It was "...my Father's house."
We should be that aggressive within the Body of Christ.
Notice that none of Jesus' volitional travels took Him to the palace.
Upvote
0
-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Should pulpits remain silent on politics?
- Thread starter Michie
- Start date
We should be that aggressive within the Body of Christ.
Notice that none of Jesus' volitional travels took Him to the palace.
Ignatius the Kiwi
Dissident
- Mar 2, 2013
- 8,869
- 4,707
- Country
- New Zealand
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Eastern Orthodox
- Marital Status
- Single
Were the money changers Christ was aggressive to in his body? What made his aggression towards outsiders justified?
Upvote
0
Ignatius the Kiwi
Dissident
- Mar 2, 2013
- 8,869
- 4,707
- Country
- New Zealand
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Eastern Orthodox
- Marital Status
- Single
And therefore this means that Christians should not be in positions of political power? Why, if no man has ruled perfectly, should only the non-Christian be allowed in the political arena of power?
Upvote
0
Ignatius the Kiwi
Dissident
- Mar 2, 2013
- 8,869
- 4,707
- Country
- New Zealand
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Eastern Orthodox
- Marital Status
- Single
Except you're not following this to it's fullest extent. There are plenty of earthly activities and positions we may have here on earth, like marriage. Yet you don't advocate Christians all give up sex. Why is political power here what Jesus is talking about? Why do you make exceptions for the worldly aspects of life that you like and live by? Why is power the only real forbidden thing to the Christian?
And let's be honest with our opinions. Do you believe Jesus intended Christians to be a political serf class always subordinate to non-Christians?
Upvote
0
They were in His Father's house, which is why the aggression was justified.
Is that really something you've missed all these years?
Upvote
0
Ignatius the Kiwi
Dissident
- Mar 2, 2013
- 8,869
- 4,707
- Country
- New Zealand
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Eastern Orthodox
- Marital Status
- Single
Alright then, let's extend this principle to an ostensibly Christian nation. Is a level of aggression towards non-Christians justified in order to preserve the Christian nature of the Christian nation?
Upvote
0
Jesus was repeatedly confronted with political enticements or traps throughout the Gospels. In each instance, He either avoided the political snare or reframed the issue to focus on His Kingdom rather than earthly power.
1. Taking up an earthly kingdom Himself
Scripture: Matthew 4:8–10; Luke 4:5–8
Political Enticement:
Satan offers Jesus "all the kingdoms of the world and their glory" in exchange for worship.
Movement/Position: World domination through political or military power.
Jesus’ Response: “It is written, ‘You shall worship the Lord your God and him only shall you serve.’”
Interpretation: Jesus rejected the offer of political control over earthly kingdoms, refusing to establish His mission through worldly power.
2. Enticement by the Zealots
Scripture: John 6:14–15
Political Enticement: The crowd wants to “take him by force to make him king.”
Movement/Position: Messianic nationalism – a popular uprising to install Jesus as a political Messiah against Roman rule.
Jesus’ Response: “He withdrew again to the mountain by himself.”
Interpretation: Jesus refused to become a political figurehead or revolutionary leader, even when offered popular support.
3. Enticement to either oppose or align with Roman rule
Scripture: Matthew 22:15–22; Mark 12:13–17; Luke 20:20–26
Political Enticement:
Pharisees and Herodians try to trap Him by asking whether it is lawful to pay taxes to Caesar.
Movement/Position: They aim to force Him to either endorse Roman occupation (alienating nationalists) or oppose it (inviting arrest).
Jesus’ Response: “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.”
Interpretation: Jesus avoids endorsing or rejecting Roman rule; He separates civic duty from divine loyalty.
4. Criticism of Sadducees
Scripture: Matthew 22:23–33
Political Enticement: The Sadducees--who collaborated with Roman authorities--sought to trap Jesus in a politically safe, rationalistic denial of resurrection.
Movement/Position: Sadducean status quo, aligned with Roman peace and temple authority.
Jesus’ Response: He affirms resurrection and undermines their premise.
Interpretation: Jesus refuses alignment with this one of the two most politically powerful religious establishments.
5. Criticism of Pharisees
Scripture: Matthew 23:23
Political Enticement: By pandering to the Pharisees, Jesus would have had their support.
Movement/Position: The Pharisees had the admiration and loyalties of the common people and the best populist network.
Jesus' Response: He hotly castigates the Pharisees, even to casting doubt on their eternal salvation.
Interpretation: Jesus refuses alignment with the second of the two most politically powerful religious establishments.
6. Before Pilate: “Are You a King?”
Scripture: John 18:33–37
Political Enticement: Pilate questions Jesus about His kingship, a potential political threat.
Movement/Position: Roman concern about rebellion and Jesus' possible role as a revolutionary leader.
Jesus’ Response: “My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight... But now my kingdom is from another place.”
Interpretation: Jesus explicitly disclaims political ambitions or earthly kingship.
Upvote
0
Ignatius the Kiwi
Dissident
- Mar 2, 2013
- 8,869
- 4,707
- Country
- New Zealand
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Eastern Orthodox
- Marital Status
- Single
I am talking about a community of people that has organized itself into a large organization or nation state. Do you disagree with said community using aggression to police itself and live according to it's principles? Maybe for instance being aggressive against Satanists and prohibiting them from expressing themselves publicly and not allowing them to blaspheme Christ, as they are wont to do.
Upvote
0
Ignatius the Kiwi
Dissident
- Mar 2, 2013
- 8,869
- 4,707
- Country
- New Zealand
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Eastern Orthodox
- Marital Status
- Single
So you are of the opinion that we as Christians must be a serf or servant class of non believing rulers? If a Christian finds themselves in a place of political leadership is he obligated to hand power to non-Christians? Take in mind also I am not suggesting that Christ's ministry existed in order to create nations, yet I do not see how it follows from this that Christians may not organize themselves into nations if they happen to convert a majority. Is the majority of Christians duty bound to rush to the nearest Atheist or Pagan and have them rule over us?
Upvote
0
timothyu
Well-Known Member
- Dec 31, 2018
- 24,605
- 9,239
- Country
- Canada
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Private
Why should they? It's not a sin in its proper format.
Power is not forbidden. Power for the benefit of self, especially at the expense of others is forbidden.
He said render unto Caesar what is Caesar's and unto God what is God's. Two separate worlds.
Upvote
0
Ignatius the Kiwi
Dissident
- Mar 2, 2013
- 8,869
- 4,707
- Country
- New Zealand
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Eastern Orthodox
- Marital Status
- Single
Because it is a worldly activity that distracts from the purity of our devotion to God. It can lead to all sorts of sins and marriage is not a perfect means of preventing sexual sin. Your main objection to power is that it corrupts, therefore shouldn't we as Christians abstain from all worldly activities and temptations? Why do you allow an outlet in the case of sex within marriage which not only distracts from God but causes all sorts of evil?
You have spent this entire thread arguing that Christians in power is evil, and wrong. That the Church suffered a great apostasy with Constantine. Power, especially command of government is always at the expense of someone. The criminal for instance. Is it wrong for a Christian ruler to punish a criminal? Should we allow people to do evil without any resistance, using only our words to convince them otherwise?
Have you given all your money to the government Timothy? Why not? Have you given all your possessions to the poor? Why not? Why aren't you perfect? You demand perfection of every Christian before you and say they were all corrupt and forsook the word of God, yet why haven't you lived by your own principles? Why are you so attached to worldly goods?
Also can you answer the question directly. Are Christians to be a serf/servant class that must abstain from political power and control? You and others like you always avoid answering this directly. So please, answer.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
timothyu
Well-Known Member
- Dec 31, 2018
- 24,605
- 9,239
- Country
- Canada
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Private
Nonsense. Unless of course our self-interest which is another matter altogether, overlies God's will. Self is the culprit, not sex.
No, I told you we had a leader here that did that but did it right. His concept of personal gain was not for self but was that ALL have access to equal heath care and a decent retirement.
Already answered that.
Upvote
0
Ignatius the Kiwi
Dissident
- Mar 2, 2013
- 8,869
- 4,707
- Country
- New Zealand
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Eastern Orthodox
- Marital Status
- Single
Marriage is always in one's self interest, be it for relationships, for sex, for children, whatever. Why do you allow such a selfish expression of humanity to be practiced without condemnation when it is better to be reliant on God alone? Or do you think God isn't enough for any man or woman? Doesn't Saint Paul say it is better to marry? Doesn't Jesus say we should seek first the Kingdom of God? Is seeking our own pleasure in earthly things seeking the Kingdom? Clearly it isn't.
Do you actually see how your hypercritical standards of worldliness can apply to literally anything. Power is not the only worry in this world, there are all sorts of temptations and evils yet power is necessary especially in how we relate to other people. Yet you think it is somehow uniquely deserving of Christians avoiding because of what exactly? Because you misinterpret the bible?
Oh so there is a political order we can appeal to. Was this leader you admire a Christian?
No you didn't but people of your persuasion never can because they are ashamed of the implication. That we apparently only exist as a serf class. If you disagree with this accusation then say you disagree with it. But to disagree with it is to suggest that Christians can be in positions of power, can be part of politics.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
timothyu
Well-Known Member
- Dec 31, 2018
- 24,605
- 9,239
- Country
- Canada
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Private
We are of dual nature and live accordingly. The trick is to not feed self but focus in the needs of others.
He was a Canadian baptist minister
They can as long as they don't play by human rules.
Upvote
0
Ignatius the Kiwi
Dissident
- Mar 2, 2013
- 8,869
- 4,707
- Country
- New Zealand
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Eastern Orthodox
- Marital Status
- Single
Except when it comes to sovereignty and living in community. You are convinced that Christians are serfs and dhimmis who must submit to the power of non-Christians.
So as long as a Christian leader gives his population free healthcare he's allowed to lead and rule a country?
Such as what? Elaborate the divine standards of Christian rule.
Upvote
0
Ignatius the Kiwi
Dissident
- Mar 2, 2013
- 8,869
- 4,707
- Country
- New Zealand
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Eastern Orthodox
- Marital Status
- Single
This is so vague as to be meaningless. Give a practical example of rule that is in service to God that would actually be legitimate. Do you consider a King who defends his realm from foreign non-Christian invaders to be serving the needs of his Christian subjects? Be specific and not vague. Articulate clear policy, show me how past Christian rulers failed to live up to this because I am starting to question whether or not you are capable of a dialogue. Whether or not you actually know anything about Church history.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
