Dominion theology?

[Goodbook]

Not sure where to post this so thought I'd try here..

What exactly is dominion theology and does it a different gospel and faith to the one delivered to the saints?

I have recently come across these 'pray for the nation' magazines and while a lot of the bible studies in them are good, and they do exhort people to pray and interecede for leaders of the government etc I just am not sure if this is exactly biblical to pray for whole nations and try and be an influence in all these areas of society which are quite powerful as we are not meant to be in the world, but salt and light and a witness to Jesus and spreading the gospel for people to know Him and be saved.

But there is always this 'other hand' side to the coin that says we have to build the Kingdom, but I always thought it was Jesus bringing the Kingdom to us because He is making all things new, not us. (otherwise all the prophecies in Revelation don't mean anything). This doesn't mean we sit back and do nothing, but then again it doesn't mean we do all these social justice things and not tell anyone the gospel. I just wonder where the fine line is..because I've been reading some scary things about dominion theology and it just gives christians a bad name when some people think they have to impose laws on others, calling them christian while ignoring that God will write his law on our hearts, not through the government. Or maybe it's an atheists view of christianity that God is so helpless that we need to do everything?

 

[Tangible]

Dominion Theology is the Right's version of the Left's Social Gospel. Both ignore the reality of man's fallen, sinful state and assume that it is possible to build Christ's kingdom (not of this world) on earth by commercial and political means.

For an orthodox alternative, I suggest researching Luther's doctrine of the Two Kingdoms.

 

[pshun2404]

I have to disagree here...

In my opinion Dominion Theology actually began in Post-Augustinian Rome and is an offshoot of ammilennialism which teaches we eventually bring the city of God to earth. Being favored of the Empire led to the assumption we were destined to conquer the world for Christ.

DT teaches we are to Christianize the nations but the problem is Christ Himself rejected dominion over the Kingdoms of this world. That was not an essential...the salvation of souls by the preaching of the gospels is what matters.

Paul

 

[Tangible]

ammilennialism which teaches we eventually bring the city of God to earth.

This is not what amillennialism is. What you have stated is more like Post-tribulation millennialism popular in the late 19th C.

Dominion Theology is taught by millennialists.

 

[ElijahW]

What exactly is dominion theology and does it a different gospel and faith to the one delivered to the saints?

Theonomy, is the issue within Dominionism of concern because it is imposed legalism. Building a kingdom on Earth is correct behavior, but forcing OT law into the government as the solution, isn't. The Kingdom in Christianity is established by Jesus being recognized by all (or enough) as the messiah or ideal king, and that example corrects how people are ruled over. Thus establishing a kingdom where humanity is free. Dominionism has none of that and just wants a government that imposes the laws that make people behave properly, with the belief that will make everyone ethical, while the issue of liberty is ignored.

 

[Gnarwhal]

I have to disagree here...

In my opinion Dominion Theology actually began in Post-Augustinian Rome and is an offshoot of ammilennialism which teaches we eventually bring the city of God to earth. Being favored of the Empire led to the assumption we were destined to conquer the world for Christ.

DT teaches we are to Christianize the nations but the problem is Christ Himself rejected dominion over the Kingdoms of this world. That was not an essential...the salvation of souls by the preaching of the gospels is what matters.

Paul

Like Tangible said, Dominion Theology and Amillennialism are not one and the same. Dominion Theology is the belief that God's Kingdom comes through our transformation of the existing institutions that presently occupy the world. Amillennialism more accurately holds that the future Kingdom (the one that will be completed and punctuated by Christ's return and the resurrection of the dead) can be progressively dragged into the present by rooting out the things of this world that won't belong in God's Kingdom to begin with. Things like greed, exploitation, hunger, thirst, homelessness and violence—things that affect people and the Earth itself.

This is quite a significant distinction because Dominion Theology simply seeks to "Christianize" things like public and private institutions, whereas the alternative view, which I believe is the correct one, is that through actions such as providing a means to obtain clean water to developing communities that didn't have it before, a part of God's Kingdom is brought to Earth as it already is in Heaven. This kind of action, simultaneously puts flesh and blood on the gospel message because it really is good news.

 

[Goodbook]

thanks for your responses, I have a question is what Landa Cope talking about dominion theology or amillenialism? It's just I don't want to distribute these magazines through the library if she's advocating domioninism, because it seems like pray for the nation editors are endorsing her views, and I'm a bit alarmed to read she says salvation is a means to an end, then starts downplaying the gospel. It just seems like a 'yes, but' gospel rather than affirming that God's promises are always 'yea and yea' and I can see the point where dominion theology would lead weak christians astray and make them believe that they are special leaders and influencers and there is a danger of these groups become elite and just like the wordly kingdoms they condemn.

 

[joey_downunder]

I just wonder where the fine line is..because I've been reading some scary things about dominion theology and it just gives christians a bad name when some people think they have to impose laws on others, calling them christian while ignoring that God will write his law on our hearts, not through the government.

Dominion Theology is scary and often from people that atheists rightly call nutjobs but undiscerning Chrstians often find convincing because they can throw a few bible verses around convincingly to back up their worldview.

e.g. Rick Joyner's support for Mitt Romney Joyner Hopes Romney will Fulfill the 'White Horse Prophecy' - YouTube

Peter Wagner's dominion mandate:
"Apostle" C. Peter Wagner Of The NAR Teaches "The Dominion Mandate" - YouTube

 

[joey_downunder]

Wow- I just watched some of Wagner's clip:
According to him Satan tempted Adam "for one main reason: to usurp the dominion that God had designed for Adam".
Not to lead Adam into sin/spiritual death, but to gain power of dominion. How trivial and how misleading that "reason" is.

 

[Gnarwhal]

Yeah Dominionism is a disturbing theology at best, it's closely associated with Kingdom Now theology which, in some cases, can become militant. The guy that used to be the senior pastor at my church became infatuated with it and resigned so he could start his own nonprofit organization that's built around Dominionism/Kingdom Now theology.

Sent from my iPhone using Forum Runner

 

[pshun2404]

Bourne you said, Like Tangible said, Dominion Theology and Ammillenialism are not one and the same. Dominion Theology is the belief that God's Kingdom comes through our transformation of the existing institutions that presently occupy the world...Dominion Theology simply seeks to "Christianize" things like public and private institutions, whereas the alternative view, which I believe is the correct one, is that through actions such as providing a means to obtain clean water to developing communities that didn't have it before, a part of God's Kingdom is brought to Earth as it already is in Heaven. This kind of action, simultaneously puts flesh and blood on the gospel message because it really is good news.


I did not mean or say they are the same thing. But the early ammillenialists believed that now that they were the church of the empire the church would eventually take over the kingdoms of the world and bring the city of God into reality on earth. Of course their intent was to freely preach the gospel and transform it and the Dominion school and Kingdom Now school want to "Christianize" everything legislating the Bible as rule over all decisions...not the same but one is related to the other (similar to the concept of manifest destiny). I believe that the scriptures, the Apostles, and all the earliast church fathers taught by them all teach that at the parousia, when Christ comes again, He will establish a Kingdom on earth. Call it what you want but this is what all the church believed until at least the allegorical interpretation of Origen...

So I agree they are not the same...I obviously did not mean to hit a nerve but by the middle ages it is hard to say who ruled the empire the emperor or the pope...

Paul