doing so compromises my faith. Both sides support allowing abortion. Both sides are evil.

Not choosing one evil is not choosing the other. The reason is I am not of the World. I voice my vote according to my spiritual citizenship. My voice is heard within those who profess to belong to the same Kingdom (your replies are evidence).


When you stand before God and He asks exactly why you supported allowing citizens to decide whether to kill babies all you will be able to say is you viewed the other sides economic and immigration platform as a greater evil.

Jon I do not care which party you would or would not support as they are both immoral. My concern is that you are misusing scripture in you attempt to justify not doing anything. You keep saying Christ said not to resist but context does not support the way you are using that scripture.

So it just comes down to your personal choice. Actually it is your conscience that would be compromised not your faith.

 

[Silverhair]

I have not, but as usual you have ignored the context.

You have also....once again...made a false accusation in the form of a strawman arguments.

I never claimed that we should "stamd aside and do nothing". Quite the opposite, in fact. I said that we cannot become salt that has lost its flavor. We stand in Christ, we do kingdom work. We do not support kerpibg abortion legal in order to bring about better economic policies.

Resist not evil is consistent with Jesus' sermon on the mount. It is consistent with Paul's instruction that the affairs of the World is not his business. It is consistent with Jesus' warning not to become involved with the concerns of the World.

You are comfortable supporting a platform that vows to let the people decide if they want to murder babies. The reason is you value economics and immigration policies over the lives of these children (dead babies won't affect you, but inflation will).

What we see in this election is where peoples hearts really are, where their treasure rests.

For most here it is in their personal finances. They, like you, view abortion as a lesser evil when compared to economic policies that could impact their wallet.

You and I are different. There is nothing you can say that will make me change my mind that of all issues in this election abortion is the greatest immoral topic.

You have made a number of assumptions about what I think but I am used to that being done on here.

What did I miss in this context Jon?
Mat 5:38 "You have heard that it was said, 'AN EYE FOR AN EYE, AND A TOOTH FOR A TOOTH.'
Mat 5:39 "But I say to you, do not resist an evil person; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also.

Just from the context you can see that Christ is referring to resisting a person.

You may think you have not lost your salt or dimmed your light but your words betray you.
Eph 6:12 For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the powers, against the world forces of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places.

But you say we are not to resist not to struggle against the spiritual forces of wickedness. You have chosen to take a knee in submission rather than fight.

I am not trying to change your mind but rather to just admit what the true reason is that you have chosen to just stand and say it is not my problem.

 

[JonC]

Jon I do not care which party you would or would not support as they are both immoral. My concern is that you are misusing scripture in you attempt to justify not doing anything. You keep saying Christ said not to resist but context does not support the way you are using that scripture.

So it just comes down to your personal choice. Actually it is your conscience that would be compromised not your faith.

I disagree that I am misusing Scripture. Jesus was mot talking about merely not hitting back when we are slapped. He is talking about the principle of not resisting evil the World may do (trusting God).

My issue is not that you are telling me which side to support.

My issue is that you are telling me that if I do not support allowing people to decide to murder children then I am supporting a greater evil of taking that decision from the people.


Both parties claim that not voting is supporting the other side. It is an argument that bases morality on utilitarianism.

I reject that philosophy. I believe that our actions themselves have a moral value.

 

[JonC]

You have made a number of assumptions about what I think but I am used to that being done on here.

What did I miss in this context Jon?
Mat 5:38 "You have heard that it was said, 'AN EYE FOR AN EYE, AND A TOOTH FOR A TOOTH.'
Mat 5:39 "But I say to you, do not resist an evil person; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also.

Just from the context you can see that Christ is referring to resisting a person.

You may think you have not lost your salt or dimmed your light but your words betray you.
Eph 6:12 For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the powers, against the world forces of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places.

But you say we are not to resist not to struggle against the spiritual forces of wickedness. You have chosen to take a knee in submission rather than fight.

I am not trying to change your mind but rather to just admit what the true reason is that you have chosen to just stand and say it is not my problem.

The Code of Hammurabi was restrictive (a law to reduce excess).

You, again, make a false accusation. Are you deliberately doing so (lying) or do you simply lack faith?

We ARE to resist the spiritual forces of evil...the "forces of darkness". BUT we are to do so as imitators of Christ, NOT by joining these spiritual forces.

Our struggle is not with flesh and blood.

The ONLY thing you accomplish by uniting with a "lesser evil" of the World (by be coming a part of these spiritual forces of evil) is you cease being salt and light.

What you are talking about is NOT standing against these spiritual forces of evil but be coming a part of those forces to accomplish which ever agenda you think will work best for you.

I believe we are to resist the forces of darkness that you believe we should become participants in.

 

[Van]

No. I know many who are not rich but sent both of their children to private schools. They cut back on other things.

Many have worked hard to send their kids to private schools. Sone have even taken second jobs.

Are you going to reimburse those people?

Your idea about wealth distribution, about the government taking my tax dollars and giving it to those who can't afford private schools....or simply won't make the sacrifice or get a better job....is socialistic.


The question you need to ask is WHY does churches who offer a Christian school charge so much that you want the government to give those handouts??

Your claim is false, that is why the Democrats oppose school choice, they want to run indoctrination camps to produce votes.

And again the un-Christian effort to right a wrong by doing wrong.

Our tax dollars are now given to failing schools, controlled by Teacher's Unions. School choice will correct this violation of the first Amendment.

Folks, ask yourselves why change the subject from school choice to claims of malfeasance in the better performing schools.

 

[Silverhair]

I disagree that I am misusing Scripture. Jesus was mot talking about merely not hitting back when we are slapped. He is talking about the principle of not resisting evil the World may do (trusting God).

My issue is not that you are telling me which side to support.

My issue is that you are telling me that if I do not support allowing people to decide to murder children then I am supporting a greater evil of taking that decision from the people.


Both parties claim that not voting is supporting the other side. It is an argument that bases morality on utilitarianism.

I reject that philosophy. I believe that our actions themselves have a moral value.

What I have been saying all along is that you have chosen to step back from the world and by doing so you are supporting evil as you are not willing to resist it. Our inaction also has a moral value.

We see that Christ and Paul both were engaged with the world and yet they resisted it. You have just chosen not to be engaged at all.

 

[Silverhair]

The Code of Hammurabi was restrictive (a law to reduce excess).

You, again, make a false accusation. Are you deliberately doing so (lying) or do you simply lack faith?

We ARE to resist the spiritual forces of evil...the "forces of darkness". BUT we are to do so as imitators of Christ, NOT by joining these spiritual forces.

Our struggle is not with flesh and blood.

The ONLY thing you accomplish by uniting with a "lesser evil" of the World (by be coming a part of these spiritual forces of evil) is you cease being salt and light.

What you are talking about is NOT standing against these spiritual forces of evil but be coming a part of those forces to accomplish which ever agenda you think will work best for you.

I believe we are to resist the forces of darkness that you believe we should become participants in.

What false accusation Jon? Your the one that has misused scripture by ignoring context. Have you not said that you will not vote. By stepping back you have shown your lack of faith. You do not trust God to accomplish His goals through even that lesser evil as you call it. By standing aside you have cease to be salt or light.

Christians down through history have stood against the evils of this world even while they were in the world. They engaged with the sinners of this world to accomplish the greater good of moving the kingdom forward.

If the apostles had done as you suggest then the gospel message would never have gotten out of Israel. You are being very shortsighted.

 

[JonC]

Your claim is false, that is why the Democrats oppose school choice, they want to run indoctrination camps to produce votes.

And again the un-Christian effort to right a wrong by doing wrong.

Our tax dollars are now given to failing schools, controlled by Teacher's Unions. School choice will correct this violation of the first Amendment.

Folks, ask yourselves why change the subject from school choice to claims of malfeasance in the better performing schools.

I never said that the Dems support school choice.

I am saying that you are a Democrat when applied to different topics.

You want the government to take taxpayers money and give to people with school age children so they can go to private school.

School choice will not remove federal dollars given to public schools. You are a socialist in this issue.

And you are willing to support allowing citizens to devide whether to murder children as a compromise to get your socialistic agenda.

I see two evils - the GOP and the DNC. As far as the World goes the DNC is the greater evil.

But as far as the Church goes, the GOP is the greater evil. You are more dangerous to Chriatianity than Harris (Harris is more dangerous to our nation).

 

[JonC]

What I have been saying all along is that you have chosen to step back from the world and by doing so you are supporting evil as you are not willing to resist it. Our inaction also has a moral value.

We see that Christ and Paul both were engaged with the world and yet they resisted it. You have just chosen not to be engaged at all.

That is what I mean. You are wrong (have misunderstood).

First, you are making all false claim. I am not taking a path of inaction. I am taking action.

The difference is I am taking action against evil ( the "greater evil" of which you have chosen to be a part and the "lesser evil" you oppose). The action I am taking is standing in Christ, proclaiming His gospel, seeking to see individuals saved and cease being of the World you want to redeem.

Second, I am not of the World, but I remain in the World.

This means that I am not seeking a solution to the problems of the world by the methods of the world.

Instead I am seeking to reach individuals that are of the World with the gospel of Jesus Christ. I seek to be "salt and light" (a different flavor and property than the World).

Jesus and Paul actually did not engage the World. They engaged individuals. Neither of them spoke out against the World government. Neither tried to get Rome to enact laws that would make their lives more comfortable. Neither engaged the immorality of the World.

You just made that up because it sounded good to you. The problem when you do that is you compromise God's Word and the gospel.

 

[JonC]

What false accusation Jon? Your the one that has misused scripture by ignoring context. Have you not said that you will not vote. By stepping back you have shown your lack of faith. You do not trust God to accomplish His goals through even that lesser evil as you call it. By standing aside you have cease to be salt or light.

Christians down through history have stood against the evils of this world even while they were in the world. They engaged with the sinners of this world to accomplish the greater good of moving the kingdom forward.

If the apostles had done as you suggest then the gospel message would never have gotten out of Israel. You are being very shortsighted.

No. You just posted that Jesus and Paul were engaging the World rather than seeking to save individuals out of the World. You made up things about God to support your claim.

 

[JonC]

@Silverhair

The issue is not action vs inaction. That is what you have not understood.

The issue is what type of action - action by becoming "of the World" to combat what we see as "greater evils" OR action remaining in but not of the World (action centered on Christ and distinct from the World).

I believe we are to engage the World, address the problems of the World, but to do so through the Body of Christ, distinctive in but not of the World.

You have said that by not joining with one power of the World one is supporting another evil.

I do not make that distinction (this worldly power vs that worldly power) as Scripture presents the whole as enemies of God.

 

[Silverhair]

That is what I mean. You are wrong (have misunderstood).

First, you are making all false claim. I am not taking a path of inaction. I am taking action.

The difference is I am taking action against evil ( the "greater evil" of which you have chosen to be a part and the "lesser evil" you oppose). The action I am taking is standing in Christ, proclaiming His gospel, seeking to see individuals saved and cease being of the World you want to redeem.

Second, I am not of the World, but I remain in the World.

This means that I am not seeking a solution to the problems of the world by the methods of the world.

Instead I am seeking to reach individuals that are of the World with the gospel of Jesus Christ. I seek to be "salt and light" (a different flavor and property than the World).

Jesus and Paul actually did not engage the World. They engaged individuals. Neither of them spoke out against the World government. Neither tried to get Rome to enact laws that would make their lives more comfortable. Neither engaged the immorality of the World.

You just made that up because it sounded good to you. The problem when you do that is you compromise God's Word and the gospel.

You continue to claim you are not doing anything but you you have chosen to avoid being salt and light in this world.

 

[Silverhair]

No. You just posted that Jesus and Paul were engaging the World rather than seeking to save individuals out of the World. You made up things about God to support your claim.

You continue to miss what the bible shows us. If Christ and the apostles did as you are doing then where would Christianity be. I see that you miss the reality that people are the world. They both engaged with sinful people which you seem to have a problem understanding.

You will do as you have chosen to do but you error when you try to justify your view through scripture.

 

[Silverhair]

@Silverhair

The issue is not action vs inaction. That is what you have not understood.

The issue is what type of action - action by becoming "of the World" to combat what we see as "greater evils" OR action remaining in but not of the World (action centered on Christ and distinct from the World).

I believe we are to engage the World, address the problems of the World, but to do so through the Body of Christ, distinctive in but not of the World.

You have said that by not joining with one power of the World one is supporting another evil.

I do not make that distinction (this worldly power vs that worldly power) as Scripture presents the whole as enemies of God.

What you see as engaging the world I see as you avoiding the world.

But we will just have to agree to disagree Jon.

 

[JonC]

You continue to claim you are not doing anything but you you have chosen to avoid being salt and light in this world.

Please stop making false accusations.

I have NOT claimed that I am not doing anything.

If I look like the World, assume worldly methods, then I am no longer "salt and light" (I would be like you).

The alternative is to be active in the World but do so in ways that are not of the World.