SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
Discussion Forum : Devotional Thoughts : Politics, Activism, and the Gospel by John MacArthur

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 )

Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri


Hi Bro. Frank,

BBQ... yes. Perhaps we should do that again sometime?

And so, as always, Christians must always be vigilant in not allowing themselves to become political pawns in power struggles.

This is indeed the challenge.

Robert Wurtz II

 2008/10/28 13:37Profile


Robert, lets do it before you go to Scotland. I will PM my Frank

P.S Anyone else who lives near KC,MO is welcome to east BBQ with us :)

 2008/10/28 13:46

Joined: 2003/11/23
Posts: 4537


Hi Robert...

I am worried that this could be a straw man too. For instance, consider these statements:

1. Who amongst us would take a job where we would have to deny that Jesus was the one and only way to heaven and that all other religions lead to eternal death? If President Bush or any elected official ever said that they would never have been elected in the first place. If Sarah Palin said that right now, she would be finished.

Do you work a "secular" job? I don't know about you, but I am not supposed to use work as the means to proclaim my faith. Yes, I can answer questions when asked. I can also share my faith in subtle (or even apparent) ways that are non-offensive. It doesn't matter if you are the President -- or the janitor at Wal-Mart, but your job is a place to work. We should pray about everything that we say. We shouldn't be surprised if we are fired for preaching while we are supposed to be working. Of course, the President has publicly shared his faith on several occasions. And most of us don't know what goes on outside the lens or recording of news cameras, thus making such a statement conjecture (at best).
2. What if it was part of your job to say what a fine faith the Muslim faith was? President Bush said that shortly after 9/11. What a slap in the face to our Heavenly Father and our Lord Jesus.

It seems that your problem is with a comment made by the President. I wonder: Did you attempt to contact him or question him about it? Does this single statement negate his faith in Christ? Was he trying to live peacefully with all men by recognizing the zeal of some muslims -- only to be attacked by those who profess to be "nonresistant?"
3. What about going to the Pope's funeral and pronouncing to the world that he was was one of the finest Christians?

Is this a direct quote or a paraphrase? Besides, I am strongly opposed to the tenants of the Roman cult -- yet I think that John Paul II probably stuck to his beliefs more than many real Christians.
4. What about making the statement that there would not be a liptmus test for Supreme court judges in the abortion issues? Again, they have to say that, they have to compromise for political expediency. Have we been called to a life of compromise? You show me a politician who would boldy and proudly say that Jesus is the one and only way to heaven and I will show you a politician I would vote for :) You show me a politican with the courage of his or her convictions and who would boldly say that , if elected, there would absolutely be a liptmus test for Supreme court judges and I would cast my vote for that person.

Really? There are a lot of people who say this, but they don't really follow through. Anyone remember Pat Roberston? He ran for President in 1988 -- and even won a couple of primaries! Of course, I disagree with Pat Robertson on any number of doctrines. But the man publicly proclaimed the faith! Did you vote for him?

Besides, abortion IS a litmus test for me -- since it is one of the greatest sins of this nation. It is a holocaust by which most other holocausts and wars pale in comparison. More children were murdered by their parents this year than in the entire war in Iraq (on all sides). In fact, more people were killed by abortion this year in America than were killed during the entire Korean or Vietnam wars (between 1950-1974).

I simply disagree with those who say that my Christianity must be confined to my physical voice. My faith in and relationship with Christ follows me everywhere. I wake up thinking about and speaking to our Lord, go through my day thinking about and speaking with Him and go to sleep talking to Him. He is with me and influences me on the job, at home and, yes, even in the voting booth as I choose what I think to be the better direction for myself, my family, my neighbors and this nation. I don't believe that God and His people are restricted or confined from such things. I also believe that God can use the systems of this world to promote the Gospel (exemplified by Paul using the Roman legal system to "appeal unto Caesar) or even the direction of the world. God uses ordinary things -- including governments and empires -- as instruments in world history. Is God guilty of concerning Himself with the affairs of this world? Is abortion a terrible evil?

I respect the views of those who hold to nonresistance. I agree with many aspects of nonresistance. However, I disagree with the extent of the application. I resist the starvation of my wife, so I work (and, in doing so, prevent myself from being "worse than an infidel"). I would push an unsuspecting stranger out of the way of a bus. I would yank a man from the path of an approaching train. I would tackle a man who was attempting to rape or kill my wife or future children. I would plead with my sister to not leave her husband and child for another man. I would vote to prevent men or women from entering office who promised to promote the destruction of society through abortion. I do not see this as "meddling" in the affairs of this world. This is the [i]prevention[/i] of harm out of love for those who are so effected.

This is not about "single issues." I weigh the issues in the balances of my mind through prayer and contemplation and then vote accordingly.

*P.S. - Ohhhh, that BBQ sounds great! Too bad I live in California. However, I do make a very good and tender BBQ brisket! It would be great to entertain believers over here -- breaking physical and spiritual bread!


 2008/10/28 14:10Profile

Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri


I am worried that this could be a straw man too.

Well, with all these straw men we could build quite a BBQ bonfire. ;-)

All of the points are well taken.

BTW, I have been going through John Macarthur's [i]Battle For the Beginning[/i] series. It is 10 sermons long. Very good for those that study apologetics and creationism.

Robert Wurtz II

 2008/10/28 14:24Profile

Joined: 2005/2/24
Posts: 2732


Hi Frank,

If you were a Christian man in downtown Alabama who owned a Restaraunt, in 1923 say, and along comes a black man and walks in your store and sits down in the "White section." The lord whispers in your heart "do not ask that man to move, serve him." Now, you have a choice to make. If it is known that you have or do serve black men, you will probably lose your business, your friends, your church membership and your place in society. What do you do? You see, this is social justice, this is cutting edge Christianity, this requires supreme faith and courage.

Again, I'm glad you are clarifying things here. I think it is important to clarify, define and differentiate the various responses a Christian might have to evil. Words like "political" and "activism" mean different things to different people. For instance, for many people, defying the segregation law by publicly serving an african american man in 1923 could be viewed as 'activism'. For you this act is a dramatization of faith, courage, and obedience to the voice of the Lord.

So apparently we are saying that there is a kind of Christian response to evil that is acceptable and proper. Perhaps where the controversy lies is in the merit and wisdom of the differing responses that historically Christians have opted to use. For instance, forming political coalitions is one type of reaction, defying Jim Crow is another type of reaction.

When we say the Church shouldn't be involved in "politics" or "activism", we are saying that the Church should not become formally and organizationally partnered with or formed into a political organization. What we are not saying, is that Christians should avoid public influence on spiritual and moral issues just because these issues have become politicalized. Both the former and the latter can make the Christian irrelevant to society.

I remember reading here on SI a couple years ago about an hispanic congregation in New York city that seemed to balance this tension very well. First off this inner city communion of saints was emphatically rooted on the premise that a Christian must be born again, and that they must come out from this world in order to witness to the world which is headed for divine judgement. Yet, it was this very separation, indeed even sectarianism, that allowed them to form a remarkable bond from which to help carry one another's social burdens and in the process becoming a witness to their community. Drug addicts had support groups, young men were told to repent of idleness, to work hard or to go to school, single mothers and widows were being taken care of, and many other wonderful activities of both spiritual and societal value were reported.

Once they were approached by a local politician wanting to obtain their influence over the community hispanic vote. He promised to provide for them many useful things for their ministry. However, the leadership of the church wisely declined the faustian bargain, telling the politician that political partnerships are fraught with unacceptable compromise.


Mike Compton

 2008/10/28 14:26Profile

Joined: 2004/2/12
Posts: 4636
Independence, Missouri


Well put MC. I think that about summarizes it.

Robert Wurtz II

 2008/10/28 15:20Profile


MC writes....

"Once they were approached by a local politician wanting to obtain their influence over the community hispanic vote. He promised to provide for them many useful things for their ministry. However, the leadership of the church wisely declined the faustian bargain, telling the politician that political partnerships are fraught with unacceptable compromise."

I can say amen to your summary brother. Here are a couple of quotes from one of my favorite preachers, Tozer.

'Any form of human government, however lofty, deals with the citizen only as long as he lives. At the graveside it bids him adieu. It may have made his journey a little easier, and, if so, all lovers of the human race will thank God for that. But in the cool earth, slaves and free men lie down together. Then what matter the talk and the turmoil? Who was right and who was wrong in this or that political squabble doesn't matter to the dead. Judgment and sin and heaven and hell are all that matter then.
—Tozer Topical Reader

"Of all the books in the world, the one most quoted, most misunderstood and most misapplied is the Bible....
Adlai Stevenson, former governor of Illinois, when going through the throes of deciding whether or not he should let his name stand for nomination for the presidency, reportedly had a deep indisposition for the office. He was quoted as having repeated the words of Christ in the garden of Gethsemane, "My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will." Now it is remotely possible that a true saint of God, in a moment of awful and heart-searching prayer, might in hushed reverence quote these words of the Savior and apply them to his or her own case. But their use at a political convention came as a dash of cold water in the face of some who heard. In the midst of endless billows of hoarse shouting, grandiose and unsupported claims of achievements, bitter and abusive denunciating of others who did not agree with them, senseless and moronic acts of childish demonstrating, "snake dancing" and horn blowing, obsequious flattering and downright lying, it is hard to see how the spirit of our Lord's solemn and tender words could have a place. All political conventions are alike, regardless of party, and should Christ appear at one of them and demand that His Lordship be acknowledged and His commandments be obeyed, He would be forthright shouted down and led from the room by the sergeant at arms. Yet His words are quoted as if they had a place there—surely a painful misapplication of Scripture."
—Tozer Topical Reader

 2008/10/28 16:17

Joined: 2006/8/25
Posts: 1658
Indiana USA


Not a reply to anyone in particular.

I have been enjoying this thread and thought I would post the complete article by John MacArthur.


Christians and Politics Part 1
John MacArthur

As Christians in the United States, it's easy to get caught up in all the political fervor. It can even be tempting to think that legislation is the key to solving the moral problems that plague American society. But is that a right perspective? John MacArthur addresses this important issue and underscores the biblical response.

There was a time (in the days of our Puritan forefathers), when almost every soul in America acknowledged the Ten Commandments as the cornerstone of ethics and morality. Today most Americans can't even name three of the Ten.

There was also a time (not so long ago) when Americans universally disapproved of homosexuality, adultery, and divorce; they believed sexual promiscuity is absolutely wrong; they regarded obscene language as inappropriate; they saw abortion as unthinkable; and they held public officials to high moral and ethical standards. Nowadays, most of the behavior society once deemed immoral is defended as an inalienable civil right.

How times and the culture have changed! The strong Christian influence and scriptural standards that shaped Western culture and American society through the end of the nineteenth century have given way to practical atheism and moral relativism. The few vestiges of Christianity in our culture are at best weak and compromising, and to an increasingly pagan society they are cultic and bizarre.

In less than fifty years' time, our nation's political leaders, legislative bodies, and courts have adopted a distinctly anti-Christian attitude and agenda. The country has swept away the Christian worldview and its principles in the name of equal rights, political correctness, tolerance, and strict separation of church and state. Gross immorality--including homosexuality, abortion, pornography, and other evils--has been sanctioned not only by society in general but in effect by the government as well. A portion of our tax dollars are now used to fund programs and government agencies that actively engage in blatant advocacy of various immoral practices.

What are Christians to do about it?

Many think this is a political problem that will not be solved without a political strategy. During the past twenty-five years, well-meaning Christians have founded a number of evangelical activist organizations and sunk millions of dollars into them in an effort to use the apparatus of politics--lobbying, legislation, demonstration, and boycott--to counteract the moral decline of American culture. They pour their energy and other resources into efforts to drum up a "Christian" political movement that will fight back against the prevailing anti-Christian culture.

But is that a proper perspective? I believe not. America's moral decline is a spiritual problem, not a political one, and its solution is the gospel, not partisan politics.

Christians and Politics, Part 2
John MacArthur

In yesterday's post, John MacArthur asked whether or not politics and legislation can provide the answer to America's moral decline. His conclusion was that "America's moral decline is a spiritual problem, not a political one, and its solution is the gospel, not partisan politics." Today's article expands on that thought, looking through history to see if political involvement has ever produced lasting transformation.


This is a lesson evangelicals ought to know from church history. Whenever the church has focused on evangelism and preaching the gospel, her influence has increased. When she has sought power by political, cultural, or military activism, she has damaged or spoiled her testimony.

The Crusades during the Middle Ages were waged for the purpose of regaining Christian control of the Holy Lands. Few believers today would argue that those efforts were fruitful. Even when the crusaders enjoyed military success, the church grew spiritually weaker and more worldly. Other religious wars and campaigns tinged with political motivation (such as the Thirty Years' War in Europe, Cromwell's revolution in England, and other skirmishes during the Reformation era) are all viewed with disapproval, or at best curiosity, by Christians today. And rightly so. The military and political ambitions of some of the Reformers turned out to be a weakness, and ultimately an impediment to the Reformation. On the other hand, the strength of the Reformation, and its enduring legacy, was derived from the fact that Reformation theology shone a bright spotlight on the way of salvation and brought clarity to the gospel.

Throughout Protestant history, those segments of the visible church that have turned their attention to social and political issues have also compromised sound doctrine and quickly declined in influence. Early modernists, for example, explicitly argued that social work and moral reform were more important than doctrinal precision, and their movement soon abandoned any semblance of Christianity whatsoever.

Today's evangelical political activists seem to be unaware of how much their methodology parallels that of liberal Christians at the start of the twentieth century. Like those misguided idealists, contemporary evangelicals have become enamored with temporal issues at the expense of eternal values. Evangelical activists in essence are simply preaching a politically conservative version of the old social gospel, emphasizing social and cultural concerns above spiritual ones.

That kind of thinking fosters the view that government is either our ally (if it supports our special agenda) or our enemy (if it remains opposed or unresponsive to our voice). The political strategy becomes the focus of everything, as if the spiritual fortunes of God's people rise or fall depending on who is in office. But the truth is that no human government can ultimately do anything either to advance or to thwart God's kingdom. And the worst, most despotic worldly government in the end cannot halt the power of the Holy Spirit or the spread of God's Word.

To gain a thoroughly biblical and Christian perspective on political involvement, we should take to heart the words of the British theologian Robert L. Ottley, delivered at Oxford University more than one hundred years ago:

The Old Testament may be studied. . .as an instructor in social righteousness. It exhibits the moral government of God as attested in his dealings with nations rather than with individuals; and it was their consciousness of the action and presence of God in history that made the prophets preachers, not merely to their countrymen, but to the world at large. . . .There is indeed significance in the fact that in spite of their ardent zeal for social reform they did not as a rule take part in political life or demand political reforms. They desired. . .not better institutions but better men. (Aspects of the Old Testament. The Bampton Lectures, 1897 [London: Longmans, 1898], 430-31)

Christians and Politics, Part 3
John MacArthur


My point is not that Christians should remain totally uninvolved in politics or civic activities and causes. They ought to express their political beliefs in the voting booth, and it is appropriate to support legitimate measures designed to correct a glaring social or political wrong. Complete noninvolvement would be contrary to what God's Word says about doing good in society: "Therefore, as we have opportunity, let us do good to all, especially to those who are of the household of faith" (Gal. 6:10; cf. Titus 3:1-2). It would also display a lack of gratitude for whatever amount of religious freedom the government allows us to enjoy. Furthermore, such pious apathy toward government and politics would reveal a lack of appreciation for the many appropriate legal remedies believers in democracies have for maintaining or improving the civil order. A certain amount of healthy and balanced concern with current trends in government and the community is acceptable, as long as we realize that that interest is not vital to our spiritual growth, our righteous testimony, or the advancement of the kingdom of Christ. Above all, the believer's political involvement should never displace the priority of preaching and teaching the gospel.

There is certainly no prohibition on believers being directly involved in government as civil servants, as some notable examples in the Old and New Testaments illustrate. Joseph in Egypt and Daniel in Babylon are two excellent models of servants God used in top governmental positions to further His kingdom. The centurion's servant (Matt. 8:5-13), Zaccheus the tax collector (Luke 19:1-10), and Cornelius the centurion (Acts 10) all continued in public service even after they experienced the healing or saving power of Christ. (As far as we know, the Roman proconsul Sergius Paulus also remained in office after he was converted [Acts 13:4-12].)

The issue again is one of priority. The greatest temporal good we can accomplish through political involvement cannot compare to what the Lord can accomplish through us in the eternal work of His kingdom. Just as God called ancient Israel (Ex. 19:6), He has called the church to be a kingdom of priests, not a kingdom of political activists. The apostle Peter instructs us, "But you are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, His own special people, that you may proclaim the praises of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light" (1 Pet. 2:9).

Jesus, as we would expect, perfectly maintained His Father's perspective on these matters even though He lived in a society that was every bit as pagan and corrupt as today's culture. In many ways it was much worse than any of us in Western nations has ever faced. Cruel tyrants and dictators ruled throughout the region, the institution of slavery was firmly entrenched--everything was the antithesis of democracy. King Herod, the Idumean vassal of Rome who ruled Samaria and Judea, epitomized the godless kind of autocratic rule: "Then Herod, when he saw that he was deceived by the wise men [concerning the whereabouts of the baby Jesus], was exceedingly angry; and he sent forth and put to death all the male children who were in Bethlehem and in all its districts, from two years old and under" (Matt. 2:16).

Few of us have experienced the sort of economic and legal oppression that the Romans applied to the Jews of Jesus' day. Tax rates were exorbitant and additional government-sanctioned abuses by the tax collectors exacerbated the financial burden on the people. The Jews in Palestine were afforded almost no civil rights and were treated as an underprivileged minority that could not make an appeal against legal injustices. As a result, some Jews were in constant outward rebellion against Rome.

Fanatical nationalists, known as Zealots, ignored their tax obligations and violently opposed the government. They believed that even recognizing a Gentile ruler was wrong (see Deuteronomy 17:15, "You may not set a foreigner over you, who is not your brother"). Many Zealots became assassins, performing acts of terrorism and violence against both the Romans and other Jews whom they viewed as traitors.

It is also true that the Roman social system was built on slavery. The reality of serious abuses of slaves is part of the historical record. Yet neither Jesus nor any of the apostles attempted to abolish slavery. Instead, they commanded slaves to be obedient and used slavery as a metaphor for believers who were to submit to their Lord and Master.

Jesus' earthly ministry took place right in the midst of that difficult social and political atmosphere. Many of His followers, including the Twelve, to varying degrees expected Him to free them from Rome's oppressive rule. But our Lord did not come as a political deliverer or social reformer. He never issued a call for such changes, even by peaceful means. Unlike many late twentieth-century evangelicals, Jesus did not rally supporters to some grandiose attempt to "capture the culture" for biblical morality or greater political and religious freedoms.
Christ, however, was not devoid of care and concern for the daily pain and hardships people endured in their personal lives. The Gospels record His great empathy and compassion for sinners. He applied those attitudes in a tangible, practical way by healing thousands of people of every kind of disease and affliction, often at great personal sacrifice to Himself.

Still, as beneficial and appreciated as His ministry to others' physical needs was, it was not Jesus' first priority. His divine calling was to speak to the hearts and souls of individual men and women. He proclaimed the good news of redemption that could reconcile them to the Father and grant them eternal life. That message far surpasses any agenda for political, social, or economic reform that can preoccupy us. Christ did not come to promote some new social agenda or establish a new moral order. He did come to establish a new spiritual order, the body of believers from throughout the ages that constitutes His church. He did not come to earth to make the old creation moral through social and governmental reform, but to make new creatures holy through the saving power of the gospel and the transforming work of the Holy Spirit. And our Lord and Savior has commanded us to continue His ministry, with His supreme priorities in view, with the goal that we might advance His kingdom: "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age" (Matt. 28:18-20).

In the truest sense, the moral, social, and political state of a people is irrelevant to the advance of the gospel. Jesus said that His kingdom was not of this world (John 18:36).

Christians and Politics, Part 4
John MacArthur


We can't protect or expand the cause of Christ by human political and social activism, no matter how great or sincere the efforts. Ours is a spiritual battle waged against worldly ideologies and dogmas arrayed against God, and we achieve victory over them only with the weapon of Scripture. The apostle Paul writes: "For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war according to the flesh. For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal but mighty in God for pulling down strongholds, casting down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, bringing every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ" (2 Cor. 10:3-5).

We must reject all that is ungodly and false and never compromise God's standards of righteousness. We can do that in part by desiring the improvement of society's moral standards and by approving of measures that would conform government more toward righteousness. We do grieve over the rampant indecency, vulgarity, lack of courtesy and respect for others, deceitfulness, self-indulgent materialism, and violence that is corroding society. But in our efforts to support what is good and wholesome, reject what is evil and corrupt, and make a profoundly positive impact on our culture, we must use God's methods and maintain scriptural priorities.

God is not calling us to wage a culture war that would seek to transform our countries into "Christian nations." To devote all, or even most, of our time, energy, money, and strategy to putting a façade of morality on the world or over our governmental and political institutions is to badly misunderstand our roles as Christians in a spiritually lost world.

God has above all else called the church to bring sinful people to salvation through Jesus Christ. Even as the apostle Paul described his mission to unbelievers, so it is the primary task of all Christians to reach out to the lost "to open their eyes, in order to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and an inheritance among those who are sanctified by faith in Me [Christ]" (Acts 26:18; cf. Ex. 19:6; 1 Pet. 2:5, 9). If we do not evangelize the lost and make disciples of new converts, nothing else we do for people--no matter how beneficial it seems--is of any eternal consequence. Whether a person is an atheist or a theist, a criminal or a model citizen, sexually promiscuous and perverse or strictly moral and virtuous, a greedy materialist or a gracious philanthropist--if he does not have a saving relationship to Christ, he is going to hell. It makes no difference if an unsaved person is for or against abortion, a political liberal or a conservative, a prostitute or a police officer, he will spend eternity apart from God unless he repents and believes the gospel.

When the church takes a stance that emphasizes political activism and social moralizing, it always diverts energy and resources away from evangelization. Such an antagonistic position toward the established secular culture invariably leads believers to feel hostile not only to unsaved government leaders with whom they disagree, but also antagonistic toward the unsaved residents of that culture--neighbors and fellow citizens they ought to love, pray for, and share the gospel with. To me it is unthinkable that we become enemies of the very people we seek to win to Christ, our potential brothers and sisters in the Lord.

Author John Seel pens words that apply in principle to Christians everywhere and summarize well the believer's perspective on political involvement:

A politicized faith not only blurs our priorities, but weakens our loyalties. Our primary citizenship is not on earth but in heaven. ... Though few evangelicals would deny this truth in theory, the language of our spiritual citizenship frequently gets wrapped in the red, white and blue. Rather than acting as resident aliens of a heavenly kingdom, too often we sound [and act] like resident apologists for a Christian America. ... Unless we reject the false reliance on the illusion of Christian America, evangelicalism will continue to distort the gospel and thwart a genuine biblical identity.....

American evangelicalism is now covered by layers and layers of historically shaped attitudes that obscure our original biblical core. (The Evangelical Pulpit [Grand Rapids: Baker, 1993], 106-7)

By means of faithful preaching and godly living, believers are to be the conscience of whatever nation they reside in. You can confront the culture not with the political and social activism of man's wisdom, but with the spiritual power of God's Word. Using temporal methods to promote legislative and judicial change, and resorting to external efforts of lobbying and intimidation to achieve some sort of "Christian morality" in society is not our calling--and has no eternal value. Only the gospel rescues sinners from sin, death, and hell.


 2008/10/28 17:05Profile

Joined: 2008/10/27
Posts: 6


As Paul Harvey would say ....

Now for the rest of the story ....

It's what came to mind after watching this Post being debated and then the article in full put up ....helps to have the whole article don't you think ....when you are debating a man's opinion?


 2008/10/28 17:17Profile

Joined: 2006/2/11
Posts: 2895
Philadelphia PA

 Re: no eternal value

Hi again everyone,

The greatest temporal good we can accomplish through political involvement cannot compare to what the Lord can accomplish through us in the eternal work of His kingdom.

But how exactly is this to be judged(1 Co 4:5)? And who determines the value of our actions here and where exactly the boundaries are of influence of the Kingdom of Heaven?

Do people somehow enter into the Kingdom of God in some sort of spirtual vaccum closed off from any contact or involvement with this world?

The abolotion of slavery, was it merely a [b]temporal good[/b], with [u]no[/u] spiritual significance? Who is it that can rightfully judge the eternal value of something done in this earth, no matter the sphere it is done in?

In the forward to Tortured for Christ, Tom White writes this regarding the definition of a Martyr:

'Many today believe that a martyr is simply someone who dies for his faith. Unfortunately, by this definition we have lost the true significance and depth of martyrdom. St. Augustine once stated, “The cause, not the suffering, makes a genuine mar­tyr.” In his play Murder in the Cathedral, T. S. Eliot describes a martyr as one “who has become an instrument of God, who has lost his will in the will of God, not lost it but found it, for he has found freedom in submission to God. The martyr no longer desires anything for himself, not even the glory of ­martyrdom.”'

Later, in the first chapter of the book, Pastor Wurmbrand writes of some remarkable people:

"When I was kidnapped by police and kept imprisoned for years in strictest secrecy, a Christian doctor actually became a member of the secret police to learn my whereabouts! As a secret police doctor, he had access to the cells of all prisoners and hoped to find me. All of his friends shunned him, thinking he had become a Communist. To go around dressed in the uniform of the torturers is a much greater sacrifice than to wear the uniform of a prisoner.

The doctor found me in a deep, dark cell and sent word that I was alive. He was the first friend to discover me during my initial eight-and-a-half years in prison! Due to him, word was spread that I was alive and, when prisoners were released during the Eisenhower-Khrushchev “thaw” in 1956, Christians clamored for my release and I was freed for a short time. If it had not been for this doctor, who joined the secret police spe­cif­ically to find me, I would never have been released. I would still be in prison—or in a grave—today.

Using their position in the secret police, these members of the Underground Church warned us many times and were of tremendous help. The Underground Church in Communist countries has men in the secret police today who protect and warn Christians of impending danger. Some are high up in gov­ernment circles, keeping their faith in Christ secret and helping us greatly. One day in heaven they can publicly proclaim Christ, whom they serve secretly now."

Christopher Joel Dandrow

 2008/10/28 20:01Profile

Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Affiliate Disclosure | Privacy Policy