Quote:
Originally Posted by aron
"Never once did he try to change the social order"???? Everything he did changed the social order. He didn't try - he did it - went to the wretched, the lost, the castoff, the demon possessed, the ones with no money and no means to repay. People with suppurating sores got touched, healed. Everything he did spoke revolution. Real revolution. Not just a new [political] Caesar, but Satan's kingdom gone and the Kingdom of God ushered in. And this continued in the Acts, and let's not pretend it didn't. They didn't gather and give life-study messages on obscure texts, puffing themselves up over abstruse "truths". No, they made tunics for the widows who had no means to pay for them.
Wake up, people.
|
This is one of the things that the LC just gets completely wrong. Throughout history, Christianity has always been involved in social causes and reform. It wouldn't even exist without that.
One example that comes to mind is MLKJ leading the civil rights movement and using his platform as a minister to do so. According to the argument in the shepherdingwords article, he shouldn't have done that, and all those civil rights issues would have been resolved when the Lord returns. That is how absurd their line of reasoning is.
Well things just don't work that way. There are all kinds of social issues needing immediate action. That's not to say that Christianity needs to be involved in every single of of those issues. But certainly there are some issues where it is appropriate to be involved. I think the real issue is that those leading the LC realize how ineffective their movement has become and want to find a way to conveniently excuse themselves from having the kind of impact on society that normal churches have.