Really appreciative of what Dean had to say around the 21:00 mark. In my experience the progressive view of pacifism held by groups such as MCUSA and some Society of Friends groups make pacifism/peacemaking out to be some mission to be accomplished through the means of politics. Because there is no clear sense of two kingdoms, there is no apparent alternative to the political world in order to achieve their vision of peace. This is why there is a constant obsession with political justice and political advocacy in those circles. This is something I have thought personally for a long time and it was interesting to hear Dean articulate the same idea in this video.
Early Christians anticipated the imminent return of Christ, given this eschatological expectation it is understandable that they would be less involved with government issues. When the parousia did not occur in the time expected, Christians began to reassess their engagement with the affairs of the world including their involvement with state matters.
@vinceplanetta8415 Could you point to primary sources that show that the early Christians didn't involve themselves in government because they thought Jesus would be back too soon for that to matter? I'm not aware of any such sources. It's also not clear to me why that belief about the parousia would lead to that belief about politics. -Lynn
@@SoundFaithChannel Hi Lynn, You're right; there aren't explicit primary sources showing early Christians avoided government involvement solely due to the imminent return of Christ. However, the apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 7:29-31 reflects this mindset: "From now on those who have wives should live as if they do not... those who deal with the world as though they had no dealings with it. For the present form of this world is passing away." The expectation of Jesus' immediate return and the establishment of God's Kingdom naturally led to a focus away from worldly affairs. However, now, 2000 years later, with the delay of the parousia, it's understandable why Christians feel more inclined to participate in government. There should be humility and recognition of the historical context that shapes these views. While those who choose to remain separate from worldly affairs have that right and scriptural and historical support from the early Church, there should also be an understanding why others do not share this view.
@vinceplanetta8415 Yes, I agree that there's no evidence that the early church avoided government for that reason, so I'd suggest that's not a good argument for government involvement today. -Lynn
The Amish votes swung Pennsylvania. There’s far far greater issues to be concerned w/ and to attest this to being in any way of salvific import is only reasoned upon very faulty biblical reasoning.
The Bible says that God sets up rulers and takes them down. Nothing you vote for will change this. Also, God is going to tear down all of these kingdoms and set up his own as per Daniel 2:44. So whoever wins is not for the betterment of the country but for the further tearing down of this system.
@nomadicrecovery1586 Just a note. Anabaptists historically have not voted, and their belief doesn't come from the JWs. So this is not a left-over JW belief. -Lynn
Really appreciative of what Dean had to say around the 21:00 mark. In my experience the progressive view of pacifism held by groups such as MCUSA and some Society of Friends groups make pacifism/peacemaking out to be some mission to be accomplished through the means of politics. Because there is no clear sense of two kingdoms, there is no apparent alternative to the political world in order to achieve their vision of peace. This is why there is a constant obsession with political justice and political advocacy in those circles. This is something I have thought personally for a long time and it was interesting to hear Dean articulate the same idea in this video.
I appreciate you mentioning Shane Claiborne and John MacArthur. I was pulled into both directions.
Early Christians anticipated the imminent return of Christ, given this eschatological expectation it is understandable that they would be less involved with government issues. When the parousia did not occur in the time expected, Christians began to reassess their engagement with the affairs of the world including their involvement with state matters.
@vinceplanetta8415 Could you point to primary sources that show that the early Christians didn't involve themselves in government because they thought Jesus would be back too soon for that to matter? I'm not aware of any such sources.
It's also not clear to me why that belief about the parousia would lead to that belief about politics. -Lynn
This type of speculation with no primary or secondary sources, is exactly is what they do with explaining away the head covering for woman
@@SoundFaithChannel
Hi Lynn,
You're right; there aren't explicit primary sources showing early Christians avoided government involvement solely due to the imminent return of Christ. However, the apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 7:29-31 reflects this mindset: "From now on those who have wives should live as if they do not... those who deal with the world as though they had no dealings with it. For the present form of this world is passing away."
The expectation of Jesus' immediate return and the establishment of God's Kingdom naturally led to a focus away from worldly affairs. However, now, 2000 years later, with the delay of the parousia, it's understandable why Christians feel more inclined to participate in government. There should be humility and recognition of the historical context that shapes these views. While those who choose to remain separate from worldly affairs have that right and scriptural and historical support from the early Church, there should also be an understanding why others do not share this view.
@vinceplanetta8415 Yes, I agree that there's no evidence that the early church avoided government for that reason, so I'd suggest that's not a good argument for government involvement today. -Lynn
Bercot grounds his arguments in anecdotal history rather in pure scripture.
You guys gotta do something about production quality (like take it from a 2/10 to a 5/10). Come on, it ain't THAT hard.
Why?
The Amish votes swung Pennsylvania. There’s far far greater issues to be concerned w/ and to attest this to being in any way of salvific import is only reasoned upon very faulty biblical reasoning.
This is pretty confusing to say not to vote.
Protestants pick convenient church father quotes and ignore everything else they say that doesn't agree with their theology. .
@David-zm3wk If you feel they are cherry-picking quotes on this subject, what are the quotes that they are missing? -Lynn
left over JW nonsense. We can and DO vote
The Bible says that God sets up rulers and takes them down. Nothing you vote for will change this. Also, God is going to tear down all of these kingdoms and set up his own as per Daniel 2:44. So whoever wins is not for the betterment of the country but for the further tearing down of this system.
Depends which kingdom you are loyal to. Many try to be loyal to both.
@nomadicrecovery1586 Just a note. Anabaptists historically have not voted, and their belief doesn't come from the JWs. So this is not a left-over JW belief. -Lynn
Yea I noticed you also live a worldly life, I am not taking your advice