Petr
Administrator
This is a specifically Protestant debate, but the general principle applies to all Christians - the question is whether "Dhimmitude", or relentless, unceasing turning of other cheek is the supposedly ideal condition for all true Christians.
“Luther understood that the Christian life was a life of suffering. The essence of Christianity is to see one’s rights trampled and not demand them. To stand up and say I demand my rights, as a Christian, is precisely the violation of everything the gospel is about."
I must admit that this drives me mad. I become unhinged at these kinds of statements.
1.) The Christian life is indeed characterized by suffering but the suffering arises out of Christians pressing for the crown rights of King Jesus in every area of life. Inasmuch as what we are contending for is consistent with the teaching of Scripture there is nothing evil about Christians demanding to be treated in the ways Scripture says that all men should treat one another.
2.) I am currently dealing with 3 marriages where one spouse is just being horrid to another spouse. Is the counsel I am supposed to give the spouse that is being tyrannized; “You know, Jesus loves it when you gladly accept the tyranny of your spouse. Indeed, The essence of Christianity is to see your rights trampled aby your spouse and not demand them. You are most like Jesus when you are gladly embracing the tyranny of your spouse.”
3.) By this reasoning all the warriors of the Christian faith from Martel to Don Juan to Sobieski to Cromwell were all acting in a non Christian manner by standing up for their rights.
4.) St. Paul appealed to his rights as a Roman citizen in Acts 22-23. Are we to believe that Paul missed the essence of Christianity?
5.) Luther himself stood up for his rights when he said “Here I stand. I can do no other.” He stood up for the rights of all Germans/Christians against Rome’s malfeasance. Indeed, the very reason Rome hated Luther, the Reformers, and the Reformation so much is that the Protestants were standing for their rights as revealed in Scripture. It was Rome who would have argued that the very essence of Christianity was to see the rights of the Reformers trampled. It was Rome who argued that the Reformers should just be quiet about their rights as taught by Scripture. It was the Reformers who wanted the right of letting the Bible speak without the Magisterium.
6.) This quote is the language of every tyrant.
7.) This kind of reasoning is the result of both Pietism and Amillennialism. No Postmillennial would ever talk like this. Amillennialism expects defeat in space and time and so they develop their theology so as to guarantee the defeat that their theology demands them to expect. Pietism on the other hand is a retreatist disposition that believes that Christians shouldn’t get involved in worldly things. Saying that Christians shouldn’t insist upon how God insists that they should be treated is consistent with both Amillennialism and Pietism.
8.) With this statement this leader condemns the Dutch resistance against Catholic Spain in the 16th-17th century. With this statement he condemns action of the English Protestants against King Charles I. With this statement he condemns Knox’s contretemps with Queen Mary. With this statement he condemns the American war for Independence. Per our Reformed leader they all missed what the “gospel is all about.”
9.) This is doormat theology. The Christian is most holy when they are most abused. Certainly, Christians suffer. Certainly, Christians see their rights trampled when there is nothing they can do about it and they gladly suffer for Christ and the Kingdom when there is nothing they can do about it. However, to say that expecting that Elders, Magistrates, and Husbands, should never be resisted when they are trampling on the privilege afforded to Christians per God’s Word is just complete and utter bunkum.
And I don’t care the credentials of who says it.
What Reformed Luminaries Are Saying Regarding What Constitutes The Essence Of Christianity
“Luther understood that the Christian life was a life of suffering. The essence of Christianity is to see one’s rights trampled and not demand them. To stand up and say I demand my righ…
ironink.org
What Reformed Luminaries Are Saying Regarding What Constitutes The Essence Of Christianity
“Luther understood that the Christian life was a life of suffering. The essence of Christianity is to see one’s rights trampled and not demand them. To stand up and say I demand my rights, as a Christian, is precisely the violation of everything the gospel is about."
High Profile Reformed Leader
Reputed to be a Pillar in the Church
I must admit that this drives me mad. I become unhinged at these kinds of statements.
1.) The Christian life is indeed characterized by suffering but the suffering arises out of Christians pressing for the crown rights of King Jesus in every area of life. Inasmuch as what we are contending for is consistent with the teaching of Scripture there is nothing evil about Christians demanding to be treated in the ways Scripture says that all men should treat one another.
2.) I am currently dealing with 3 marriages where one spouse is just being horrid to another spouse. Is the counsel I am supposed to give the spouse that is being tyrannized; “You know, Jesus loves it when you gladly accept the tyranny of your spouse. Indeed, The essence of Christianity is to see your rights trampled aby your spouse and not demand them. You are most like Jesus when you are gladly embracing the tyranny of your spouse.”
3.) By this reasoning all the warriors of the Christian faith from Martel to Don Juan to Sobieski to Cromwell were all acting in a non Christian manner by standing up for their rights.
4.) St. Paul appealed to his rights as a Roman citizen in Acts 22-23. Are we to believe that Paul missed the essence of Christianity?
5.) Luther himself stood up for his rights when he said “Here I stand. I can do no other.” He stood up for the rights of all Germans/Christians against Rome’s malfeasance. Indeed, the very reason Rome hated Luther, the Reformers, and the Reformation so much is that the Protestants were standing for their rights as revealed in Scripture. It was Rome who would have argued that the very essence of Christianity was to see the rights of the Reformers trampled. It was Rome who argued that the Reformers should just be quiet about their rights as taught by Scripture. It was the Reformers who wanted the right of letting the Bible speak without the Magisterium.
6.) This quote is the language of every tyrant.
7.) This kind of reasoning is the result of both Pietism and Amillennialism. No Postmillennial would ever talk like this. Amillennialism expects defeat in space and time and so they develop their theology so as to guarantee the defeat that their theology demands them to expect. Pietism on the other hand is a retreatist disposition that believes that Christians shouldn’t get involved in worldly things. Saying that Christians shouldn’t insist upon how God insists that they should be treated is consistent with both Amillennialism and Pietism.
8.) With this statement this leader condemns the Dutch resistance against Catholic Spain in the 16th-17th century. With this statement he condemns action of the English Protestants against King Charles I. With this statement he condemns Knox’s contretemps with Queen Mary. With this statement he condemns the American war for Independence. Per our Reformed leader they all missed what the “gospel is all about.”
9.) This is doormat theology. The Christian is most holy when they are most abused. Certainly, Christians suffer. Certainly, Christians see their rights trampled when there is nothing they can do about it and they gladly suffer for Christ and the Kingdom when there is nothing they can do about it. However, to say that expecting that Elders, Magistrates, and Husbands, should never be resisted when they are trampling on the privilege afforded to Christians per God’s Word is just complete and utter bunkum.
And I don’t care the credentials of who says it.
