QC and SG accountability (11/11/16)
As expected, we spent time talking about Trump's victory in the US elections. We noted that Scripture calls us to
1. Submit to civil authorities (Ro 13:1-7, 1 Pe 2:13)
2. Honour them (1 Pe 2:17, Ro 13:7) and
2. Pray for our political leaders (1 Ti 2:1)
And yet, Acts 5:29 reminds us that the laws of God must always take precedence over the laws of men when there is a conflict. And yet, Christians must take pains to be the best citizens possible excepting when we are compelled and restricted by the laws of the land to go against Scripture.
We moved on to address Kevin's question: how should we regard events and movements in the past like the Crusades, or the Inquisition, or the conquistadors who did what they did in the name of Christ? We said that their actions did not reflect Scriptural principles, and that we should be most careful when engaging in political action not to proceed on the basis of preference and expediency without clear Biblical warrant.
What then of the Israelites' killing of the Canaanites in the Promised Land? We noted that this was a direct command from God, not something the Israelites aimed for on their own. On God's part this was not an impulsive, petty act, but the culmination of a 400-year period of patience with the sin of the Canaanites (Gen 15:16). The Israelites were, in that place and time, the way for God to exercise His righteous judgement. With the cessation of Israel as a political state/theocracy, the people of God are no longer called to go to war. God is the One who can judge all nations, and He did not have a double standard for His own people, who eventually were destroyed and deported by foreign powers. Furthermore, there were restrictions placed on the kind of warfare the Israelites could engage in (e.g. Dt 20:1-20). There were individuals in Canaan who came to faith and were spared (e.g. Rahab). This therefore is not genocide or ethnic cleansing in the way that we view these events in the modern day sense.
We spent time on the cliche: "God loves you unconditionally". Scripture does speak of the love of God that was set upon us before our birth (Ro 9:11), when were were 'dead' in our sins (Eph 2:3), and enemies with God (Ro 5:8-10). This is a marvelous truth. And yet God certainly does not love everyone unconditionally, for some will be saved, while others go to hell. The alternative would be to embrace unversalism, which regards hell as remedial because God's love is so great that all will be saved. God does not desire us to go on sinning, and persistent sin in a so-called Christian's life may be a sign that that individual is not truly saved (1 Jn 5:18). So it is generally unhelpful for us to quote this phrase to non-Christians and sinning Christians alike.
1. Submit to civil authorities (Ro 13:1-7, 1 Pe 2:13)
2. Honour them (1 Pe 2:17, Ro 13:7) and
2. Pray for our political leaders (1 Ti 2:1)
And yet, Acts 5:29 reminds us that the laws of God must always take precedence over the laws of men when there is a conflict. And yet, Christians must take pains to be the best citizens possible excepting when we are compelled and restricted by the laws of the land to go against Scripture.
We moved on to address Kevin's question: how should we regard events and movements in the past like the Crusades, or the Inquisition, or the conquistadors who did what they did in the name of Christ? We said that their actions did not reflect Scriptural principles, and that we should be most careful when engaging in political action not to proceed on the basis of preference and expediency without clear Biblical warrant.
What then of the Israelites' killing of the Canaanites in the Promised Land? We noted that this was a direct command from God, not something the Israelites aimed for on their own. On God's part this was not an impulsive, petty act, but the culmination of a 400-year period of patience with the sin of the Canaanites (Gen 15:16). The Israelites were, in that place and time, the way for God to exercise His righteous judgement. With the cessation of Israel as a political state/theocracy, the people of God are no longer called to go to war. God is the One who can judge all nations, and He did not have a double standard for His own people, who eventually were destroyed and deported by foreign powers. Furthermore, there were restrictions placed on the kind of warfare the Israelites could engage in (e.g. Dt 20:1-20). There were individuals in Canaan who came to faith and were spared (e.g. Rahab). This therefore is not genocide or ethnic cleansing in the way that we view these events in the modern day sense.
We spent time on the cliche: "God loves you unconditionally". Scripture does speak of the love of God that was set upon us before our birth (Ro 9:11), when were were 'dead' in our sins (Eph 2:3), and enemies with God (Ro 5:8-10). This is a marvelous truth. And yet God certainly does not love everyone unconditionally, for some will be saved, while others go to hell. The alternative would be to embrace unversalism, which regards hell as remedial because God's love is so great that all will be saved. God does not desire us to go on sinning, and persistent sin in a so-called Christian's life may be a sign that that individual is not truly saved (1 Jn 5:18). So it is generally unhelpful for us to quote this phrase to non-Christians and sinning Christians alike.
Comments
Post a Comment