Featured Cultural Interaction pt2

In a previous introductory thread we began to explore to what extent if any are Christians duty bound to interact with and possibly change the culture .
As expected a wide variety of responses was offered.
One response was the Christians are only here to present the ungodly with their need to be reconciled to God by the cross work of our Saviour.
On a Christian forum no one would deny that is part of what we are here for.
The next series of issues or questions is concerning is that the extent of our responsibility , are we being consistent with the "gospel of the Kingdom"?

What end time view we hold will influence our responses

The question is will our end time view be modified or changed by investigating these questions?

 

In Mark 1:14-15 Now after John was put in prison, Jesus came to Galilee, preaching the gospel of the Kingdom of God and saying, the time as fulfilled, and the Kingdom of God is at hand. Repe't, and believe in the gospel.

What is the gospel of the Kingdom?

Did the church exist yet?

If someone heard this and believed what would it mean to them?

What is the relationship if any of the Church to the Kingdom?

Was it a physical earthly Kingdom?

Was it only a spiritual Kingdom?

Was it already?

Was it not yet?

Are all people in the Kingdom?

 

Some quotes;

Kuyper wanted to awaken the church from what he viewed as its pietistic slumber. He declared:

No single piece of our mental world is to be sealed off from the rest and there is not a square inch in the whole domain of human existence over which Christ, who is sovereign over all, does not cry: 'Mine

The Puritans did not retreat from culture but attempted to apply to the law of God to every area of life. We have largely abandoned these ideas. Boot points out various reasons for the church’s cultural retreat such as eschatological dualism, two-kingdom theology, antinomianism and false views of justice.


"Iconoclast,posted;

In Mark 1:14-15 Now after John was put in prison, Jesus came to Galilee, preaching the gospel of the Kingdom of God and saying, the time as fulfilled, and the Kingdom of God is at hand. Repent, and believe in the gospel.

What is the gospel of the Kingdom?

Did the church exist yet?

If someone heard this and believed what would it mean to them?

What is the relationship if any of the Church to the Kingdom?

Was it a physical earthly Kingdom?

Was it only a spiritual Kingdom?

Was it already?

Was it not yet?

Are all people in the Kingdom?

Joe Boot offers this;
Christ Jesus reigns over all, for, having been raised from the dead, ascending to sit down at the right hand of majesty and power, all authority and judgment is in his hands, and his royal court is now in session (Eph. 1:20–23; Heb. 1:3–4; Matt. 28:18; Phil. 3:21).

Those born again by the Spirit of God are now sons and joint-heirs with Christ, and are appointed ambassadors of his cosmic dominion.

As 'new creatures' through whom the power of the new creation is already at work, God's people are sent out into all the earth to declare the good news of Christ's reign and salvation and assert his crown rights in every area of life and thought (Ps. 2; Acts 2:29–36; 1 Cor. 8:5–6; Eph. 6:19–20; Phil 2:9–11).

 

Some have opposed these ideas like this;

The Two Kingdoms Theology, as articulated by leading proponents like David VanDrunen, slices up reality into two domains or kingdoms, both under God's broad supervision – the spiritual or redemptive kingdom and the common or civil kingdom.

These two domains are said to have different ends, functions, laws and modes of operation. In the common kingdom we have the family, the school, science, art, civil society (or all cultural life) and the state – these areas of life cannot and should not be distinctly Christian as they are part of an allegedly common or neutral realm guided by natural law, common to believers and unbelievers alike.


The church, on the other hand, is ruled directly by Christ where the standards of Scripture apply, but contra the example of King David in Psalm 2, Daniel in Babylon, Amos to the nations around Israel, Jonah in Nineveh, John the Baptist before Herod and the apostle Paul before Roman governors, we must not seek to inculcate those standards and bring them to bear for political life and the social order; those standards are for Christians alone. God's revealed word is for believers, but not the worldly civil kingdom.

The logic of this Two Kingdoms idea is expressed when Stevens claims, "Our goal is not political power but the gathering of God's people in readiness for the coming of the eschatological kingdom, for which we await the return of the Lord Jesus from heaven. Our primary task is evangelism, and in the meantime it will often prove impossible to serve both God and Caesar, despite our best efforts to fulfil our duties in both spheres of life."

This not only seems to shunt the kingdom of Christ out of the present historical situation and into eternity, but suggests there is an underlying dichotomy of purpose between serving God's redemptive intentions and valid use of political power. The political task is somehow made incongruent with the reality of the eschatological reign of Christ. This notion, as well as focusing on doing evangelism while we await parousia, with little or no expectation that cultural and political life can or will be turned toward faithfulness to God is classic Two Kingdoms rhetoric.



Yet where in Scripture are we ever called to 'serve both God and Caesar'? We are only ever called to serve Christ the Lord in every area of life, including the political life of the state. We cannot have two masters. In engaging political life, we must never serve Caesar (i.e. the state) as though there is a common kingdom independent of the immediate reign of the Son of Man, now seated at the right hand of God in the place of total authority, everything being made subject to him (Heb. 1:1-2:10; Eph. 1:20-23; Col. 1:15-20). But we can serve Christ, by serving his purposes in the state, as in any other area of life. It is because we can and must serve Christ the Lord in every area of life that we have the authority to prophetically call political power to do justice and bend the knee to God in all its functions.

The problem for man is not the creational structures he is called to serve in (like the family and state) but the direction of that service – the direction of our hearts. Will we, in our life and work, be turned toward idolatry or true worship, because from the heart spring the issues of life (Prov. 4:23)? Thus when Stevens basically juxtaposes political, cultural and social transformation with seeking the eschatological coming kingdom of Christ; when personal evangelism rather than the broader mission of evangelization (Matt. 28:16-20 includes teaching and disciplining nations not just individuals) is said to be the priority; when prayer for revival has no apparent connection with the transformation of the political life of the nation, it is these Two Kingdoms theological and philosophical ideas that seem to underlie his reasoning.

Resignation from the public space: Responding to John Stevens' liberal pluralist vision | Dr. Joe Boot

 

Secular thought has been given a pass, and needs to be confronted and discarded.
This error while present since the fall took root and comes down to us from the error known as the enlightenment

;

There were two distinct lines of Enlightenment thought. The radical enlightenment, inspired by the philosophy of Spinoza, advocated democracy, individual liberty, freedom of expression, and eradication of religious authority. A second, more moderate variety, supported by René Descartes, John Locke, Christian Wolff, Isaac Newton and others,

sought accommodation between reform and the traditional systems of power and faith.

Science came to play a leading role in Enlightenment discourse and thought. Many Enlightenment writers and thinkers had backgrounds in the sciences and associated scientific advancement
with the overthrow of religion and traditional authority in favor of the development of free speech and thought. Broadly speaking, Enlightenment science greatly valued empiricism and rational thought and was embedded with the Enlightenment ideal of advancement and progress.



However, as with most Enlightenment views, the benefits of science were not seen universally.

The Enlightenment has also long been hailed as the foundation of modern Western political and intellectual culture.
It brought political modernization to the West in terms of focusing on democratic values and institutions and the creation of modern, liberal democracies.

The fundamentals of European liberal thought, including the right of the individual, the natural equality of all men, the separation of powers, the artificial character of the political order (which led to the later distinction between civil society and the state), the view that all legitimate political power must be “representative” and based on the consent of the people, and liberal interpretation of law that leaves people free to do whatever is not explicitly forbidden, were all developed by Enlightenment thinkers

In religion, Enlightenment-era commentary was a response to the preceding century of religious conflict in Europe.

Enlightenment thinkers sought to curtail the political power of organized religion and thereby prevent another age of intolerant religious war.

A number of novel ideas developed, including deism (belief in God the Creator, with no reference to the Bible or any other source) and atheism. The latter was much discussed but had few proponents. Many, like Voltaire, held that without belief in a God who punishes evil, the moral order of society was undermined.

.The Age of Enlightenment | History of Western Civilization II

 

Secularism is the unplanned child of a deformed Christianity. It is now betraying its mother.

Joe Boot

 

Throughout history, the Lord has entrusted the work of gospel-centered culture building and renewal to His people.
Gen1:28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

Gen.9:9 And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth.

Mt28:18-20
18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.

19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

This task is particularly urgent in our day because the organs and institutions of modern culture have been thoroughly saturated by humanistic and pagan assumptions about the source of nature of truth and freedom.
These pretensions have steadily redefined intellectual, social, familial, sexual, and ethical norms, unleashing real evil and enslaving Western society in radical opposition to Christ and the freedom brought by the gospel.

From the school, the academy, and courthouse, to senates, parliaments, and palaces, the Christian faith is being systematically expunged from public life and ignored or assaulted in our corridors of learning and power.
If we love the gospel, our neighbors, and freedom, Christians must take up the cultural task with faith and courage.

pg 15,16 preface of Gospel Culture

 

The Church has failed to uphold Phil.2:12-16.
We have in large part been guilty of world flight due to a form of doctrinal apostasy failing to correctly understand the gospel of the gospel of the Kingdom.

Partial obedience is also partial disobedience.

 

How should christians relate to an increasingly DE Christianized public square where people are becoming either ignorant of, or hostile toward the world view of The Bible?

What are christians to do when the institutional church is marginalized, the exclusive claims of the gospel of viewed as bigotry ,and the moral law and scripture seen as repressive and intolerant?
pg30...Introduction...The Mission of God.

 

In a contacts where increasingly people of other religions from secular humanists,the muslims coalesce[ not without growing tensions ]on the one governmental structure and we are informed that the new state doctrine is multiculturalism, how are christians to understand and relate the claims of Christ and God's law to public life - indeed should they seek to relate them at all?

 

In addressing this renewed encounter in our time, many christians have decided to adopt and overtly pluralistic or inclusiveness perspectives on the gospel and mission essencially surrendering moral absolutes and a binding character of God's law are all together and reinterpreting the Christian gospel to be embracing of many social orders and many routes to God, without the need for a saving knowledge of Christ.
Is this capitulation and adequate approach for Christian seeking to understand how The Bible relates with today's pluralism?
Indeed can biblical faith be Reconciled with the modern philosophy of religious pluralism at all?
The puritan perspective says no, and regards the acceptance of philosophically pluralistic and inclusive and close serviced missiological solutions as idolatry. It must be stressed that what is not being said here is that christians cannot live peaceably and a religiously pluralistic contacts - the early church dead and christians have done so all over the globe for centuries. The question is how are we to live in that context it biblical Christianity cannot be harmonized and a new synthesis with the religious pluralism of our day?
What is the proper relationship between church and state? Is a Christian culture possible?
If a culture were converted to faith in Christ, how would their institutions change?
What would be the basis of such a cultures laws?
Does The Bible have the answers the societies problems, and if so, what are those answers?

 

This is what the concern of this book is. The short videos are the author being questioned about the topic.
Posts 8,9 are short question and answers.

Post 16 is from a book called the American Covenant, by Marshal Foster

 

When Will Christianity Today Evaluate Biden by the Ten Commandments? - The American Vision

Why hasn’t Christianity Today been critical of the Democrats if the Ten Commandments are the standard? It’s an irritating puzzle that demands an answer. Trump is by no means a perfect man, but to claim that he’s somehow different from other politicians—including Democrats—is preposterous.

John F. Kennedy had his sexual conquests. Ted Kennedy left a woman to drown in the backseat of his car while he met with his political advisers on how to handle the incident. He was honored as “the Lion of the Senate.” Former Pres. Bill Clinton has been accused of numerous sexual indiscretions. These are just some of what we know. Joe Biden has been accused of sexual assault by Tara Reade, a former staff member when Biden was a U.S. Senator. The media have been complicit in keeping Democrat sins off the front page. How long would a Republican governor last if nine women had accused him of sexual assault, and yet Democrat Andrew Cuomo remains governor of New York.

I’m for equality when it comes to pointing out the sins of politicians. For every sin of Trump or any Republican, the media should expose a sin of a Democrat. But the question remains — by what standard? —since Democrats no longer have any standards.

Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY) recently said: “What any religious tradition describes as God’s will is no concern of this Congress.” Nadler was responding to Rep. Greg Steube, R-Fla., who criticized the Equality Act during the House debate, saying it violates Christian beliefs.

“The gender confusion that exists in our culture today is a clear rejection of God’s good design,” he said. “Whenever a nation’s laws no longer reflect the standards of God, that nation is in rebellion against him and will inevitably bear the consequences.”

It would be helpful if Christianity Today would evaluate the Biden administration and Democrat policies by the standard of the Ten Commandments:

 

1. The First Commandment states that there is only one God, and only He can save us. Democrats believe “the State is as God walking on Earth,” as Hegel put it, and they are its ministers and only they can save us.

2. The Second Commandment forbids idolatry. The State has become an idol and is worshipped as a god when the Bible declares that civil government is limited, decentralized, and serves as a “minister [servant] of God to [us] for good” (Rom. 13:4). The standard of good is not what politicians or judges say it is. The State continues to grow and pass more laws that make more people dependent on the idol State.

3. The Third Commandment forbids taking God’s name in vain. Politicians appeal to God all the time and yet violate His commandments in the same breath. President Obama referenced God — even singing “Amazing Grace” — in his eulogy for Rev. Pinckney and soon after celebrated the Supreme Court’s ruling making same-sex marriage the law of the land. Supposed Roman Catholics Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden have done the same. This is taking God’s name in vain.

4. The Fourth Commandment sets one day a week aside for rest. That day is Sunday. Not Friday or Saturday. The interesting thing about this commandment is that it’s written into the Constitution at Article I, Section 7, Clause 2. a document that Democrats say is religiously neutral.

1. The Fifth Commandment defines the family. As we’ve seen, the courts have redefined the family, and by redefining the family they can now rewrite all laws in terms of that new definition. Joe Biden has made the support for “body dysmorphia” and gender reassignment surgery a centerpiece of his administration. Biden selected transgender doctor Rachel Levine as assistant health secretary, the first openly LGBTQ person nominated to a Cabinet position.
2. The Sixth Commandment was legislated out of existence decades ago by the sanctioning of perpetual war and the legalization of abortion. Pro-life evangelicals who supported pro-abortion Biden “are not happy that the new White House administration under President Biden has included a change to taxpayer funding of abortions as part of the American Rescue Plan.”
3. The Seventh Commandment in its prohibition of adultery is a summary statement about all marital relationships. The law prohibiting adultery rests on the creation mandate of marriage being between a man and a woman (Gen. 1:27–28; 2:20–25). The complement of man and woman is what’s “suitable,” not two men or two women. Jesus confirmed the creation mandate that marriage is between a man and a woman (Matt. 19:1–6). Democrats have been a the forefront of supporting same-sex marriage.
4. The Eighth Commandment prohibits stealing. Our nation’s outrageous taxing system is based on theft when people are given the right to vote to take money from some people so it can be given to other people. The same is true for creating money out of thin air. This is worse than counterfeiting because it devalues the dollar and results in higher prices as the flood of new money chases a limited number of goods. It’s one of the reasons home prices have skyrocketed.
5. The Ninth Commandment prohibits bearing false witness. Politicians bear false witness with almost every word they speak. Consider the following statement from presidential candidate Barack Obama that he gave on April 17, 2008, when he was campaigning for the presidency: “I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman. Now, for me as a Christian, it’s also a sacred union God’s in the mix.” Hillary Clinton said something similar.
6. The Tenth Commandment indicts the modern State and those who support it because it covets everything: power, property, authority, money, prestige, privilege, and our souls. Covetousness leads to envy.

It would be a great help if the folks at Christianity Today would be an equal opportunity judge of both Republicans and Democrats.