Is the Church Radical Enough?

Discussion in 'Free-For-All Archives' started by JGrubbs, Oct 4, 2004.

  1. JGrubbs

    JGrubbs
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2004
    Messages:
    4,761
    Likes Received:
    0
    Dave Black wants to know, "Is the church of Jesus Christ radical enough?"

    In his latest post to his Web site, Mr. Black explains that if "there has been a transformation taking place, it has been the work which the culture has had on transforming the church, not the other way around. The redemptive effect which the modern church – and here I am speaking of the modern 'evangelical,' Bible-believing church – has had on the culture has been practically nil."

    He goes on to explain, "The point is simple. Politics will not bring the kingdom of God closer. Politics should lead men to despair and, ultimately, to the cross. The Christian responsibility is always more than politics, and rarely less. But even in the midst of our engaging the culture for Christ our plea is always for men to humble themselves under the mighty hand of God – whether they be presidents or princes or ploughboys."

    Click here to read the rest of Dave Black's article, "Seizing the Root".
     
  2. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    Very well said ... something that all need to give more thought to. I have long believed (and expressed) that we are too tied up in politics. And some here have criticized me for it. But I firmly believe that the hope for the world and this nation is not found in politics but in the gospel of Jesus Christ. We need preachers who will stay out of politics and stick to what God actually said. I know that rubs some people the wrong way here, but I firmly believe that is the mandate of Scripture ... Preach the word, be ready in season and out season, reprove, rebuke, exhort with all patience.

    The church has too easily been transformed by the world. The church has capitulated to the changing times. Let us return with fervency and commitment to Christ alone as the hope for individuals, for the nation will change only when the people who make up the nation change. And the church will change only when the people who make up the church change as individuals.
     
  3. askM

    askM
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2004
    Messages:
    90
    Likes Received:
    0
    You make a good point. However, if the church (meaning Christians here) had been more willing to take a stand and lobby against liberalism and moral relativity from the beginning, then maybe some of these things would not have even become an issue...gay marriage???? Once you have done all you can do, then we have a right to complain. I personally wish Christians, I mean actual bible believing Christians, would get more involved in politics and take a stand on what is right without fretting over political correctness and appeasement.
    2 Chronicles 7:14
     
  4. JGrubbs

    JGrubbs
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2004
    Messages:
    4,761
    Likes Received:
    0
    Here are some more excerpts from this article:

    Unlike our current batch of Bush pom-pom wavers, Jesus did not organize or assert any human cunning or power upon the social dynamic. He just started the church. Its symbol, the cross – the symbol par excellence of the Romans’ enormous political authority – was now, by the grandest of paradoxes, transformed into the symbol of His redemption.

    &lt;snip&gt;

    I cannot think of anything more vital for the American church than for it to return to its prophetic role in relation to culture. The kingdom will not come because Christians have joined the Constitution Party, as much as this writer thinks that is to be commended. The New Zion is not the United States of America. Believers must be “in” but not “of” the political order, “using the world as though they did not make full use of it; for the form of this world is passing away” (1 Cor. 7:31). It may be too late to return to a constitutional form of government; it may also be too late to return to the old paths of biblical wisdom. But the church need not despair. One person at a time, one couple at a time; one family, then one church, then one community at a time, God can yet revive us.

    It matters little who is in the White House if Jesus Christ is not the Lord in my house. Let Him be welcome there, at the root of our society, and I dare say He will be present in the society at large.
     
  5. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    If the church had kept it heart in the preaching of the gospel and the uncompromising exposition of the whole counsel of God, then these things wouldn't be an issue. We must remember what the mandate of the church is.
     
  6. Pennsylvania Jim

    Pennsylvania Jim
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2000
    Messages:
    7,693
    Likes Received:
    0
    J grubbs, I don't think Larry actually thought the article was saying what he pretended to think it said. He was just cleverly twisting it to fit his own pietistic agenda.
     
  7. Pennsylvania Jim

    Pennsylvania Jim
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2000
    Messages:
    7,693
    Likes Received:
    0
    An interesting pattern that I've noticed regarding those cought up in the heresy of pietism is that when they do make an exception and become politically active on a particular issue, they are usually not on the Christian side. This comment is not aimed at Larry, I know that he means well.
     
  8. Pastor Larry

    Pastor Larry
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2001
    Messages:
    21,763
    Likes Received:
    0
    If you knew me, you would know that I have never been confused with a pietist, so I am not sure what my pietistic agenda is. But more to the point, What did I pretend to think it said, and what did it actually say? It seemed to be to be something I completely agreed with and expressed my agreement with it.
     

Share This Page

Loading...