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.
The church is distinct from government, community, or nation. Rather, it constitutes the body of Christ comprised of believers. The purpose of the church is not to establish governments or nations, nor to control individuals.So the Church is irrelevant then and can be ultimately dispensed of if need be?
Christianity is experiencing a decline primarily in Western regions, where the majority of the population has historically been Christian. Conversely, Christianity is growing in Eastern and Southern areas, where most people are non-Christian and where governments are often not only non-Christian but, in some cases, have shown hostility toward Christianity. This is the testament of Christianity: Christian government, Christian nation, Christian rule and regulation cannot sustain or advance Christianity.I don’t prefer decline, but in the current world atmosphere with a major religion that is growing more dangerous by the day and spreading rampantly in many countries with the stated goal of taking down the west, and the USA specifically, I would rather partner with those who wish to continue the culture we have, including freedom and liberty for all, than succumb to a barbaric invasion.
(Sorry for the run-on sentence.)
But, even if Christianity wasn’t on the decline, it still wouldn’t be a “Christian nation”. It would be a nation where Christianity is the major religion.
I agree but the Church is a community and it is a community that sets itself apart from other communities in that it seeks growth via thr conversion of all. Christians will then naturally inherit institutions of power, governments and nations as they are successful in spreading the Gospel. This requires us to accept the necessity of control especially because governance is about control. Christianity isn't an individualist and libertarian creed.The church is distinct from government, community, or nation. Rather, it constitutes the body of Christ comprised of believers. The purpose of the church is not to establish governments or nations, nor to control individuals.
So in other words you would rather see Christianity decline by supporting a system that undermines it. You're more afraid of Christianity potentially undermining the system by challenging core enlightenment assumptions.I don’t prefer decline, but in the current world atmosphere with a major religion that is growing more dangerous by the day and spreading rampantly in many countries with the stated goal of taking down the west, and the USA specifically, I would rather partner with those who wish to continue the culture we have, including freedom and liberty for all, than succumb to a barbaric invasion.
(Sorry for the run-on sentence.)
But, even if Christianity wasn’t on the decline, it still wouldn’t be a “Christian nation”. It would be a nation where Christianity is the major religion.
Pure false teaching that “church will inherit institutions of power, governments and nation” .I agree but the Church is a community and it is a community that sets itself apart from other communities in that it seeks growth via thr conversion of all. Christians will then naturally inherit institutions of power, governments and nations as they are successful in spreading the Gospel. This requires us to accept the necessity of control especially because governance is about control. Christianity isn't an individualist and libertarian creed.
The Church, being the people, will necessarily inherit those institutions and nations if they succeed in converting said people who own those institutions and nations. How is this false? How does one avoid this?Pure false teaching that “church will inherit institutions of power, governments and nation” .
Christians may hold positions of governmental authority, as the Bible does not prohibit this profession. However, the Bible does not state that Christians are required to lead government or control all or any aspects of governance.The Church, being the people, will necessarily inherit those institutions and nations if they succeed in converting said people who own those institutions and nations. How is this false? How does one avoid this?
I never said it was required. Rather what I think is required is for us to not support a political order that is fundamentally against us. That order for the Apostles was Rome. For us today it is regimes like the USA.Christians may hold positions of governmental authority, as the Bible does not prohibit this profession. However, the Bible does not state that Christians are required to lead government or control all or any aspects of governance.
“The system” as you call it, here in the USA, Constitutionally separates church from state and guarantees freedom of religion (not freedom from religion). So the system here doesn’t undermine it. It isn’t declining because the system undermines it, as you suggest, but because we live in a fallen world and men would rather rebel against God than be in loving communion with Him. As I said earlier, it appears you support bringing the inquisition back, forcing people through torture and pain to declare allegiance to God. That is no better than the barbaric religion I mentioned earlier in the thread. Or the early Romans who fed the Christians to the lions for entertainment.So in otherworldly you would rather see Christianity decline by supporting a system that undermines it. You're more afraid of Christianity potentially undermining the system by challenging core enlightenment assumptions.
I am glad the early Christians didn't have your attitude towards Rome.
Christianity thrived under regimes which didn't embrace your values. Christianity being in power didnt weaken the Church or the faith community. Do yoy think God commanded us to be enlightened liberals? Why didn't the early Christians follow that philosophy?“The system” as you call it, here in the USA, Constitutionally separates church from state and guarantees freedom of religion (not freedom from religion). So the system here doesn’t undermine it. It isn’t declining because the system undermines it, as you suggest, but because we live in a fallen world and men would rather rebel against God than be in loving communion with Him. As I said earlier, it appears you support bringing the inquisition back, forcing people through torture and pain to declare allegiance to God. That is no better than the barbaric religion I mentioned earlier in the thread. Or the early Romans who fed the Christians to the lions for entertainment.
Your argument suggests that it should not be surprising to see a decline in Christianity if the nation is no longer identified as a Christian nation. this is completely false assumption.I never said it was required. Rather what I think is required is for us to not support a political order that is fundamentally against us. That order for the Apostles was Rome. For us today it is regimes like the USA.
Your argument suggests that it should not be surprising to see a decline in Christianity if the nation is no longer identified as a Christian nation. this is completely false assumption.
I can agree with this sentiment when it comes to individual faith but it's flawed in that it doesn't address the practical reality of what has played out historically. Christianity for instance faded in Egypt as a result of Islam and it's dominance over power for instance. Often Christians of your persuasion will instinctively blame Coptic Christians for their failure to convert the Muslims yet you would likely not know the sorts of conditions Christian dhimmis were subject to.Christianity is not defined by nations, governments, or laws; it is based solely on Jesus. No authority can determine its progress or decline, as all power belongs to Christ. Those who worship Him do not rely on government or nation.
“Preaching the Gospel” is the only thing Jesus commanded.I maintain this is the case because Christians have become absorbed into thr country as such and the country as such is no longer a Christian country, if it ever was one and there are too many examples historically which demonstrate that whose in power can and often does inform the population. Christianity has never been a purely individualist creed.
I can agree with this sentiment when it comes to individual faith but it's flawed in that it doesn't address the practical reality of what has played out historically. Christianity for instance faded in Egypt as a result of Islam and it's dominance over power for instance. Often Christians of your persuasion will instinctively blame Coptic Christians for their failure to convert the Muslims yet you would likely not know the sorts of conditions Christian dhimmis were subject to.
Preaching the Gospel to Muslims resulted in death. Christians had to pay a special tax and feel themselves as social and religious inferiors to their Muslim overlords. Christian women could marry Islamic men and their children would be raised as Muslims but Muslim women could not marry Christian men or their would be killed.
The point of telling this is that the conditions of who rules matters and I do not think it controversial to posit that it would have been better for the Copts had they maintained political control of Egypt and had security in which to flourish as a Christian society with law informed by Christianity and rulers which put the Copts first.
It's not that it's necessary to rule but it is often better and Christianity historically never had this sort of radical seperation from power you seem to advocate.
It literally did. Muslims would kill any Christian who preached in their midst against Islam and the Christian community as a whole could have expected to suffer.“Preaching the Gospel” is the only thing Jesus commanded.
If you think Preaching the Gospel to Muslim resulted in death, then Jesus Christ is a false teacher and we all be better of as atheist.
Is there a direct quote from Jesus instructing followers to seek political power to expand his kingdom?It literally did. Muslims would kill any Christian who preached in their midst against Islam and the Christian community as a whole could have expected to suffer.
Would you have preferred all Christians simply died in the Middle East? Would you have preferred Christians in the East and West not resist Islamic invasion?
You're arguing that political control and power doesn't matter yet only someone ignorant of Christian history could actually believe this.
Is there a quote forbidding it? The seeking of political power? Are Christians a dhimmi class naturally in your estimation?Is there a direct quote from Jesus instructing followers to seek political power to expand his kingdom?
There is no direct quote from Jesus about seeking political power, so people invent their own interpretations and follow what suits them! is that your advise?Is there a quote forbidding it? The seeking of political power? Are Christians a dhimmi class naturally in your estimation?
My advice is to do what is best for the Christian community and live according to the faith. At times that has been to use or get political power. I see loyalty to the current US regime as antithetical to the interests of Christianity broadly as the US regime promotes values which ultimately undermine faith.There is no direct quote from Jesus about seeking political power, so people invent their own interpretations and follow what suits them! is that your advise?
So, are you suggesting that humans, rather than God's commands, determine what is best for Christians? If that's the case, Christianity is no different from Islam or Hinduism, where people also decide what is best for their community.My advice is to do what is best for the Christian community and live according to the faith. At times that has been to use or get political power. I see loyalty to the current US regime as antithetical to the interests of Christianity broadly as the US regime promotes values which ultimately undermine faith.
Where have i suggested anything like that? What do you mean by Christians being no different from Islam or Hindiusm? How would you have Christians distinguish themselves from these communities in a way that is different from how Christians of the past did?So, are you suggesting that humans, rather than God's commands, determine what is best for Christians? If that's the case, Christianity is no different from Islam or Hinduism, where people also decide what is best for their community.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?