[soundofgrace] RE: [soundofgrace] NCT and Politics

Message: < previous - next > : Reply : Subscribe : Cleanse
Home   : October 2006 : Group Archive : Group : All Groups

From: "Jeff Scanlan" <jscanlan@...>
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 19:46:54 +1000

________________________________________
From: Bruce Woodford [mailto:bwood4d@...] 
Sent: Monday, 23 October 2006 12:20 PM
To: soundofgrace@...
Subject: RE: [soundofgrace] NCT and Politics

Hi Jeff, 
Just a few comments below in black to what you wrote...
There are several things that I could say about what you have written and I
will try to say some of these such that our discussion here can be
constructive.
To begin with I was challenging your denigration of democracy as being
little more than anti-God 'egocracy' - to invent a word. My argument is that
it has quite a lot of value and we should not disparage with negative
one-liners. I am no theonomist but I do believe that it is reasonable to
point out that our system has enabled the hungry to be fed even though 'man
does not live by bread alone'.
Certainly there are commendable accomplishments and benefits provided by
almost any government system. But my observation has been that when
government takes on the task of feeding the hungry ( a mandate BTW which God
has never assigned to civil government) it always ends up feeding those whom
God says should NOT eat! i.e. those who will not work! See II Thessalonians
3:10.

[Jeff comments]
I have heard that argument before about what the government's tasks are in
relation to Scripture and I do not buy it!

Frankly I do not believe that the scriptures actually speak to those issues
of what the state is supposed to do and what it is not supposed to do, at
least as far as the NC is concerned. What I think that the NC does do is to
define our relationship to the world, including the government, but I fail
to see that it addresses governments per se.

I also think that you oversimplify the situation in relation to what
governments do in relation to programs to feed hungry people.

[Bruce again]
For myself, having grown up with an intense interest in politics, I have
over the years come to realize that there are few political solutions to
spiritual problems. 
There are NO political solutions to any spiritual problem that I know of! 

[Jeff comments]
People seem to think so when they demand that the government legislate for
certain standards, e.g. outlawing racial discrimination or banning
abortions.

I would not make a blanket statement that there are *no* political solutions
to spiritual problems but I would agree that those solutions are definitely
limited.



[Bruce again]
For myself the best that I can do is to work in my church and reach out to
the poor and needy, spiritually and materially, through the various means
established. I currently do telephone counseling and I work with Boys
Brigade at our church. I have in the past worked with the homeless and drug
addicts.
A godly man once gave me and some other young men some wise counsel: "If you
want to make eternal investments, you've got to invest in "eternal
commodities"!" He continued, "There are only two of them: (1) People are
eternal and (2) The Word of God is eternal. So if you invest your life in
getting people into the Word of God and the Word of God into people you will
have investments that will continue to multiply and pay dividends for all
eternity! But," he cautioned us, "if you invest in any temporal commodity
that investment will be worthless at the coming of the Lord!"


[Jeff comments]
I think that I can agree with that.



[Bruce again]
So let us leave that aside and consider other aspects of your posting. In
particular I would like to comment on your implied and stated suggestions as
to what to do about the abortion issue.
You may have been able to extricate yourself from what you consider too
close an involvement with the 'abortion industry'. However for any one
individual these days that ability to extricate oneself as you may have done
is quite problematic. If for example I am the mail delivery person whose
route includes an abortion clinic would I have to resign my position to be a
consistent Christian? I am sure you could think of other examples of such
dilemmas.
Personally, I would not consider delivering mail to an abortion clinic a
dilemna at all. Providing a legitimate public service to anyone does not
mean having an unequal yoke together with them. But to contribute voluntary
funding to support their unrighteous work would be.


[Jeff comments]
I suppose it would depend on what the total package is and whether you could
avoid it.


[Bruce again]
And I have heard so many stories of Christians 'living by faith' as you
recount. Many times however I have noted that those who live this way and
seem to have all their needs supplied are very good salesmen with an
incredible presence before an audience and the capacity to describe in
graphic detail how grand their ministry is. I do not mean to be cynical
toward all such people but you have to wonder sometimes! My point is that
you option sounds 'easy' for you because you are obviously an articulate and
talented person. It may not be that simple for other Christians.
Dear brother, being "articulate" or "talented" or having a "grand ministry"
has had nothing at all to do with the Lord's provision for our needs! I too
know of many "ministries" which widely publicize their work and also their
"needs". For me, "red flags" always go up in my mind whenever a "minister"
or "ministry representative" makes their needs known to others and solicits
funds! My "grand ministry" at that time consisted of trying to get a little
business up and running, delivering newspapers and helping with teaching and
gospel preaching in a little local assembly of believers! Other Christians
have the very same faithful and reliable God that I have and I am convinced
that II Chronicles 16:9 is still as true as the day it was first written!
"For the eyes of the Lord run to and fro throughout the whole earth, to show
himself strong in the behalf of them whose heart is perfect toward him."
BTW, "those whose heart is perfect toward Him" are NOT "super stars" or
"super saints" but simply those who are humble, dependent on God, loyal and
obedient to what He says to them. Any believer who is willing to obey God
can prove God and find that He is absolutely reliable!
All NC saints have this awesome assurance in I Cor.1:9, "God is faithful by
whom ye were called unto the fellowship of His Son, Jesus Christ, our Lord."


[Jeff comments]
Fine, provided you maintain your humility in all this!


[Bruce again]
As for what to do about abortion I would like to see approaches other than
just verbal abuse of complicit state authorities. One website comes to mind
of a group that is trying to do something really positive, viz.
www.prolifemedia.info <javascript:ol('http://www.prolifemedia.info/');>
I agree, in addition to refusing to support and fund abortion mills, there
is much that Christians can do positively such as..... teaching about the
sanctity of all human life, teaching about the importance of abstenance
outside of marriage, encouraging pregnant women considering abortion to
carry their babies full term, providing care for such, providing options
such as adoption for those unable to care for their babies etc etc.
And then there is state support of young mothers. Our government has
recently been giving $4000 to any woman who has a baby. Will this stop
abortions? I don't know if it has but it is worth a try and hopefully other
countries will be looking at it. IOW let us put our money where our mouths
are!
Again, I do not agree with or support the use of public funds (tax revenue)
for charity! If government officials want to give to those in need out of
their own pockets, I applaud them! 
An excellent account of how Davie Crockett was once challenged on this very
point by one of his constituents, Horatio Bunce can be found at
http://www.beachbrowser.com/Archives/Opinion/August-2000/Davie-Crockett.htm
But charity has never been the divine mandate for civil government! They
have two responsibilities set out in Romans 13 and I Peter 2: (1) to punish
evil doers and (2) to praise those who do well!


[Jeff comments]
I simply do not agree on that one at all. I believe, and I think I could
demonstrate this quite well, that such arguments are arguments from silence.
To say that the government must not give support out of tax dollars to the
poor and needy on the basis of such verses is to argue as the JW's do in
saying that John 1:1 et al disprove the trinity.


[Bruce again]
In other words, they are to co-operate with God who has designed that moral
creatures receive the direct and divinely appointed consequences of their
own choices! But most government charity/welfare/social assistance programs
exactly reverse those divine mandates.....most often government programs end
up subsidizing those who do evil and penalizing those who do well! Those who
refuse to work are subsidized and those who work diligently are penalized!
Just as you cannot legislate the fruit of the spirit, you cannot legislate
charity! To attempt to do so is actually legalized plunder of others' labor!


[Jeff comments]
It is more about the effective management of a modern state than it is about
legislating for the fruit of the spirit. I think that your description of
what happens in such programs is a caricature.

God bless,
Jeff