A Wake Up Call - God is Speaking to Us

[OBW]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Do you agree with the teaching that Christians are going to rule over cities in the next age?

If you do agree then do you agree that Christians are being trained to rule in this age?

One other question, what part of "of the people, by the people and for the people" exonerates you from being responsible?

I agree that there is an aspect of ruling in the next age. Or at least something that is best described as such.

But there is nothing in what I can read in scripture that indicates that our "efforts" here on earth are designed to train us for the age to come in that manner. I do not agree that we are simply being trained to "rule," especially in this age. In fact, I find plenty to tell me that we are not here for this world, to rule it or otherwise, other than to be salt and light, not movers and shakers.

As for the general statement that the government of the US is "of the people, by the people, and for the people" I do not find that I am responsible, but rather invited to participate. And even to the extent that I might take on responsibility with respect to some part of it, that does not make the "spiritual" aspect of that part my "responsibility" outside of my own personal exercise of spirituality.

Phrasing your argument as you did might work on the simpleminded. But it presupposes that Christians in America are being groomed to rule over cities. I guess all the rest of the poor Christian schmucks in the world are being groomed to rule over hovels and cattle stalls. They surely will never get the opportunity to be part of "of, by, and for the people," therefore lacking in training for ruling a city.

Or is it the character of those who will eventually rule rather than training in ruling that matters?

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by OBW

I agree that there is an aspect of ruling in the next age. Or at least something that is best described as such.

But there is nothing in what I can read in scripture that indicates that our "efforts" here on earth are designed to train us for the age to come in that manner. I do not agree that we are simply being trained to "rule," especially in this age. In fact, I find plenty to tell me that we are not here for this world, to rule it or otherwise, other than to be salt and light, not movers and shakers.

As for the general statement that the government of the US is "of the people, by the people, and for the people" I do not find that I am responsible, but rather invited to participate. And even to the extent that I might take on responsibility with respect to some part of it, that does not make the "spiritual" aspect of that part my "responsibility" outside of my own personal exercise of spirituality.

Phrasing your argument as you did might work on the simpleminded. But it presupposes that Christians in America are being groomed to rule over cities. I guess all the rest of the poor Christian schmucks in the world are being groomed to rule over hovels and cattle stalls. They surely will never get the opportunity to be part of "of, by, and for the people," therefore lacking in training for ruling a city.

Or is it the character of those who will eventually rule rather than training in ruling that matters?

Fair enough, in this age Christians are supposed to be Light and Salt, let's work with that.

I thought Cahn's message was both light and salt.

Please explain why it you thought it wasn't.

The United States has a constitution which explains how laws are made in this country. For 7 men to short circuit that and say that one of the inalienable rights mentioned in the constitution is the right to kill your baby and keep that private is outrageous. There is no "right to an abortion" in the constitution. Why isn't shining a light on this considered "light"?

Salt kills germs. Isn't creeping fornication a germ? Isn't a society that exterminates 50 billion babies a "germ". Why shouldn't a word against this be considered "salt"?

[alwayslearning]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Salt kills germs. Isn't creeping fornication a germ? Isn't a society that exterminates 50 billion babies a "germ". Why shouldn't a word against this be considered "salt"?

That wasn't the only part of his message but OK...how would YOU write the laws against fornication and abortion? Please give us something concrete to work with!

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

It is cut and dry. There is no constitutional protection for abortion. Therefore the constitution is very clear, this is a matter for the States to decide. Each state should pass their own law. The Supreme court is not a legislative body, and the idea that abortion is protected by the constitution as a right to privacy is as ugly a lie as you could dredge up from the pit of hell.

Every state already has laws in place. If Roe ever were overturned, then all these state laws would once again be in effect.

[OBW]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

I thought Cahn's message was both light and salt.

Please explain why it you thought it wasn't.

It doesn't qualify because it is not for the world, but for the church. But as such it is misdirecting us toward something that doesn't exist. It is aimed at eliminating certain sins from the public so that America can once again be blessed. (I disagree that the kind of position of being blessed ever existed, but that is his position.)

Salt and light is about us being God's image on the earth. Whether America is what Cahn thinks it ought to be, or is more like China in the darkest days of Communism, or Iran right now is totally irrelevant to us being salt and light.

If there is a need to repent and pray, it is for us to repent and pray concerning ourselves. We cannot repent for others or pray them into righteousness any more than we can pray them out of a Catholic purgatory. We can pray that the Spirit will work on people to open their eyes.

But if our goal is a blessed America, then it is a misguided goal. It makes America an idol. The idea seems so appealing. But it is making the improvement of our natural lives the center of our call to pray. If we get moved to pray beyond our own pitiful state, we should be praying for our willingness to live the justice that is commanded of us.

Instead, we are putting our prayer and efforts into fighting the sins of the world like abortions, gay marriage, etc. As I have said before, we are happy to suggest in song that they can come to God "Just as I Am" but we are otherwise going to insist that they straighten up or go to jail.

Now that is a position that exemplifies the Christianity that is demanding the return of the "Christian nation." It is not the Christianity that I believe we are called to by God and his Word.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by OBW

It doesn't qualify because it is not for the world, but for the church.

What? When the Lord said "let your light shine" that was for the church and not for the world? When He said to the disciples "you are a light set on a hill" that was for the church to see not the world? Likewise with the salt? You appear to have a completely different Bible from me. Did I misunderstand? Did you misspeak? Please explain.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by OBW

If there is a need to repent and pray, it is for us to repent and pray concerning ourselves. We cannot repent for others or pray them into righteousness any more than we can pray them out of a Catholic purgatory. We can pray that the Spirit will work on people to open their eyes.

You can't have it both ways. If you want the US to be a free democracy with a government by the people, for the people and of the people. Then the people must bear responsibility for that government and those laws. You and I are responsible for the laws of this land. Now, if like Ghandi you were light and salt you are not responsible for the actions of British imperialism. You are responsible for your response to those actions.

I have never suggested. nor did Cahn, that we are to repent on behalf of the director of Planned Parenthood. You have created this pathetic little straw man.