Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I see, so you cannot explain why the early Christians were politically neutral either,
interesting phenomena that Christians are unaware of these facts, may i suggest you
don't know your history, nor where you are coming from.

No, I'm saying you're full of %#@&!!

As usual. 😞

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
No I am advocating it for no one but true Christians, the Bible makes it quite clear that
only a small number by comparison are or will be true Christians, ( the road to life is
cramped and narrow and few are the ones finding it) which in turn refutes the
assertion that my advocating abstention in any serious way has consequences for the
ci ...[text shortened]... reasoning then they must also have been
violating it by advocating and practising abstention.

Yes, they were violating their principle of political abstention it if they advocated it. As you are doing. I think you should admit that you are taking a little time out from your abstention.

Originally posted by JS357
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sour_grapes

At the time, how would they participate? As lion food?

So your claim is that they did not participate in civil government because they were
persecuted? All of them? At the same time? Interesting that not a single historian I
have ever read and i have read a few, has asserted that they did not participate in civil
government because of persecution, nearly all of them speak of a scared duty, or
principles which prevented them.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
No I am advocating it for no one but true Christians, the Bible makes it quite clear that only a small number by comparison are or will be true Christians [...] which in turn refutes the assertion that my advocating abstention in any serious way has consequences for the civil governments

What political system would you envisage in, say, a nation, or even the world, if everyone [or virtually everyone] was a "true Christian"? How would resources, responsibilities and authorities be allocated, deliberated upon and changed if necessary?

Originally posted by JS357
Yes, they were violating their principle of political abstention it if they advocated it. As you are doing. I think you should admit that you are taking a little time out from your abstention.

I advocate Gods Kingdom, if that is your perception of politicising them its your perception, i am not running for office, i am not asking for donations or soliciting for funds, I have not even asked that you refrain from voting nor hindered you in any way to do so, i have merely asserted that the early Christians practised abstention to demonstrate that there is a historical precedent.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I advocate Gods Kingdom...

What would be the political arrangements on earth for people living in "God's Kingdom"?

Originally posted by Suzianne
No, I'm saying you're full of %#@&!!

As usual. 😞

umm i did not author the quotes, truth a hard pill to swallow. meh just take your
medicine and admit that early Christians did not involve themselves with civil
government.

Originally posted by FMF
What would be the political arrangements on earth for people living in "God's Kingdom"?

the political arrangement, what do you mean, the structure of the society?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
the political arrangement, what do you mean, the structure of the society?

Presumably you know what the word "politics" means? What would be the mechanisms of social relations involving authority or power that would result in, for example, rates of tax being set, levels and purposes of public expenditure, creation, change and repeal of laws etc. etc.?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
umm i did not author the quotes, truth a hard pill to swallow. meh just take your
medicine and admit that early Christians did not involve themselves with civil
government.

Considering they were persecuted and ostracized, I'm afraid they really had no choice.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
So your claim is that they did not participate in civil government because they were
persecuted? All of them? At the same time? Interesting that not a single historian I
have ever read and i have read a few, has asserted that they did not participate in civil
government because of persecution, nearly all of them speak of a scared duty, or
principles which prevented them.

Yes while maintaining a low profile. Rationalizing it, too.

Originally posted by Suzianne
Considering they were persecuted and ostracized, I'm afraid they really had no choice.

oh really so if they had a choice they would have done so, interesting that not a single
historian mentions the fact that persecution prevented them, any ideas why? they do
mention however sacred duty and certain principles, what do you think these principles
might have been?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I advocate Gods Kingdom, if that is your perception of politicising them its your perception, i am not running for office, i am not asking for donations or soliciting for funds, I have not even asked that you refrain from voting nor hindered you in any way to do so, i have merely asserted that the early Christians practised abstention to demonstrate that there is a historical precedent.

You said: "It is both scripturally and historically self evident that true Christians have always
endeavoured to maintain complete neutrality in the worlds conflicts and its political struggles." You did not limit this to early Christians unless you now assert there have been no true Christians since then.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
i have merely asserted that the early Christians practised abstention to demonstrate that there is a historical precedent.

What does this "historical precedent" tell us about how resources, responsibilities and authorities would be allocated, deliberated upon and changed if necessary in a society, nation or world where "true Christians" were not persecuted but were in the majority and in control of their own lives and able to govern themselves and their interactions?

Originally posted by JS357
Yes while maintaining a low profile. Rationalizing it, too.

right then, the word of God was not preached in a a corner, in fact, Paul states that it
was preached in the entire inhabited earth, King Festsus states that Christianity was
spoken against everywhere, Pliny sates that sacrifice had virtually ceased because
entire villages had adopted it and we are to believe that Christianity kept a low profile
while achieving all of this. any one who reads the book of acts cannot fail to be utterly
astounded at the nonsense of such a statement, my goodness, he caused uproar in one
city after another, kept a low profile, bwahahaha! read the testimony of Vivia Perpetua,
the entire city turned out to see the trail of those who were accused, low profile,
neeeeeext!