How should Christians respond to the various "agendas" of the world...

[handy]

ReecesPieces put forth a thoughtful post, but one on a certain subject that is currently under a moratorium due to the overwhelming amount of threads on that particular subject.

This thread isn't meant to be a end-run around the moratorium, but rather a place where we can discuss the principles that Reeces brought up in that other thread.

How should we as Christians respond to the various "agendas" of the world. There are many out there including feminism, progressive politics, abortion, etc. etc. etc.

I'm thinking of various political causes that run counter to what the Bible teaches us Christians to do.

In her thread, Reeces stated: "The only people who I feel we should be allowed to correct, or form an opinion about is our brothers & sisters in the faith. Is it not our duty to correct each other in the faith? Even with this we should approach each other prayerfully with love!"

I agree. I don't see it as part of our "job" to condemn non-Christians for being... sinners in need of a savior. Rather, our job is to share God's love and the gospel with them.

I also see that, often times, when we Christians get caught up in fighting against the various agendas that are out there, it impacts our ability to share the gospel.

As for me, when I have a vote in the matter, I vote pro-life, pro-traditional marriage, etc... all in line with my Biblical views. I just don't see where I have either the right or responsibility to try to force others to these views.

What about it? How should we respond to these issues?

 

[ReesesPieces]

Thanks Handy for starting this thread first off!

Thru much prayer & seeing each other as Children of God or as our former selves, to bring it to a much more personal level. Treat each person as you would want to be treated. With love & respect. I'm in no way saying you have to tolerate how a person choices to live there life but for the brief moments you have to encounter that person(s) show love...its amazing what a little kindness can do.

Romans 2:11
For there is no respect of persons with God.


Also to adress a point made in the other thread.

ALL SIN at first looks like something harmless That is indeed the trick of the enemy!

How many times have you heard people say "Oh a little wont hurt", or "Every ones doing it" " Im not hurting anybody"

then the next thing you know a little has turned into a whole lot & were sitting there wondering how in the world did we get ourselves into this situation! I have been there a few times myself. Everything that looks good isnt good at all & its best to just stay away from the whole lot

I like to think of it in terms of cute little baby animals at the zoo...tigers for instance. When they are first born they are practically harmless but as they grow & grow there true nature comes out next thing you know there eating people. This is the same way with sin at first we say ohhh its harmless just a little taste....and we know the end of it all is Destruction & death.

Lets sow seeds of loving kindness & pray God deep roots into there hearts of stone & renews there spirit thru Jesus Christ our redeemer.

Lift Jesus up & HE will draw all men unto him!

 

[Drew]

I don't see it as part of our "job" to condemn non-Christians for being... sinners in need of a savior. Rather, our job is to share God's love and the gospel with them.

I also see that, often times, when we Christians get caught up in fighting against the various agendas that are out there, it impacts our ability to share the gospel.

What, actually, is "the gospel"? Despite what many may think, I believe the Bible is clear that the term "gospel" does not, at least directly, denote the concept of "personal salvation through faith in Jesus".

Instead, the term "gospel" denotes the declaration that Jesus is lord of all creation, including this present material world and all its institutions.

In keeping with this, I believe it is indeed the responsibility of all Christians to declare this to the world: There is a new king and all should pledge obedience to this king.

Of course, we should do this with love. But I think the scriptures are clear: the kingdom of God is here right now and the duty of the church is to try to reshape society to this kingdom model. Lots of people will not like this, including, of course, those with agendas that are at variance with the kingdom model the Bible presents.

But, I suggest, we are called to do this anyway.

 

[Drew]

Let me put this another way. We all appear to agree that there are people out there trying to re-structure the world according to a number of "agendas".

Why should we not be in there fighting for the kingdom agenda? Is it not "good enough" to inform the way the world works? Why do so many Christians appear to want to "concede the battle" to these agendas that work against the kingdom that Jesus has initiated.

And by the way, Jesus never said "my kingdom is not of this world" in the sense that many people take this statement. As I can show (and have repeatedly shown), the proper reading of this is "my kingdom is not from this world - it is based on entirely different principles than all the kingdoms that have arisen throughout history".

Jesus is certainly not denying what Paul affirms: Jesus is to be understood as a replacement for Ceasar as lord of this present material order. The church needs to correct itself on this matter, and soon.

 

[farouk]

Not sure I entirely agree. Because as a dispensationalist, I would see the coming of the Lord in 1 Thess. 4 as being about taking the church out of the world, which is reserved to judgment, rather than about the Lord coming to the earth next, in order to replace the secular rulers, with Christians as supporters.

 

[ColdBlooded]

Staff is not going to allow this thread to be hijacked even a little bit Edited
When talking about society as a whole, it's really nothing more than popular opinion, and considering the majority of the world is christian, you guys have a pretty firm hold on what stays and goes.

The problem is that Christians are not just one massive group that all think alike.
There are moderates and evangelicals and everything in between which differ so much on popular issues.

I want a peaceful world where everyone is happy, but that wont happen.

I don't like how Christians push for everyone to abide by their rules and customs because many of those ideals conflict with what we know as fact. But just how I have the right to push for peace and equality, you have the right to push for your agendas and ideals.

It's just free speech, and anyone can have the say.

 

[DarkHorseRising]

An "agenda" is (in practical terms) just any movement, ideology, or series of works that someone disagrees with. If you don't agree with it, you would also have an agenda, just one that runs counter to the first. So treat it like anything else in life. Avoid it, and if you feel strongly enough about it, discuss the issue and your reasoning behind it.

 

[Atothetheist]

Not going to turn the thread.reba

Wow...... Editted out, Alright then.....

Nothing to do here.

 

[reba]

Drew the way i read you and Handy the goal is the same. And getting there is almost the same....

I wish we were more united then we are.... I believe there will be a time of persecution coming to , shell we say, western world. That persecution will unite those in Christ. I believe history has shown us this...

We should treat the unsaved sinner as Christ would have....I needed a 2by4 to get my attention some dont Jesus would have known what each needed..If we are "prayed up" we as individuals should have a good grasp for the 'other ' individual.

We should fight the nonchristian agendas with every thing we have. With congress and parliament with campaigning etc. Not to force Jesus Christ and John 3:16 down someones throat.But sorta like living with in the Ten commandants no steeling, lying, adultery not a bad set of rules for life....

 

[evenifigoalone]

Differently than we as a whole do, apparently. We are accused of being hateful because of a lot of those things.
Though, to be fair, I think a lot of it is overreacting on their part, too. The cry of "hate! hate!" is something they use because it's effective in getting people to agree with them--however wrong they may be with the accusations.
Certain extremists (ie, those who murder abortion doctors) definitely aren't helping.

That said, I say we should ideally respond by going out of our way to show the opposite. That we love and care about them, despite not approving of their actions.


Things like abortion...well, people are entitled to their own opinions, but I just don't think it should be acceptable or legal. (Not trying to spark a debate on that.)
Other things I think should apply to Christians, and not be forced on others to obey commandments they don't believe in.
It is a rather tough call.


But in opposing certain things, don't just oppose it and go around telling people how wrong it is. Show that you care. An example would be those pregnancy clinics that try to discourage abortions, but at the same time show love and support for the expectant mother, rather than anger.

Too often Christians are viewed as angry, judgmental, and hateful. (And some are, unfortunately.) Prove them wrong.

 

[Brightmorningstar]

It should be fairly obvious from this thread and the threads closed that it is getting increasingly difficult for Christians to respond to agendas of the world where the world doesnt want to allow it. (and yes it places Christian forums in a difficult position)

I completely agree with Drew, handy, Reeces, Questdriven and farouk...

Is it not our duty to correct each other in the faith?

Spot on. Thats what the NT epistles do much of the time, thats exactly what 2 Tim 3:16 says.

Even with this we should approach each other prayerfully with love!"

Spot on.

As for me, when I have a vote in the matter, I vote pro-life, pro-traditional marriage, etc... all in line with my Biblical views. I just don't see where I have either the right or responsibility to try to force others to these views.

I agree, but should what you vote for within the democratic process be passed as law, it will force behaviour on others that they dont want, and vice versa.

I favour Drew's view slightly more than farouk's concerning the ways and thinking of the world is not the same as the Kingdom, but the NT shows Jesus and the disciples did not expect everyone in the world to agree, and primarily witnessed to the individual rather than the authorities ; democracy does however give Christians the chance to fashion the behaviour of the world.

The non-believer however cannot distinguish between false teaching and Biblical interpretation, so the church cannot afford to have false teaching. It isnt helped because when the non-believer says

The problem is that Christians are not just one massive group that all think alike.

they actually are apart from the false teachers. And as a Christian I can fully endorse all written by my fellow Christians Drew, Reeces, handy, Questdriven and farouk so far on this thread.

As coldblooded shows, the world is happy to have democracy as long as the values they want get voted in.

 

[Grazer]

Are we called to be an example to the world or called to set the agenda that the world must follow and agree with?

I have my own views on issues and if this puts me in conflict with a fellow Christian, so be it. I put my reasoning across, I listen to their reasoning and adapt from there if necessary. You will not get this world to universally agree to anything. But everyone has an agenda, its the nature of having a worldview.

 

[Brightmorningstar]

Grazer,

Are we called to be an example to the world or called to set the agenda that the world must follow and agree with?

I should have thought it was now obvious, we are to set an example, but democratic government and laws set the agenda the wordl must follow and agree with.
As to your point, democratic government wont even get everyone to agree.

 

[Drew]

Not sure I entirely agree. Because as a dispensationalist, I would see the coming of the Lord in 1 Thess. 4 as being about taking the church out of the world, which is reserved to judgment, rather than about the Lord coming to the earth next, in order to replace the secular rulers, with Christians as supporters.

As you might expect, I disagree. I believe the scriptures do not teach a rapture (do you realize that the notion of a rapture has only arisen in the last 200 years or so - the early church, I am told, had no concept of a rapture).

 

[Grazer]

Grazer,

I should have thought it was now obvious, we are to set an example, but democratic government and laws set the agenda the wordl must follow and agree with.
As to your point, democratic government wont even get everyone to agree.

Exactly but we have to obey the laws of the government do we not?

 

[Drew]

I don't like how Christians push for everyone to abide by their rules and customs because many of those ideals conflict with what we know as fact. But just how I have the right to push for peace and equality,.....

False either / or. Or at least it is great judgement on the church if you are being objective (and no one is really objective) in your implication that Christians are not for "peace and equality".

If there is anything people like Jesus and Paul were clear about, it is "peace and equality". So either you are not accurately characterizing the record of the church or the church has not followed its vocation to create a world of peace and equality.

 

[Drew]

We should fight the nonchristian agendas with every thing we have.

We are in violent agreement on this point.

 

[Drew]

As coldblooded shows, the world is happy to have democracy as long as the values they want get voted in.

I agree, if I understood you properly. Some people object to what they see as Christians "forcing our values down their throats". Well, if, in a democratic society, Christans use the ballot box to change the world to fit what they see as the ideal model of how a society is to be run, how is that force?

The point is this: Society needs to be ordered, and somebody's values are going to be used. Christians should not be bullied (or tricked) into thinking that our values have any less "right" to compete for broad adoption in society than anybody else's.

And note: In Great Britain, it was Christians who arguably led the movement that achieved the abolition of slavery. Was this an example of the church forcing our values down other people's throats?

 

[Drew]

But everyone has an agenda, its the nature of having a worldview.

I think this is a brilliant, important point, and very well-expressed. I cannot think of any way to add to this.

 

[ColdBlooded]

Everyone wants control. It's simply part of a social hierarchy that our society conforms too. Whoever is in control, makes the rules.

That is why society favors liberalism, not because it is good or bad, but simply that the majority believe this to be the best.

That isn't necessarily good or bad, just a stable constant.

There are things like vocal minorities that can distort perceived ideas about who thinks what and how many, but it matters little.

People have free will to choose, and therefor will have different opinions on how things are to be controlled.

Speaking specifically on religious agendas. Teaching that alter the way you think or the decisions you make is just another variable on how things are run.
Again, neither good or bad because what changes is different and those decisions made can be seen as positive or negative depending on who is looking in.

You have an agenda and so do I. So does everyone else.