Gee. There have been bloody stories within Protestantism that I condemn, but what does that have to do with theological understanding?
I've already laid down the theological understanding from Paul. I've then tried to demonstrate how we think about the political and how you can't just avoid it. If you allow families, if you allow bonds, if you allow distinctions to exist between peoples you will always have multiple sides to any given issue. Who rules us, what should state policy be, etc. You seem focused on being above this world, yet if you are going to condemn your own tradition of Protestantism for doing what was necessary to secure it's existence, why call yourself a Protestant? What else do you disagree with those who came before you and what they did? Because as far as I can tell, even though I don't agree with the Reformers and I think their doctrines were ultimately harmful to Christendom, they it because there was no other option.
The Catholics wouldn't just leave the Protestants alone, they viewed Protestantism to be a dangerous heresy which must be expunged lest it spread.
And again you come with Islam. Yes I know you Orthodox and Muslims have such an unsweet history there, but you shouldn't let emotions get the best of you. In fact, you can live in an Islamic state as a Christian, it is possible if you pay the Jizyah tax. I would even say that Christians lived better in the Islamic Empire than in the Pagan Roman Empire.
I actually disagree with this assessment. Both Islam and Rome show us two types of tolerance, one was beneficial to Christianity, one was not. Christians managed to thrive in the Roman context because they were given too much tolerance by the authorities. Persecutions were not consistent and severe persecutions lasted only for a time during the reign of a specific Emperor. This allowed Christians enough stability to grow in between the good times while at the same time being staunchly opposed to any sort of effort to integrate Christians into the Empire via sacrifices to Caesar or some other practice. Christians were still able to proselytize and this reaped much fruit.
The Islamic context is different. Yes Christians were tolerated but their position in society clear, they were Dhimmis, utterly subject to the Ummah. Any hint of proselytization invited reprisal and you could expect the community or the proselytizer to be executed. This is why Christianity didn't spread in Islamic contexts as it did in Rome. This is why you see a gradual diminishment of Christianity in places where Christianity was at one time dominant. Christianity disappeared entirely from North Africa and was drastically reduced in places like Egypt, Syria and the Asia Minor when under Islamic rule.
So to say Christianity was better under Islam than under Pagan Rome, is simply false.
As I said, I don't care who conquers the world. A Christian is not worldly. The New Testament makes a clear statement about how a Christian should live, and you don't seem to disagree with that at all, but you are trying to suggest that the teachings of the New Testament are unworkable. I cannot agree with this way of thinking. A Christian should live as the apostles did, even if it costs him his life, for dying is gain (Philippians 1:21).
And there are real implications to that. Power won't cease to exist simply because you refuse to take it or let your brothers and sisters in Christ take it. There will always be Rulers and they will change the destiny of the people they rule. Power has that effect and if you surrender it, then you can't complain about the consequences of what your enemies will do when they have power and you foolishly have denied yourself any legitimacy to wield it.
You are Orthodox and I have talked to Orthodox people several times. You are just different, not only in this respect, but in other important things as well. We will not agree.
We don't have to agree, but you're simply mistaken. If you desire a life free of worldliness, free of bonds of loyalty, kinship, then go live in the forest away from humanity. That is the only way you can be consistent with your view.