Ethics/politics Kingdom of God?

[DPMartin]

From the Encyclopedia on this website:

*The kingdom of God means, then, the ruling of God in our hearts; *
it means those principles which separate us off from the kingdom of the world and the devil;
*it means the benign sway of grace; *
*it means the Church as that Divine institution whereby we may make sure of attaining the spirit of Christ *
and so win that ultimate kingdom of God where He reigns without end in "the holy city, the New Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven.

To the degree that one sees “ethics and politics” as other than God’s Principles for ruling in our hearts, and to the degree that sees "ethics and politics’ as being a part of the kingdom of the world, then I would say that “ethics and politics” are NOT in the Kingdom of God.

To the degree that “ethics and politics” are clearly related to the Principles of God, then that portion of “ethics and politics” are in the Kingdom of God.

But the problem I see is that most people are trying to replace God’s Principles with their own version of “ethics and politics.” A moral relativism that is dangerous becasue it attempts to push God out of the equation of “How shall we live?”

GratefulFred
thanks for the reply

Well my friend, I can most definitely see your point. But no one can replace God’s Principles. His Way stands forever. Just as Jesus Christ lives forever. And Jesus is the Way.

The world seeks it’s own righteousness by reconciling sin, to look just and merciful to the sinner. That it’s ok to remain in sin, in the sense of none rejection. Creating it’s own religion without saying it is one, for they are already called by religious, “secular”. And if you notice they do not seek to redefine that, but they do seek to redefine anything else within their reach, into their own view for their own purposes.

But we know that the Ministry of the Cross is the Reconciliation of the sinner unto God, not the sin. But they fool the sinner into believing he can be reconciled unto sin. And the sinner who loves his sin, rejoices. The Constitution was not given to reconcile sin unto itself. It was given to relieve the oppressed. But upright is not fallen, and the fallen are oppressed by their refusal of that which is upright. And not by that which is upright as they would have you believe.

On “morals are relative” consider:

Judges:21:25: In those days there was no king in Israel: every man did that which was right in his own eyes.

If one’s eyes are on Christ, then what is relative to you? If one’s eyes are not on Christ, then what is relative to them? But what is ethical is that we agree, to the Truth, the Way, the Life, our Lord Jesus Christ. That is of God. But what is unethical is to redefine that, which is of God, or what is God, for one’s own purposes.