Important Announcement regarding the Alternative Views Subforum

[zeek]

Here is a sample of the LCM teaching on politics and the church:

POLITICS
AND RELIGION

Separation of politics and religion is a fine teaching in the Bible. "You know that those who are esteemed as rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. But it is not so among you [the Christians]" (Mark 10:42-43). The Lord Jesus declared that His kingdom is not of this world. Hence, the church, which is subject to the Lord, does not need to go to war. But the question now is much deeper than that of separation between politics and religion.

Many believers think that it is good for politics and religion to be separated one from the other, that the church should not bother itself with politics, and that politics should not interfere with the church. But they think that the church should declare its stand and express its view concerning current issues and that believers can join political movements and serve as government officials. What they say seems to be reasonable, because they say that since believers are also citizens of a country, they have their works as citizens. We should look at the teaching in the Bible. The Lord Jesus left us "a model so that you may follow in His steps" (1 Pet. 2:21). The Lord is our example in everything. We will not go wrong if we follow Him in respect to our relationship to politics. Was the Lord Jesus a politician? Did He pay attention to the politics of His country? Did He ever represent the voice of the people to criticize the officers of Palestine? Did He ever rebuke the political oppressors on behalf of the politically oppressed? Did He ever rally any political power around Him? Please read Luke 12:14; 13:1-3; Matthew 17:24; 22:21.

Christians are merely strangers and sojourners on earth (Heb. 11:13-16; 1 Pet. 2:11). Who can interfere or participate in the politics of a country? Only those who are the citizens of that country can do this. Those Chinese who reside in Japan have no right to interfere with the politics of Japan. The fact that we are strangers and sojourners shows that we have nothing to do with the politics of this world.

Some have said, "Who can be more qualified to be government officers? Are they not more just and morally qualified than others?" The answer in the Bible is that Christians are the most unqualified to be government officers. A government officer is one who executes the law. The laws in the world are based on justice, and all transgressors have to be punished. However, the principle of conduct of Christians today is mercy (Matt. 5:38-48). Can world politics act according to the teaching on the Mount? The words "do not judge, that you be not judged" (Matt. 7:1) have forever disqualified believers from interfering with politics or being executors of law.

The Lord Jesus forever separated politics from the church of God in Matthew 22:21. Since believers do not belong to Caesar (who represents politics), they should never do the work of Caesar. Let those who belong to Caesar do the work of Caesar. We who belong to God should be separated solely unto God.

The Bible only commands believers to be obedient citizens of a country and obey the officers; it has not commanded the believers to be officers themselves and be obeyed. Please read Titus 3:1; Romans 13:1, 5-7. If we are pressured to act contrary to God's commands, we have to act according to Acts 5:29. Matthew 10:23 is also a good solution. We can choose to disobey, but we must never become non-submissive or rebel.

If God's children try to be officers at the gate of Sodom, they will find that before Lot had a chance to convert Sodom, Sodom had converted Lot! Collected Works of Watchman Nee, The (Set 1) Vol. 07: The Christian (5)

According to Nee the Bible teaches that it is wrong for a Christian to hold political office. So, professing Christians should not run for or hold public office or work for the government. The business of government should be left to unbelievers.

I worked for the State of Florida for 37 years. It never occurred to me that I was acting unchristian. How about that?

[OBW]

Originally Posted by zeek

According to Nee the Bible teaches that it is wrong for a Christian to hold political office. So, professing Christians should not run for or hold public office or work for the government. The business of government should be left to unbelievers.

I worked for the State of Florida for 37 years. It never occurred to me that I was acting unchristian. How about that?

Given the kind of politics that some push (as you linked in a recent post elsewhere), there is an aspect in which the Christian is better of to not be in politics. But that extreme is no different than the one that says you should have nothing to do with it. Somewhere in between is the real biblical position.

I assume that your service in government was both valuable and worthy of your efforts. (Not saying you always may have felt that way.)

And even to hold public office is a noble task. But forcing Christian morality onto the world through such position is a different thing. And sticking your head in the sand is just as poor.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by zeek

According to Nee the Bible teaches that it is wrong for a Christian to hold political office. So, professing Christians should not run for or hold public office or work for the government. The business of government should be left to unbelievers.

Then I suppose that the only "proper" occupations in the Bible for Christians are fishing (Peter), medical doctors (Luke), preaching (Apollos), and tent-making (Paul). Perhaps I missed a couple others. Ahh yes, slaves and slave owners.

And all you computer guys, engineers, day-traders, fashionistas, garbage men, landscapers, sales people, car mechanics, etc. are all on notice for being too worldly.

Btw, Nee took his political views from Darby. Perhaps the exclusives posted spies at the polling booths to see if any of their members had become "worldly." I read what Nee taught on politics, and I am shocked at the poor teachings supposedly supported by scripture. Think of his logic: The Lord Jesus was not a politician, so neither should we be. But the Lord was neither in pharmaceuticals like Nee was. Didn't he know that "pharma," the root word for pharmaceuticals, is the Greek word for demons?

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Then I suppose that the only "proper" occupations in the Bible for Christians are fishing (Peter), medical doctors (Luke), preaching (Apollos), and tent-making (Paul). Perhaps I missed a couple others. Ahh yes, slaves and slave owners.

And all you computer guys, engineers, day-traders, fashionistas, garbage men, landscapers, sales people, car mechanics, etc. are all on notice for being too worldly.

Btw, Nee took his political views from Darby. Perhaps the exclusives posted spies at the polling booths to see if any of their members had become "worldly." I read what Nee taught on politics, and I am shocked at the poor teachings supposedly supported by scripture. Think of his logic: The Lord Jesus was not a politician, so neither should we be. But the Lord was neither in pharmaceuticals like Nee was. Didn't he know that "pharma," the root word for pharmaceuticals, is the Greek word for demons?

Good points bro Ohio. Nee was so against government that he didn't pay 'em taxes (didn't render to Caesar). That got him arrested. Then he relented toward government ... and changed his mind, to get a lighter sentence ... and admitted many more sins toward those efforts ... damaging many, and his ministry, in the process. Martyr my behind. Witness Lee go tell it to those who don't know you, or Nee.

Should we trust Nee, or Lee, about anything?

[zeek]

Originally Posted by awareness

Good points bro Ohio. Nee was so against government that he didn't pay 'em taxes (didn't render to Caesar). That got him arrested. Then he relented toward government ... and changed his mind, to get a lighter sentence ... and admitted many more sins toward those efforts ... damaging many, and his ministry, in the process. Martyr my behind. Witness Lee go tell it to those who don't know you, or Nee.

Should we trust Nee, or Lee, about anything?

An ad hominem argument is a fallacy unless it can be shown that the character of the proposer is relevant to the truth of his/her proposition. Even a pathological liar may correctly observe that the sky is blue. So, it doesn't necessarily follow that if Nee transgressed then his propositions regarding politics are false. If you wish to refute Nee's points, you can't just attack Nee. You actually have to show how they are false.

[testallthings]

WE WILL NEVER SAY THAT WE CAN NEVER BE WRONG! (WATCHMAN NEE)

"We will never say that we can never be wrong! Even if all others approve us, we will be the last to approve ourselves. It may be that our mistakes are more numerous than those of others! But, dear brothers, we are willing to follow the Bible literally. If we are wrong, we are indeed willing to be corrected. We would ask those who know where we are wrong to please point out to us our mistakes from the teachings of the Bible, and not from the opinions of men. We know that we are not trustworthy. This is why we trust in the Bible. Since we know that we are not trustworthy, we would also ask your forgiveness in our unwillingness to trust in any famous Bible expositor. We admit that the exposition in The Christian is quite different from the traditional interpretations of men. We are definitely not for our readers to follow us blindly. If they do this, it would be better for The Christian to cease its publication. We can only proclaim the truth that we know. Our readers should never think that what The Christian has said can never contain any mistake. We have to tell the brothers frankly that we do not believe we are like the biblical prophets who wrote the Scriptures by divine inspiration. We can make mistakes. Even though those who love The Christian are increasing day by day, perhaps no one is more aware of the shortcomings of the magazine than the editor himself. The Lord also knows our shortcomings. We hope that every reader will check our messages against the teachings of the Bible. If they are the same, then please pay the price to follow these teachings. If they are not the same, we advise you to refuse them totally. Never follow blindly just because you trust The Christian and its editor. Our unique goal is to lead people closer to God's living word and His written Word. If a man can be drawn closer to Christ and to the Bible, our work has received its great reward. I wish that The Christian would simply be something like a pontoon bridge, something that is used and then forgotten, with itself receiving no recognition at all."

COLLECTED WORKS OF WATCHMAN NEE, THE (SET 1) VOL. 07: THE CHRISTIAN (5)

Chapter 19 Section 1

[awareness]

Originally Posted by testallthings

WE WILL NEVER SAY THAT WE CAN NEVER BE WRONG! (WATCHMAN NEE)

"We will never say that we can never be wrong! Even if all others approve us, we will be the last to approve ourselves. It may be that our mistakes are more numerous than those of others! But, dear brothers, we are willing to follow the Bible literally. If we are wrong, we are indeed willing to be corrected. We would ask those who know where we are wrong to please point out to us our mistakes from the teachings of the Bible, and not from the opinions of men. We know that we are not trustworthy. This is why we trust in the Bible. Since we know that we are not trustworthy, we would also ask your forgiveness in our unwillingness to trust in any famous Bible expositor. We admit that the exposition in The Christian is quite different from the traditional interpretations of men. We are definitely not for our readers to follow us blindly. If they do this, it would be better for The Christian to cease its publication. We can only proclaim the truth that we know. Our readers should never think that what The Christian has said can never contain any mistake. We have to tell the brothers frankly that we do not believe we are like the biblical prophets who wrote the Scriptures by divine inspiration. We can make mistakes. Even though those who love The Christian are increasing day by day, perhaps no one is more aware of the shortcomings of the magazine than the editor himself. The Lord also knows our shortcomings. We hope that every reader will check our messages against the teachings of the Bible. If they are the same, then please pay the price to follow these teachings. If they are not the same, we advise you to refuse them totally. Never follow blindly just because you trust The Christian and its editor. Our unique goal is to lead people closer to God's living word and His written Word. If a man can be drawn closer to Christ and to the Bible, our work has received its great reward. I wish that The Christian would simply be something like a pontoon bridge, something that is used and then forgotten, with itself receiving no recognition at all."

COLLECTED WORKS OF WATCHMAN NEE, THE (SET 1) VOL. 07: THE CHRISTIAN (5)

Chapter 19 Section 1

These are great words from Nee. Nee said a lot of great things. But in the end, from what I've learned, and seen with my own eyes in Lee's movement in America, he says one thing and produces another ; not to mention is own personal sexual improprieties, in his hidden personal life.

So what was your purpose in posting it testallthings?

[zeek]

Originally Posted by testallthings

WE WILL NEVER SAY THAT WE CAN NEVER BE WRONG! (WATCHMAN NEE)




"We will never say that we can never be wrong! Even if all others approve us, we will be the last to approve ourselves. It may be that our mistakes are more numerous than those of others! But, dear brothers, we are willing to follow the Bible literally. If we are wrong, we are indeed willing to be corrected. We would ask those who know where we are wrong to please point out to us our mistakes from the teachings of the Bible, and not from the opinions of men. We know that we are not trustworthy. This is why we trust in the Bible. Since we know that we are not trustworthy, we would also ask your forgiveness in our unwillingness to trust in any famous Bible expositor. We admit that the exposition in The Christian is quite different from the traditional interpretations of men. We are definitely not for our readers to follow us blindly. If they do this, it would be better for The Christian to cease its publication. We can only proclaim the truth that we know. Our readers should never think that what The Christian has said can never contain any mistake. We have to tell the brothers frankly that we do not believe we are like the biblical prophets who wrote the Scriptures by divine inspiration. We can make mistakes. Even though those who love The Christian are increasing day by day, perhaps no one is more aware of the shortcomings of the magazine than the editor himself. The Lord also knows our shortcomings. We hope that every reader will check our messages against the teachings of the Bible. If they are the same, then please pay the price to follow these teachings. If they are not the same, we advise you to refuse them totally. Never follow blindly just because you trust The Christian and its editor. Our unique goal is to lead people closer to God's living word and His written Word. If a man can be drawn closer to Christ and to the Bible, our work has received its great reward. I wish that The Christian would simply be something like a pontoon bridge, something that is used and then forgotten, with itself receiving no recognition at all."

COLLECTED WORKS OF WATCHMAN NEE, THE (SET 1) VOL. 07: THE CHRISTIAN (5)

Chapter 19 Section 1

Humble words those, but when others actually did say "we" were wrong 'we" sued the pants off of them. So "we" said one thing and did another. Let me know if I'm "wrong" but I think that's called hypocrisy.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by zeek

An ad hominem argument is a fallacy unless it can be shown that the character of the proposer is relevant to the truth of his/her proposition. Even a pathological liar may correctly observe that the sky is blue. So, it doesn't necessarily follow that if Nee transgressed then his propositions regarding politics are false. If you wish to refute Nee's points, you can't just attack Nee. You actually have to show how they are false.

The recent hurricanes have underscored the fundamental weakness in the political process.

During Hurricane Harvey it was depicted as "unprecedented" to have a storm drop that much rain. Harvey dropped 50 inches, the previous record in the continental US was 49 inches. So although it was record setting it was hardly "unprecedented". Add to this the fact that scientists have been warning that bigger storms are a consequence of climate change and I would say that this was "precedented", they were warned, and they should have expected that with the Gulf 2 degrees warmer than usual we would get this.

So then, why were so many homes caught in the flood zone? You can be sure the insurance companies weren't caught off guard, that is why 80-85% of those flooded in Harvey and Irma didn't have flood insurance.

Here is the problem for politicians -- if they tell people they can't build in certain areas they take them to court and argue they have freedoms, rights, etc. Insurance companies don't care because they make the flood insurance prohibitively expensive so that no one has it. The city absolves itself by creating maps of flood zones and then telling people "buyer beware" knowing full well that the majority of Americans have no idea how to "beware". Primarily the poor suffer as the rich are not going to go without flood insurance and if it is too expensive they'll get a property elsewhere.

So then the politicians take the money from the real estate developers for their campaign, absolve themselves by claiming people have the liberty to do as they please. Developers don't care. The risk of the storms hitting in any six month period is much smaller than the risk of it hitting over 20 or 30 years (life of a mortgage). Insurance companies don't care. This leaves banks. But, flood damage rarely destroys 100% of the value. A $300,000 house is generally a third land value and two thirds house. If the house loses a roof that can be $50,000 or less. Flood damage can add to this. But even if the damage is $100,000 the bank might not lose anything. The only real losers are the home owners who cannot afford to fix the damage, declare bankruptcy and lose everything.

This happened in Katrina, it happened in Harvey, and I expect it happened in Irma. Prior to Irma I heard that Florida had "prepared for hurricanes". Idiotic. You cannot prepare for a category 4 or 5. You can "prepare" for a Cat 1 or 2, but unless you can guarantee you won't be hit by a 4 or 5 you aren't prepared. Once again, all the politicians do is take the developers money to run their campaigns and then put a positive spin on things when the disasters do hit.

These disasters have been predicted, often 20 years before the fact. There is no "real" preparation or response except for a few exceptions. I read of one town along the Mississippi, they were told that they needed to move to higher ground and they did. They move the entire town to an area 200 feet higher and have not been flooded since.

So then, I think Christians should be aware of the weakness and ineffectiveness of politicians. That doesn't mean that government service is unchristian or that some jobs are more sanctified than others, a position that was pushed in the LRC. But if you are going to go into it you should not be ignorant of what is involved and the bargains that have to be made.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

This happened in Katrina, it happened in Harvey, and I expect it happened in Irma. Prior to Irma I heard that Florida had "prepared for hurricanes". Idiotic. You cannot prepare for a category 4 or 5. You can "prepare" for a Cat 1 or 2, but unless you can guarantee you won't be hit by a 4 or 5 you aren't prepared. Once again, all the politicians do is take the developers money to run their campaigns and then put a positive spin on things when the disasters do hit.

These disasters have been predicted, often 20 years before the fact. There is no "real" preparation or response except for a few exceptions. I read of one town along the Mississippi, they were told that they needed to move to higher ground and they did. They move the entire town to an area 200 feet higher and have not been flooded since.

Hurricane proof? I saw some of the damage from Irma. Houses never built on stilts. Trailer homes set on cinder blocks. They should read the scripture about building on sinking sand.

These storms are "unprecedented" not because they have never happened before, but because we now have more people living on the shoreline than ever before. You can thank National Flood Insurance programs for that. Hurricane Donna was worse than Irma, yet in 1960 there were less than 5 Million people in Florida. Funny thing is that Donna occurred while the early climate change crowd were crying "ice age."

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Then I suppose that the only "proper" occupations in the Bible for Christians are fishing (Peter), medical doctors (Luke), preaching (Apollos), and tent-making (Paul). Perhaps I missed a couple others. Ahh yes, slaves and slave owners.

Yeah the only occupation of Christians should be those found in the Bible. And their only allowed to dress like back then too ...

And David was a king, and Jesus too ... so government is allowed ... especially President, our version of king. Obama, for example, is king of Babylon ... and he's a Christian. Cruz? I don't know. He's a Canuck. Has birther issues. Unlike Obama.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

Yeah the only occupation of Christians should be those found in the Bible. And their only allowed to dress like back then too ...

And David was a king, and Jesus too ... so government is allowed ... especially President, our version of king. Obama, for example, is king of Babylon ... and he's a Christian. Cruz? I don't know. He's a Canuck. Has birther issues. Unlike Obama.

Unlike yobama??? They proved he was a Mooslim born in Kenya. I've seen how they forgered his birth certificate.

I'm starting to feel the "Bern." I'm going to vote for Sanders. He just seems so sincere, compared to all the other guys. I figure I'll get free education, free health care, free food and housing, and free bus tickets. And Hillary and Trump will pay for it all! How could I pass up such a great deal?

I need to get it in writing, though, you know how those lawyers and politicians are.

[Intothewind]

Is the lcm going to unofficialy back someone this year?

Previously I feel folks voted repub irregardless...despite the lcm claim to be apolitical

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Intothewind

Is the lcm going to unofficialy back someone this year?

Previously I feel folks voted repub irregardless...despite the lcm claim to be apolitical

When I was in the lcm political position was subtly very pubbie oriented. For example. when brothers discovered I subscribed to Newsweek, Time, and U.S. News & World Report, I was advised to only read U.S. News & World Report (a conservative news mag). And then, my open minded reading was such a concern that news of it was spread around to other brothers, who also talked -- I mean 'fellowshipped' -- to, "with," me about my selection of reading of "worldly" material.

I admit that, if you are a Christian it can be confusing. Afterall, God is a conservative, and Jesus is a liberal. Shouldn't Christians of the New Covenant therefore be liberal?

That's why I'm confused by evangelicals going for Trump ... not to mention that his whole life has been devoted to mammon.

Mat_6:24 "No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon." - Jesus

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

I admit that, if you are a Christian it can be confusing. Afterall, God is a conservative, and Jesus is a liberal. Shouldn't Christians of the New Covenant therefore be liberal?

That's hysterical!

You are one funny guy!

Now is the Holy Spirit an Independent?

Perhaps the angels are libertarians?

And Lucifer is in the communist party?

[Intothewind]

Besides, y'all love a man too

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Intothewind

Besides, y'all love a man too

Don't know what you're driving at, but, I hope we all love our biological father ... and he's a man.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by zeek

Here is a sample of the LCM teaching on politics and the church:




According to Nee the Bible teaches that it is wrong for a Christian to hold political office. So, professing Christians should not run for or hold public office or work for the government. The business of government should be left to unbelievers.

I worked for the State of Florida for 37 years. It never occurred to me that I was acting unchristian. How about that?

I think you are asking the wrong question, no doubt due to Nee having the wrong perspective.

The question I would ask is "should a person holding a political office be a professing Christian?" The NT says clearly that God desires all men to be saved and come to the full knowledge of Jesus Christ.

There is no NT teaching that people in government should not be Christians, or that Christians should not work in the government.

Instead there is the observation that not many of these people are professing Christians.

[Evangelical]

I tend to agree with Nee that Christians should stay out of politics. Perhaps it is possible to have some influence in a minor role but to get to the top almost requires one to sell their soul to the devil. The devil tempted Christ with such a thing.

There are Christian politicians but dig a little deeper into their faith and few would be serious Christians as most born again believers understand it. Most are simply church-goers and profess a religion.

There are also Christians in the military but serious Christians do not join the military in a combat role because bloodshed is something God does not like. It is a fact that the early Christians were pacifist in every sense of the word. A serious Christian is taught to love their neighbor and simply couldn't pull the trigger when required of them. A serious Christian could not easily subject themselves to be molded into the sort of killing machine and mindset that job requires. God will always be tugging at their heart-strings and conscience. Like King David prayed in Psalm 51:14 to be delivered from the guilt of bloodshed.

[ZNPaaneah]

“Christians are merely strangers and sojourners on earth (Heb. 11:13-16; 1 Pet. 2:11). Who can interfere or participate in the politics of a country? Only those who are the citizens of that country can do this. Those Chinese who reside in Japan have no right to interfere with the politics of Japan. The fact that we are strangers and sojourners shows that we have nothing to do with the politics of this world.” (Watchman Nee — from Post 1)

13*These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth.

These men refer to Abel, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob. All of these men were very active in their community. They did not live during a democracy. They fought battles, met with political leaders, and established governments. This is the basis for WN’s doctrine, that their testimony was that they were strangers and sojourners, hence no Christian can be involved in the political process. This seems like WN has taken this word “stranger and sojourner” and created a teaching based on the logical extreme while ignoring the context.

11 Dearly beloved, I beseech you as strangers and pilgrims, abstain from fleshly lusts, which war against the soul;

12 Having your conversation honest among the Gentiles: that, whereas they speak against you as evildoers, they may by your good works, which they shall behold, glorify God in the day of visitation.

13 Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme;

14 Or unto governors, as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well.

15 For so is the will of God, that with well doing ye may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men:

The context of this verse reference is clearly a matter of "doing well" and "your good works".

[zeek]

Can you say "Veselnitskaya"?

[awareness]

Originally Posted by zeek

Can you say "Veselnitskaya"?

They are finding more and more hidden ties to the Russians during Trump's campaign. And now Trump wants to start a cybersecurity unit with Russia. Isn't that just letting the fox into the hen house?

[zeek]

Originally Posted by awareness

They are finding more and more hidden ties to the Russians during Trump's campaign. And now Trump wants to start a cybersecurity unit with Russia. Isn't that just letting the fox into the hen house?

Putin trumped Trump.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by zeek

Putin trumped Trump.

Until Trump came along, the USA had been winning every hand of cards?

[ZNPaaneah]

I think there are a lot of interesting parallels between Trump and Andrew Jackson.

Like Trump Andrew Jackson's daughter played a pivotal role in his administration.

Also like Trump the level of "fake news" and vicious media attacks were off the charts. Andrew Jackson was an outsider, the first president to be be elected who was not part of the ruling elite, defeating John Adams, who was part of the existing political dynasty. Also, like Trump Andrew Jackson campaigned with a brand new approach where he walked with the people and interacted directly with the common man. Also, like Trump's building a wall to keep out the Mexicans, removing the Indians was a major part of Jackson's campaign.

However, as people I would say that Jackson was the antithesis of Trump. Jackson was intensely loyal, which is why he was called "old hickory". His loyalty extended to anyone and everyone that was "on his team" including indians and their families. In contrast Trump cuts loose anyone and everyone, famous for his "your fired" line. Also it was quite obvious in his writing and speaking that the Bible and the work of Christ infused his heart, whereas with Trump any reference of his to the Bible is so superficial you realize it is contrived. However, whereas Trump has no issue using religion for political purposes Jackson absolutely refused since his understanding of the constitution was that as President he didn't want to present a biased impression concerning religion.

Why is this important? Jackson was president as the country split apart. You could see the impending civil war. Jackson was also battling the corrupt influence of a national bank. Also the debate was over State's rights vs Federal govt. Today the debate is over whether or not our Federal government has become too powerful and is in violation of the constitution with whistleblowers like Snowden coming forward with their warnings.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

They are finding more and more hidden ties to the Russians during Trump's campaign. And now Trump wants to start a cybersecurity unit with Russia. Isn't that just letting the fox into the hen house?

You still believe these fake news stories?

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by zeek

Here is a sample of the LCM teaching on politics and the church:




According to Nee the Bible teaches that it is wrong for a Christian to hold political office. So, professing Christians should not run for or hold public office or work for the government. The business of government should be left to unbelievers.

I worked for the State of Florida for 37 years. It never occurred to me that I was acting unchristian. How about that?

I think we need to return to Post #1. Does holding public office require you to act in a way that is unchristian?

My issue is hypocrisy. Slavery was hypocritical. It involved lying, deceit, distorting the word of God, etc. Civil rights will never result in a world that is just if those fighting for civil rights are hypocrites. You will not get justice if the foundation is lies, deceits, and hypocrisy.

I don't excuse the lies and deceits of Clinton, on the other hand I don't think that Clinton's lies justify or exonerate Trump's lies.

It is quite obvious that many people feel you have to compensate for past injustice with present injustice. I believe that is a failed strategy. If people rebelled against the past injustice then they will certainly rebel against institutional injustice that is supposed to "compensate" for that.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

I think we need to return to Post #1. Does holding public office require you to act in a way that is unchristian?

My issue is hypocrisy. Slavery was hypocritical. It involved lying, deceit, distorting the word of God, etc. Civil rights will never result in a world that is just if those fighting for civil rights are hypocrites. You will not get justice if the foundation is lies, deceits, and hypocrisy.

I don't excuse the lies and deceits of Clinton, on the other hand I don't think that Clinton's lies justify or exonerate Trump's lies.

It is quite obvious that many people feel you have to compensate for past injustice with present injustice. I believe that is a failed strategy. If people rebelled against the past injustice then they will certainly rebel against institutional injustice that is supposed to "compensate" for that.

Where and how do your comments about Clinton (Bill? Hilary?) and Trump fit into racial reparations and perceived past injustices?

These comments are flawed on so many levels.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Where and how do your comments about Clinton (Bill? Hilary?) and Trump fit into racial reparations and perceived past injustices?

These comments are flawed on so many levels.

Simple, a kingdom is built on a foundation of righteousness.

The civil rights movement condemned past unrighteousness, but if they do that by perpetuating unrighteousness it will fail.

Same is true of Trump. His campaign was based on condemning past unrighteousness. But if he perpetuates the unrighteousness he will fail.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Simple, a kingdom is built on a foundation of righteousness.

The civil rights movement condemned past unrighteousness, but if they do that by perpetuating unrighteousness it will fail.

Same is true of Trump. His campaign was based on condemning past unrighteousness. But if he perpetuates the unrighteousness he will fail.

Ohhhh...kay.

And what is the unrighteousness that Trump is perpetuating?

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Ohhhh...kay.

And what is the unrighteousness that Trump is perpetuating?

Too soon to make a final judgement.

I would say that the recent trip to Helsinki smells of unrighteousness. Some have called it treasonous, others have called it despicable. I have yet to hear anyone defend his actions. But I said "if he", still too early to say specifically.

However, the recent tape released that both Trump and Guiliani have authenticated and which they both claim "proves Trump did nothing wrong" I consider very troubling.

What does the tape prove?

1. Trump had an affair with that woman.

2. Trump was in the habit of having his fixer pay off tabloid papers to buy and bury the stories from these affairs.

3. Trump lied when he said he knew nothing of Cohen making the payment.

By any measure I feel it is absurd to say that proving these three things is equated with "proving Trump did nothing wrong". Once again, this reminds me of the complaints about Clinton not having a moral compass.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Simple, a kingdom is built on a foundation of righteousness.

The civil rights movement condemned past unrighteousness, but if they do that by perpetuating unrighteousness it will fail.

Same is true of Trump. His campaign was based on condemning past unrighteousness. But if he perpetuates the unrighteousness he will fail.

Once a liar, always a liar. And it doesn't matter if past presidents lied, as we know they did. Trump is our president now, and he clearly lies more than all the rest. I don't trust liars, whether left or right. That's one reason I'm an independent. Trump clearly can't be trusted, and all his words are called into question. Who in their right mind could trust him?

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by awareness

Once a liar, always a liar. And it doesn't matter if past presidents lied, as we know they did. Trump is our president now, and he clearly lies more than all the rest. I don't trust liars, whether left or right. That's one reason I'm an independent. Trump clearly can't be trusted, and all his words are called into question. Who in their right mind could trust him?

I think you will be embarrassed some day if you think Trump "lies more than the rest". What is fair to say is that his lies are far more transparent.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by zeek

Here is a sample of the LCM teaching on politics and the church:

If God's children try to be officers at the gate of Sodom, they will find that before Lot had a chance to convert Sodom, Sodom had converted Lot! Collected Works of Watchman Nee, The (Set 1) Vol. 07: The Christian (5)

According to Nee the Bible teaches that it is wrong for a Christian to hold political office. So, professing Christians should not run for or hold public office or work for the government. The business of government should be left to unbelievers.

I worked for the State of Florida for 37 years. It never occurred to me that I was acting unchristian. How about that?

So to return to the first Post, I would point out that Jesus prayed specifically that we would not be taken out of the world, but rather we would not be of the world.

This teaching by Nee clearly indicates that believers will be overcome by the world, even though the NT promises that the one in us is greater than the one in the world.

The idea that "politics" is somehow dirtier and therefore an unclean profession compared with journalism (look at this charge from Bezos that these rags are simply hit men for politicians) or businessmen (look at how the cigarette companies lied and sold addictive products for a profit, knowing that the cigarettes killed people) or even the church (look at the sex abuse scandals in the Catholic church) is absurd.

Instead I would argue that "we are not ignorant of Satan's devices". We should be aware of what we are getting into and the battles we will encounter. From my understanding the NT does not tell us to run from this battle, but rather advises us to be fully prepared, dressed, shod and armed for battle.

What is the "good news" if not that Jesus has come and lives in us and will rule and reign. Expressing that in your living on your job is the gospel.

2nd issue with Nee's teaching. Why would you base a teaching for Christians on Lot? Why not Abraham? When Lot was taken Abraham didn't say "I'm not of this world". No, he put together an army, chased them down and rescued Lot along with people from Sodom. He was then ministered to by Melchizedek. This certainly seems to be a much better story to base a NT teaching on than Lot's failure. No one has ever said that "Lot was a man of faith".

[zeek]

Many in the church today should read this, and try to put themselves in the shoes of the mother. It ain't easy.

"I Wish I’d Had A ‘Late-Term Abortion’ Instead Of Having My Daughter"

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...b0a8731aeabbd6

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by zeek

Many in the church today should read this, and try to put themselves in the shoes of the mother. It ain't easy.

"I Wish I’d Had A ‘Late-Term Abortion’ Instead Of Having My Daughter"

I have a friend who was raped by a black man. She decided to keep the baby. Today that beautiful little girl is all grown up. She is a faithful believer in Christ, married to wonderful Christian, and she now has many beautiful girls of her own.

"What man does for evil, God meant for good, to save many alive." Genesis 50.20

Originally Posted by zeek

Many in the church today should read this!

Agreed!

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I have a friend who was raped by a black man. She decided to keep the baby. Today that beautiful little girl is all grown up. She is a faithful believer in Christ, married to wonderful Christian, and she now has many beautiful girls of her own.

"What man does for evil, God meant for good, to save many alive." Genesis 50.20

Agreed!

Pro-lifer's should also be pro-environmentalists and pro-universal health care. Why care about the pre-born and not care about the post-born? That's not really pro-life.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

Pro-lifer's should also be pro-environmentalists and pro-universal health care. Why care about the pre-born and not care about the post-born? That's not really pro-life.

And you still believe that the these abortion supporters care for the environment or your healthcare?

How many more years do you plan to live before you see thru their hypocritical facade?

When healthcare is a "right," and jobs are a "right," and housing is a "right," and food is a "right," and abortion is a "right," then we have, by definition, totalitarian socialism, and thus, no more liberties. Sorry is you don't understand this. Please study how socialism has done in countries like Venezuela, Cuba, and Nicaragua. Please study how socialism did in the soviet empire. They too had all of these "rights."

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by awareness

Pro-lifer's should also be pro-environmentalists and pro-universal health care. Why care about the pre-born and not care about the post-born? That's not really pro-life.

I am all three. I believe the Bible is too. Man was placed to tend and care for the garden, and concerning the health care the Bible says if a man doesn't want to work neither should he eat. Nothing about keeping him from having basic healthcare. I think there is plenty in the NT to lay the ground work for a universal healthcare (Basic medicare for all citizens).

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by zeek

Here is a sample of the LCM teaching on politics and the church:




According to Nee the Bible teaches that it is wrong for a Christian to hold political office. So, professing Christians should not run for or hold public office or work for the government. The business of government should be left to unbelievers.

I worked for the State of Florida for 37 years. It never occurred to me that I was acting unchristian. How about that?

Robertson is either ignorant or his religious prejudices have gotten the better of him. Buddha never claimed to be a god. Buddha wasn't a Jesus, a Savior figure, or anything like that. -- Awareness referencing Post by Zeek

I thought this thread was about the NT teaching concerning Christians working in government. If the thread is about what it means to "Act unchristian" shouldn't that be a different thread? What does Robertson's views on idolatry have to do with this thread?