Posted on 02/14/2008 4:28:15 PM PST by Terriergal
It was a question, not a speculation - and could have been met with a denial, asking the same question in reply or laughing it off - none of which would be “making it personal.”
Fine. Please note, however, that the complaint was lodged over my comments about 1940s Lutherans, which he/she evidently took quite personally. The “getting personal” tripwire can be very idiosyncratic in these dialogues, and I want to make sure we’re dealing with objective rules.
Hitler was very involved in the occult. Something Protestant Lutherans don’t get involved in. If, for example, I define myself as a golfer but the extent of my golfing is a Arnie Palmer at the club, it would be absurd for anyone to call me define me as a golfer.
Dietrich Bonhoffer, a Lutherhan pastor who died at the express order of Hitler, would contest characterizing Hitler as a Protestant Christian.
Re-phrased version of the question: Did you not answer the time and place question because it would force you to conclude that societies subject to Christ’s word are more prosperous, more peaceful, more loving than those who have not heard His word?
All Religion Forum posters are held to the same standard.
Do you KNOW John MacArthur? I can’t think you know him or anything about him to make that kind of absurd statement.
Would you not agree, however, that the primary characterization of 1940s German Lutherans was, in fact, utter silence on the subject of the Holocaust? Would it be fair, conversely, to characterize most German Lutherans as proactively fighting against the S.S.?
I know what I need to know about John MacArthur in order to condemn his work? Do I golf with him? No. Have I attemtped to rebuke him directly? Yes. Many times.
What can I say, except that I disagree with you that the Bible ever says this.
I'll throw you a bone here - if Christians are not called to/incapable of redeeming the culture about them, then IMO you are correct in holding a Premil vision of the future, holding out the hope of being raptured/rescued as the means of escaping your current predicament, and in ridiculing us Postmils for believing in (and devoting resources to) doing otherwise. But likewise, if we Reformed Postmils are correct in believing we're called to (and promised to be successful in, long-term) redeem the culture, then IMO we're correct in chastising your side for being retreatist and defeatist (allowing the culture to slide further away from God), and for promoting failure as God's reward for any church growth.
If you're going to start labelling postmils "Dominionists" again, Terriergal, you might as well place me on that list also. And then drop me from all the other lists you have me on.
I don’t think it would be fair for me to characterize a whole nation of German Lutherans. I don’t know what they knew about these atrocities and when they knew it. I know this country turned away refugees when they could have welcomed them.
I can judge Hitler by the things that he did rather than how he was mis-characterized by others. But to call him Christian after the horrible un-christian acts that he did is absurd.
I know that many Germans took risks to protect Jews. Dietrich Bonhoeffer is a better example of German Lutheran Protestant.
Of course, they are treating conservative evangelicals just like conservative evangelicals treat the LDS Church. If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen!
I don’t know how the end times will play out except we are not called to redeem culture, but to preach the gospel. All these groups intent on ‘redeeming culture’ are not preaching the gospel.
I didn’t say anything about postmils. But those who think we as Christians can redeem culture are dominionist and ignorant of Scripture.
Well you couldn’t prove it by anything that they have said on line, because Huckabee is a true socialist. He justifies his socialism with biblical quotes, that’s the difference.
I asked you if you were. For example, if I were to ask if you don’t like Lutherans, I don’t think you’d have a problem. If you showed up here repeating the blood libel as if it were true, I think the religion mod would have a problem with that too.
Would you define yourself as a dominionist? In my understanding that would be someone who believes that the world is going to get better and better until Jesus returns. In fact, some dominists claim that he CAN’T come back until we improve.
No actually the presence of the church (the true church, not an apostate version) actually creates a lot of conflict.
So... the reason I didn’t answer was that the criteria for judging was not sufficient. I would rather go somewhere where the truth is preached whether it is ancient Rome where Christians were being martyred, or modern day america. But the point is moot.
Go back and read the links in my post #69, if you're not sure.
I would say you’re not a dominionist. We just have a difference of opinion then on when Christ will return - pre or post mill, or mid or pre-wrath! The Holy Spirit is currently restraining evil which I think will become very apparent when Christians are removed at the Rapture.
We are to be salt and light to the world but the Great Commission doesn’t tell us to do as Rick Warren hawks - wipe out poverty and disease, but to preach the good news. At that point, I would agree that a nation guided by godly principles is superior to others who deny that each person is worthy of value due to the fact that we are created by Him and in His image.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.