end times discussion on the kingdom of christ

[jasoncran]

i have a question for preiterists.

should christians form a worldwide theocracy in order to usher in the return of christ?

if yes, how?

 

[Drew]

i have a question for preiterists.

should christians form a worldwide theocracy in order to usher in the return of christ?

if yes, how?

As you probably are aware, I believe that the Bible teaches that Jesus has already been enthroned as king of the world.

I believe that the church have the job of implementing that kingship. I believe that the best way to do that is through the tools of democracy - we should advocate for the adoption of kingdom of God values in all institutions of government. And yes, if it can be achieved democratically, I believe that we should stitch church and state back together.

But let me be clear - I am not saying that we should do away with democracy. Perhaps people will see a contradiction between committing to democracy and saying that Jesus is King. Well, we'll see.

 

[jasoncran]

you do realize that in all honestly democracies and the republic forms of goverment that the u.s has is far less efficient than a monarchy.

direct democracy is mob rule. and leads to tyranny.

we cant even agree here much less anywhere esle. thanks for the reply.

 

[Libre]

i have a question for preiterists.

should christians form a worldwide theocracy in order to usher in the return of christ?

if yes, how?

As you probably are aware, I believe that the Bible teaches that Jesus has already been enthroned as king of the world.

I believe that the church have the job of implementing that kingship. I believe that the best way to do that is through the tools of democracy - we should advocate for the adoption of kingdom of God values in all institutions of government. And yes, if it can be achieved democratically, I believe that we should stitch church and state back together.

But let me be clear - I am not saying that we should do away with democracy. Perhaps people will see a contradiction between committing to democracy and saying that Jesus is King. Well, we'll see.

What exactly do you base this belief on?

The kingdoms of the world will never be part of God's kingdom. They are directly opposed. The world operates by power over people. God's kingdom is based on service to one another.

His kingdom is spreading since Pentecost. But it is spiritual. Invisible, except for it's members. We can't be entangled in the world, for we can't serve two masters.

 

[RND]

As you probably are aware, I believe that the Bible teaches that Jesus has already been enthroned as king of the world.

I thought Jesus was in Heaven acting as our High Priest.

I believe that the church have the job of implementing that kingship.

I thought the church was responsible for presenting the Gospel of Christ.

I believe that the best way to do that is through the tools of democracy - we should advocate for the adoption of kingdom of God values in all institutions of government.

So in other words you favor the use of force, fear, intimidation and manipulation instead of using the example of love that Christ employed.

And yes, if it can be achieved democratically, I believe that we should stitch church and state back together.

Well, that explains why a "woman rides the beast." I wonder Drew, do you realize just how disastrous and how much blood was shed the last time this happened? Do you understand that this nation was founded without two things, a king and a pope?

But let me be clear - I am not saying that we should do away with democracy.

Whew, that's good! For a second I thought you weren't in favor of wolves voting with chickens as to what to have for dinner.

Perhaps people will see a contradiction between committing to democracy and saying that Jesus is King. Well, we'll see.

Or perhaps there will come a day when people think that if they kill another they will be doing God a favor.

 

[RND]

What exactly do you base this belief on?

The kingdoms of the world will never be part of God's kingdom. They are directly opposed. The world operates by power over people. God's kingdom is based on service to one another.

His kingdom is spreading since Pentecost. But it is spiritual. Invisible, except for it's members. We can't be entangled in the world, for we can't serve two masters.

Excellent thoughts.

 

[jasoncran]

he is a preiterist,that is why i'm asking. to my knowledge drew believes that christian should form a theocracy and help usher in the return of christ. this is flawed to me as we are just as easily to become corrupt and fall into the same traps as anyone else. history has shown us this.

drew is a canadian, not american

 

[RND]

drew is a canadian, not american

We hold that against him!

 

[Drew]

What exactly do you base this belief on?

I assume that you mean my belief that Jesus is presently king. If so, I could post many Biblical arguments in support of this. But to avoid simply repeating what I have already posted, perhaps you can look at my arguments in the following thread:

viewtopic.php?f=14&t=41876

The kingdoms of the world will never be part of God's kingdom. They are directly opposed. The world operates by power over people. God's kingdom is based on service to one another.

This is not a Biblical position. There are many texts that show that Jesus either is (as I believe) or at least will be king over all nations.

His kingdom is spreading since Pentecost. But it is spiritual. Invisible, except for it's members. We can't be entangled in the world, for we can't serve two masters.

This argument that the kingdom is only "spiritual" is not Biblical. The division of the world into a spiritual part and a "temporal" part is not a Jewish or a Biblical idea. It is a Greek concept that has been super-imposed on writers who never believed it.

It seems like we disagree on a lot. I have simply stated my position in this post. If you wish supporting arguments, I am happy to oblige.

 

[Libre]

he is a preiterist,that is why i'm asking. to my knowledge drew believes that christian should form a theocracy and help usher in the return of christ. this is flawed to me as we are just as easily to become corrupt and fall into the same traps as anyone else. history has shown us this.

drew is a canadian, not american

There are some dispensationalists who believe this also. Ever hear of the late Rushdooney and his followers? Some even want to bring in OT law, such as stoning adulterers and rebellious children. They I believe are extreme dominionists/restorationist. Something like that.

 

[Drew]

As you probably are aware, I believe that the Bible teaches that Jesus has already been enthroned as king of the world.

I thought Jesus was in Heaven acting as our High Priest.

I believe that the church have the job of implementing that kingship.

I thought the church was responsible for presenting the Gospel of Christ.

There is no reason to think that the categories of king and high priest are mutually exclusive.

I believe that the best way to do that is through the tools of democracy - we should advocate for the adoption of kingdom of God values in all institutions of government.

So in other words you favor the use of force, fear, intimidation and manipulation instead of using the example of love that Christ employed.

What an outrageous misrepresentation. I never posted anything of the kind. If I see more of this, you will go back on "ignore".

And yes, if it can be achieved democratically, I believe that we should stitch church and state back together.

Well, that explains why a "woman rides the beast." I wonder Drew, do you realize just how disastrous and how much blood was shed the last time this happened? Do you understand that this nation was founded without two things, a king and a pope?

The idea of the separation of church and state is not a Biblical one. Besides, you are not reading me carefully if you think that I am in favour of intituting things like a "pope" or a (human) king.

 

[Drew]

he is a preiterist,that is why i'm asking. to my knowledge drew believes that christian should form a theocracy and help usher in the return of christ. this is flawed to me as we are just as easily to become corrupt and fall into the same traps as anyone else. history has shown us this.

drew is a canadian, not american

I am not a preterist, I am a partial preterist (I think).

The scriptures are clear - Jesus is a sitting king. This is not really at issue. The real questions are (1) how should the church behave given this truth; and (2) why do so many people deny what the Bible so clearly teaches - that Jesus is King.

And I do not see what relevance my citizenhip is.

In any event, both you and Libre are seemingly not reading my post carefully. I am not, repeat not, in favour of any kind of human king, or pope. I think it is best to implement Jesus' kingship through the means of democracy.

 

[Drew]

There are some dispensationalists who believe this also. Ever hear of the late Rushdooney and his followers? Some even want to bring in OT law, such as stoning adulterers and rebellious children. They I believe are extreme dominionists/restorationist. Something like that.

Of course, I am in no way responsible for what other people believe. Please do not engage in these patently faulty "guilt by association" arguments. As other posters will know I have repeatedly asserted that the Law of Moses lies in the past.

I stand on the scriptures - Jesus is lord of the world right now. Not just of an "inner spiritual domain". That idea is entirely absent from the worldview of people like Paul and Jesus. Jesus teaches that, through His own ministry, God is becoming King of all creation. And Paul echoes that.

 

[Drew]

Here is one of many Scriptural arguments that Jesus is a presently sitting King of all the world:

From Acts 4:

On their release, Peter and John went back to their own people and reported all that the chief priests and elders had said to them. 24When they heard this, they raised their voices together in prayer to God. "Sovereign Lord," they said, "you made the heaven and the earth and the sea, and everything in them. 25You spoke by the Holy Spirit through the mouth of your servant, our father David:
" 'Why do the nations rage
and the peoples plot in vain?
26The kings of the earth take their stand
and the rulers gather together
against the Lord
and against his Anointed One

Note the context: Peter and John are praying this prayer in response to the actions of the religious leaders. Now the content of the prayer quotes directly from Psalm 2. This is not “co-incidenceâ€. Here is the material from Psalm 2:

Note that the prayer quotes Psalm 2, verses 1 and 2:

Why do the nations conspire
and the peoples plot in vain?
2 The kings of the earth take their stand
and the rulers gather together
against the LORD and against his Anointed One.

And what does Psalm 2 go on to say a few breaths later in respect to this "annointed one"?:

I have installed my King
on Zion, my holy hill

Assuming that Peter and John know their scriptures, they know that Psalm 2 describes rebellion against a sitting King. Do you really believe that the Holy Spirit would inspire the writer of Acts to record this prayer, which exactly echoes the Psalm 2 account of rebellion against a sitting King, and not expect us to draw the obvious conclusion – Jesus is indeed that very King, already installed, just as Psalm 2 declares.

The scriptures are clear and consistent. Even though (obviously) we do not have Jesus with us in person, his Kingship has been established.

 

[researcher]

The kingdoms of the world will never be part of God's kingdom.

Here's a land based kingdom...

Isa 60:10 And the sons of strangers shall build up thy walls, and their kings shall minister unto thee: for in my wrath I smote thee, but in my favour have I had mercy on thee.

Isa 60:12 For the nation and kingdom that will not serve thee shall perish; yea, those nations shall be utterly wasted.

Isa 60:16 Thou shalt also suck the milk of the Gentiles, and shalt suck the breast of kings: and thou shalt know that I the LORD am thy Saviour and thy Redeemer, the mighty One of Jacob.

Isa 60:17 For brass I will bring gold, and for iron I will bring silver, and for wood brass, and for stones iron: I will also make thy officers peace, and thine exactors righteousness.

 

[RND]

There is no reason to think that the categories of king and high priest are mutually exclusive.

Drew, I never suggested they were. The "kingdom of God" is within the heart of every believer in Jesus Christ. He acts as our High Preist in the heavenly sanctuary as our intermediary.

What an outrageous misrepresentation. I never posted anything of the kind. If I see more of this, you will go back on "ignore".

Drew, the very act of voting for something means that one has to be taken from and from that "taking" something has to be given to another. So whether you choose to believe it or not democracy is mob rule - taking from the minority in favor of what the majority wants. That is indeed ruler ship through force, fear, intimidation and/or manipulation. Jesus Christ never operated under such pretense.

The idea of the separation of church and state is not a Biblical one.

Yes it is. The theocracy that was originally the purview of God was rejected by Israel and was never revisited and it won't be revisited until Christ returns.

Dan 2:44 And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, [but] it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever. Dan 2:45 Forasmuch as thou sawest that the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, and that it brake in pieces the iron, the brass, the clay, the silver, and the gold; the great God hath made known to the king what shall come to pass hereafter: and the dream [is] certain, and the interpretation thereof sure.

Besides, you are not reading me carefully if you think that I am in favour of intituting things like a "pope" or a (human) king.

Drew, I have learned in a very short time from reading your post that you don't generally ever make yourself very clear. Drew, what do you think will happen if the church and state reunite? Will they protect our freedom to worship as we see fit? What type of church do you want to see reunited with the state? Should the state have prosecution power over those that don't want to worship the church the state favors?

Frankly, I don't think you've thought this through very well.

 

[researcher]

So in other words you favor the use of force, fear, intimidation and manipulation instead of using the example of love that Christ employed.

Isa 60:12 For the nation and kingdom that will not serve thee shall perish; yea, those nations shall be utterly wasted.

:yes

 

[RND]

So in other words you favor the use of force, fear, intimidation and manipulation instead of using the example of love that Christ employed.

Isa 60:12 For the nation and kingdom that will not serve thee shall perish; yea, those nations shall be utterly wasted.

:yes

Voting is not how we serve the Lord. Humility is however.

 

[Drew]

The "kingdom of God" is within the heart of every believer in Jesus Christ. He acts as our High Preist in the heavenly sanctuary as our intermediary.

This is not a Biblical statement - I challenge you to present any evidence at all that suggests that the "kingdom of God" is only "within us".

Drew, the very act of voting for something means that one has to be taken from and from that "taking" something has to be given to another. So whether you choose to believe it or not democracy is mob rule - taking from the minority in favor of what the majority wants. That is indeed ruler ship through force, fear, intimidation and/or manipulation. Jesus Christ never operated under such pretense.

When I refer to implementing the kingdom through democracy, I should have been more clear - my belief is that we need the kind of democracy we have in Canada and in the US - one that properly protects the rights of minorities.

The idea of the separation of church and state is not a Biblical one.

Yes it is.

I challenge you to provide any Biblical evidence for your position.

The theocracy that was originally the purview of God was rejected by Israel and was never revisited and it won't be revisited until Christ returns.

I am not sure what you mean by "theocracy". But, as many texts show, Jesus is presently in a kingship position in respect to this temporal world. There is no inconsistency with believing that Jesus is presently King and also believing that He will return.

This is the Achilles heel in the view that Jesus is not King - the Biblical texts clearly show that He is king. So that is not the question. The question is "how does the church acts as loyal subjects, given that we know Jesus is already enthroned.

 

[Drew]

Drew, I have learned in a very short time from reading your post that you don't generally ever make yourself very clear.

My posts easily surpass the norm around here for clarity and precision.

Frankly, I don't think you've thought this through very well.

The uncomfortable fact for you is that the Bible clearly has Jesus presently enthroned. That is beyond reasonable doubt. The fact that you deny the teaching of the scripture is not a problem with my thinking, it is a problem with your view of the Bible.