Irresponsible
Reacting to “This Shambling and Shameful and Shambolic Shamdemic”
I think your comparison of COVID-19 to climate change is irresponsible. There is no evidence that climate change is having a disastrous effect, and whether humans even contribute to it or not is a matter of no little debate. COVID-19 has already killed over 100,000 people, and there are mass graves in New York. The two are not comparable. The one has alleged dangers, the other has documented effects.
I have benefited a great deal from your ministry and respect you as a man of God. But I believe on this issue you are discounting the real danger of the virus too readily.
Bryan
Bryan, thanks for the kind words, and thanks also for the push back. But the issue is not whether COVID is doing anything bad. It most certainly is. The issue is whether that negative effect is measuring up to the predictions made for it (thus far, not even close), and whether it is significantly different than the kind of impact that respiratory illnesses have every year. I am not defending “no response.” I am critiquing the nature of “this response.”
Responsible
I have really appreciated your take on the shamdemic and wanted to report on an aspect of the tragedy that you may not be aware of. I live in a lesser populated, warm-climate state that today, has only reached 80 deaths from the virus, almost entirely from the elderly nursing-home population. But when the panic first started, before the schools were closed but right after President Trump made his suggestion that people not gather in groups of more than 50, about 10 large churches in our fairly small city immediately switched to online worship services. It was a denominational mix — some mainline liberal churches, some biblically-faithful ones, and it was done in the name of “prudence” and “diligence.” I watched as the weeks passed, many more local churches went online, with some cutting all extra activities but keeping Sunday worship with safety precautions and admonitions for those with compromised health or fear of getting sick, to just stay home. Our governor took a steady but careful approach, closing schools first, then slowly limiting “non-essential” business and travel bit by bit, but when he finally issued a statewide stay-at-home order, he specifically exempted churches and those visiting family members. This didn’t happen until the day after Palm Sunday, but by that time, almost every church that I knew of or checked on was exclusively online. I can count on one hand the number of contemporary churches which pulled their drum sets outside and held drive-in services, but thankfully our pastor was determined to continue to hold in-person worship (which was streamed for those uncomfortable with attending) until actually barred from it by law, which never happened. Almost every church in our city voluntarily forsook the assembling of the believers since they could watch their own pastor preach on a screen, and it was NOT a Romans 13 issue at all because it was still perfectly legal to meet. I talked with some Christians who were not happy with the arrangement, but felt powerless because that was what their leadership had decided . . . but when I invited them to our church, they chose to stay home and “worship online.”
Amanda
Amanda, thanks.
Empty Field Hospitals
We have one of them big field hospitals in our very own convention center in Fresno, Ca because we were not about to be outdone by the big sophisticated cities. We have a county population of 986,542 with a total of 201 total cases (.02%) of which 49 (.004%) have EVER been hospitalized and a total of 5 deaths (.0005%)
Melody
Melody, thanks.
The Romans 13 Void
With Christians needing a better understanding of Romans 13, specifically in light of the current craziness, can we expect something formal from you before Grace Agenda or will you let the anticipation build for August?
Jordan
Jordan, yeah, something is necessary somewhere.
I wanted to first thank you for your work and your words for the edification of the saints, myself not least of all (though perhaps least amongst them). You have that Chestertonian flair minus those Chestertonian flaws. I admire that.
Second, in regards to your article “Romans 13 and the COVID-19 Virus,” I appreciate your balanced and biblical (and “correct”) perspective, but desire some further elucidation. How are we to deal with rogue jurists (selected by bureaucrats we’ve elected) increasingly making mincemeat of our Constitution and Bill of Rights? That is to say, given your premise, if the greater majority of the polity has embraced a position which becomes law, is that not the new law of the land? Or do we only consider law that which was penned down by the Founding Fathers?
I appreciate you taking the time to answer, if indeed you have the time. God bless!
Joe
Joe, what is being enforced is not necessarily the same thing as the law, and in some cases is entirely contrary to the law. To say that an order is unconstitutional is the same thing as saying that it is illegal. It is becoming apparent to me that what America needs (book, documentary, something?) is a crash course in civics.
RE: Romans 13 and the COVID-19 Virus How should we understand Joseph’s handling of the Egyptian assets? Is such government overreach in fact not overreach? Does the fact that God provided inerrant revelation change the rules of the game for government? It seems the Egyptians lost their land to buy back what the government took from them by force.
Mike
Mike, my understanding of this cannot be fully developed here, but I can give you the nutshell. Paganism is, in its essence, slavery. A pagan people cannot be a free people. Joseph saved them, but that deliverance was that he in effect enslaved the Egyptian populace — but this made them living slaves, not dead ones. In order to have them function as a free people, they would have to convert to the worship of the living God.
Based on how the 3 positions are defined, the 2nd position is really a 1st position just restated in more polemical terms. If the authority to obey or not finally rests in the Church to “have the authority to identify when the genuine authority of the magistrate is being abused or mishandled” then you’re back to the first position.
Gene
Gene, I don’t think so. The overarching authority is the law of God. If we use the example of a husband and wife, a woman can be a dutiful and obedient wife, but also have a line that she will not cross (let us say he orders her to join him in the robbing of banks). Her submissive disobedience at that point does not nullify all her prior obedience.
My dear fellow . . . the Constitution is the rule for the Federal government, and thank heavens it says specifically, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” As you are well aware, that’s the 10th amendment, and it is fundamentally the part upon which your idea that each of us are lesser-magistrates is balanced. But in this, stunningly, the Congregationalists were state-established churches in MA, NH, and CT at the time of the ratification of said Federal Constitution (though a fat lot of good it did them). That is to say: there is quite a flimsy drape to the argument you are making from a strict constructionist view, which reveals the parts with lesser dignity under it. That is to say: the local governor is far more constrained by his own local constitution than he is the Federal, and maybe those laws are not as “as long as I wanna obey” as you are making them out to be. I agree wholly with you that version 2 of Rom 13 is the right view, and I also agree that, in the rear view mirror, someone should have pointed Fauci and Trump at Moses for a gander at how a real leader gets this done, but as we are here and not in a imaginary universe where you and I get to tell people in the Eastern Time Zone how to live, let’s please not pretend we are not scofflaws only because we are not now doing what we say we might well durned tootin’ do any time now.
Frank
Okay, Frank, calm down. I suspect we agree more than not. A state government can be as wrong-headed and as tyrannical as a national one. And I think that our point of individual resistance should be based on something far more strong than personal inconvenience or annoyance. A case has to be made, and the evidence must be clear — from Scripture, history, law, natural revelation, and so on.
First off, let me thank you for your tireless defense of the gospel and your wise and uncompromising cultural commentary. You have been an inspiration to me and I wish there were more pastors like you in our country today.
Having said that, I wanted to challenge you on your recent article about Romans 13 and the COVID-19 Virus. On the presuppositional level, you seem to grant that the magistrate has a right or duty to “protect” it’s citizens from the risks associated with a plague. You say “In a time of genuine plague, the civil magistrate has the right to shut things down.” Why? To, presumably, protect its citizens from catching the plague. The underlying presupposition, then, is that when risks to our life or danger to our health are present, the government has a “right” to suspend, ignore, or otherwise overrule our natural rights that have been given by God. Is this an accurate summation of your position? If it isn’t, I would very much like to understand better your presuppositional framework for granting the government the right to tell us what we can and cannot do when he have not done anything criminal by biblical standards.
My point of concern in your comments is that nowhere in Scripture does God give the governing authorities the right or duty to “protect” us from the risks of life. In fact, the OT law code was exclusively a court system, wherein the only sphere of authority given to the government was a court trial after someone’s natural rights had been violated. In Romans 13, the governing authorities are merely a terror to evil-doers — again echoing the judicial system of the OT. No one is an evil-doer until they, in fact, do something evil. The government can’t be a terror to everyone simply because they might do something that could endanger someone else. In principle, I have no doubt that you would agree that that would be a violation of their sphere of sovereignty.
The point I am trying to make is not one of insurrection. I readily submit to the government’s lock down right now, among the other draconian policies they have been implemented over the years (I live in California). My point is simply to speak to the ethical nature of their actions, as that needs to be made clear even as we submit as far as we are able.
As a point of illustration, I would only ask you to work through this thought experiment to see if I am right. To pick up where you left off with your example, you mentioned that the Constitution states that we have a right to bear arms. But that is neither here nor there. If I do not, in fact, have that natural right by God’s authority, then perhaps my governor might be doing the best thing for me when he says that his lexicon states that I do not in fact have the right to bear arms. Why would he say that? For my protection, of course.
All the pragmatic arguments against gun confiscation aside, how are we as Christians to argue with that in principle? If we grant that in “a time of genuine plague the civil magistrate has the right to shut things down”, we have already surrendered in the ideological battle. The justification for a shutdown is to protect us from others who might be infected –- those who might be “walking around with knives in their hands and unknowingly stabbing others”, as some have put it. Whatever happened to due process? Why is everyone now guilty until proven innocent? And why is this different than the magistrate who simply says “guns are too dangerous, and anyone could kill anyone accidentally with them . . . therefore I am taking them all away”?
The main point here is this: the government cannot get into the business of providing “safety” from the risks of life without first trampling the rights of many or all of its citizens to do so. Any example we look at would require such a trade-off. And once Christians compromise on that point, it is a gradual but logically consistent slippery slope down the road to tyranny. For then we have no foundation from which to argue with those who say the government has a right or duty or obligation to protect us from job loss, bankruptcy, injuries, emotional pain, etc. That is because the idea of protection coming from the civil government has already in principle been granted. Citizens’ only political differences then become pragmatic rather than ideological. They become opinions about whether we think the government is going too far or not far enough . . . whether we have stepped over the ethical or constitutional line, or whether we can just see the line from where we are.
In Christ, and with great gratitude,
Isaac
Isaac, I don’t believe that the magistrate has the right to shutter everything, whether it is for our protection or not. The state is not a babysitter or nanny. But I believe that Scripture is clear that quarantining in case of a deadly or incurable disease is an area where the magistrate has genuine authority. Moses was not tyrannical because there was a leper colony outside the camp.
Worship and COVID
In a recent episode of the Plodcast you gave a spot-on explanation of the Reformed doctrine of worship. Unlike other traditions that focus on God coming down to us, either by the transubstantiation of the Eucharistic elements or by a special spiritual presence, the Reformed paradigm focuses on the saints going up to God. There’s a sense in which Going to church is going to Heaven. We are actually gathered with the heavenly hosts before the Throne of God. As I’m sure you agree, there are HUGE implications for that in terms of what our worship should look like. I actually think that one dimension of God’s providence in this pandemic is a judgment on the church for the various distortions of worship, both from baroque high-church liturgical excesses as well as masturbatory rock-concert light-show non-sense. If the church’s worship has become degenerate, then the Lord is content to take it away to get our attention. Anyway, I wanted to ask whether you have any good book recommendations defending the scriptural and historical basis for the view of worship you described in the Plodcast. I’m going to read your book on worship, but any other good books on this matter? Thanks and God bless you.
Joe
Joe, I would recommend a book called Worship in the Reformed Tradition by Hughes Oliphant Old.
Hope you and yours are well. I had a question about worship services. Right now, almost every church is needing to resort to online media. I’ve seem some Christians act like or actually talk about it like this is just the same as the physical gathering because “God is not confined to a building.” Should the likelihood of God disciplining the church weigh in on how we talk about our online media? Is there a difference? Is it wrong to call the online medium a “worship service”? Would appreciate your thoughts.
Thanks.
Grant
Grant, when we have broadcast our services, we have left out the Lord’s Supper because what we are doing is not a gathering of God’s people. It is better than nothing, just like a letter to the Thessalonians was better than nothing, but still not the same as being together (1 Thess. 3:10).
And Back to Romans 13
I have a question about quarantine orders from a legal perspective. Under Scalia’s opinion in Employment Division v. Smith, the free exercise clause does not provide grounds from exemptions for facially neutral laws of general applicability. As such, any order that falls within a state constitution’s delegation of executive power is unobjectionable on First Amendment grounds (so long as the law doesn’t facially single out religion and is not tailored such that it affects only religious gatherings).
This article [1] from law professor John Inazu explains that such orders are legally unassailable (whether or not you agree with his theological reasons for total compliance).
Do you think that Scalia was wrong? Almost no legal historian does — even Michael W. McConnell, who resigned as a federal appellate judge in order to argue religious liberty cases before the Supreme Court — concedes that Scalia’s interpretation of the legal rule is essentially correct. (See City of Boerne v. Flores).
If you think Scalia was correct as an interpretive matter, how would you amend the First Amendment to bring our constitutional order in line with biblical principles of Government (forgive me if I just need to go read “Empires of Dirt,” which I have not yet gotten around to).
Thanks,
[1] Close the Churches – The Atlanticwww.theatlantic.com › ideas › archive › 2020/03 › close-churches
Kelli
Kelli, as a matter of current American law, I believe Scalia’s interpretation is correct. But if we were talking about an ideal biblical republic, I would like to see more deference on the part of the magistrate when it came to the government of the churches. This would look like a request to shut down for the sake of whatever emergency it was, and the respective governments would negotiate an arrangement. It would be more like New York State talking to New Jersey than it would New York State talking to New York City.
The principles you elucidated above are clear. My question is the order that one should use to address the issue.
If one takes issue with the order of the magistrate (for example, in the instant case of the authority to quarantine), it seems as if the first step would be to use the lawful means provided by the extant legal framework.
In other words, seeking redress for the grievance by filing a legal action would seem to be the first step in the process. I am not ruling out civil disobedience as an valid instrument in the toolbox, but under our current legal schema it is not (unless in a emergent circumstance) apparent as the first step.
Gray
Gray, yes, I agree. The first step should not be to man the barricades.
In “Romans 13 and the COVID-19 Virus” you wrote that our First Amendment right of the people peaceably to assemble has been taken away.
I’ve heard you say elsewhere, and more than once, that the F.A. prohibits Congress from establishing a religion, but it does not prohibit *states* from establishing a religion; in fact, at the time it was adopted, such-and-such number of states had established religions, and no contradiction to be found anywhere. So: Congress may not establish a religion, but the states may.
Might something comparable be at play with the right to assemble? Congress may not abridge that right, but Congress has done no such thing. My governor has abridged my Constitutional right to assemble, yes, but the F.A. would no more prohibit the governor from doing such a thing than it would prohibit her from establishing a state religion. Congress may not abridge my rights to assemble, but states may.
In other words, it seems as if you’re trying to have it both ways. Is there a contradiction here?
Josh
Josh, that is a good argument, but the way I would counter is this. States can do some things the national government cannot do. But the Constitution does require of all states that they maintain a republican form of government, and certain things are essential to that — free exercise, redress of grievances, etc.
“Romans 13 and the COVID-19 virus” I agree with everything in the article and it did much to clear up confusion as to the types of God-ordained governments, their roles and how they interact. My only issue is I don’t know where the line is when we as a church change our stance and say “Wait a minute . . .” As of now the line seems very arbitrary and undefined. What does that look like to you?
Grant
Grant, yes, right now it looks that way. Our session of elders is currently working on a set of principles for just that reason.
I was disappointed by your taking the 2nd position in this blog post, that the government sometimes has the right to command the church. God never gave government authority over the church, only over individuals, and only in the area of justice (protection of rights). That’s why churches are tax-exempt and have been long before non-profit status existed in the world. The power to tax is the power to destroy. In your example of a shooter, they can command individuals but they can’t command the church. But it’s deeper than that. As you bring up later in the blog post, We are a republic, rule by law, and the authorities in our government are the people. The people set up the Constitution to limit our government, so when government breaks the God-given rights enumerated therein (like freedom to worship and freedom of Assembly), then that government is rebelling against their authority, and it is doing unlawful things that no Christian is bound to submit to.
Now we many times will obey an unlawful government edict, because we don’t want to engage in that fight at that time, and we wisely choose obedience by convenience, but we should never feel that unlawful commands by rebellious leaders are a Romans 13 issue (in the usual way people use that term, I agree with you in the way you phrase that it is a Romans 13 issue). Note that most of my last 2 paragraphs apply to the form of government we have in the U.S. and are not general.
Finally, I would point out that the Bible lays down what the government can do in a plague, and the key point is that they do “targeted quarantines” like Singapore, South Korea and Taiwan are doing, without destroying their economy. So they are using the strategy of Communist China instead of a Biblical strategy. I know you realize all this stuff, but mostly wanted to make the point that the 1st position is truly the Biblical position.
Lance
Lance, my position is that the magistrate can have authority in matters that are circa sacra (around sacred things) but no authority for things in sacris (in sacred things). But this is a fallen world, and there are places where the Venn diagram will overlap.
Thank you for continuing to write about the COVID craziness and challenging Christians to think about it. So just to be clear in regards to Romans 13: Is your argument essentially that American Christians may need to consider disobeying the mayor, governor, etc. because WE are partially the authority because of the Constitution? And would it also be the case that Christians in countries where they are not given the rights/authority we are in America ought to be obedient even when it’s heavy-handed and possibly grounded in lies and evil motivations? Thanks again for your help!
Nicholas
Nicholas, the Constitution does not grant people freedom, but rather recognizes the fact that they have it. Now if a people are enslaved to sin, it is unlikely that they will have institutions that recognize their freedom because they don’t have it. But in places where large numbers of people are coming to Christ, free institutions are in the process of being born. It is often a long and difficult process, but it is happening. In our case, our institutions still recognize our rights, but because of our spiritual declension, we have largely forgotten them. In places where the institutions that recognize these truths have not yet formed, the people of God should (slowly) begin the process of living them out. I believe that we are seeing this happen in China right now.
Final Comment
I’ve been reading your commentary around the COVID crisis with interest. I appreciate your constructive criticism of the various mathematical models being used to shape policy and am similarly concerned about the erosion of civil liberties.( I’m unaware of the US legislation but discovering that the UK law now protects me from a malpractice suit, i.e. they are expecting me to have to malpractice is chilling)
However speaking as a medic I’m unclear as to what alternatives you think would be appropriate under the circumstances? I agree that the economic impact will be devastating but the effects of the UK gov failure to implement lock down swiftly has and is resulting in equal devastation as the healthcare service is struggling to cope.
So I have to say I’m more in favour of lock down than not, maybe I’m a coward as I don’t want to have to deal with that number of sick people, and I don’t think I’ve ever given out quite so many food bank vouchers in my career to date. Without the lock down I don’t want to think how it would go. But as a wise sister in Christ tells me there’s no grace for my imagination!
I don’t know what the answer is but I do think that whatever anyone does or did do was always going to result in deaths and misery, and so arguments about how to manage things seem to me at least like the famous angels on the head of a pin.
I have appreciated your COVID catechism as reminding myself who God is, is about the only thing that makes sense at present.
Thank you for reading, and please thank your daughter Rachel for her always helpful perspective on family life and pointer to Christ, I remind myself of the cookie analogy in Fit to Burst often.
Best wishes and thank you for the blog.
Emma
Emma, thanks. Trust in Christ, and stay strong.
Your answer to Isaac is too dismissive. He asks a very important question about one of your assumptions (a question which I have also mulled), and you use an example of clear biblical law regarding lepers to attempt to shift the focus. God commanded that sick lepers be quarantined, so how does that provide any authority for civil governments to demand that all the well people be quarantined? It doesn’t.
Corey, agreed. In my piece on quarantines I argue that locking down all the healthy is unscriptural.
Doug, thank you for publishing my rather lengthy note and responding. I still don’t think the biblical text warrants civil magistrates quarantining the sick by penalty of law (i.e. by force). Rather, it seems to me that the sick individuals would have been warned that if they did not self-quarantine (and someone got infected as a result of their negligence) then they risk facing the just consequences. This may seem like a mostly trivial nuance, but it’s not. From a presuppositional perspective, when we give the government any authority over non-criminal individuals, we are asking for tyranny. At that point,… Read more »
Re Joseph: Yeah (paganism is slavery), but also, during the 7 fat years Joseph could double Pharaoh’s share from 10% to 20% without causing a tax revolt. So the fat years must have added, say, at least 30% to the usual harvests, and all Egypt knew what Joseph was doing. So anyone, or any group, or any local government, could’ve collected 10% for storage, as Joseph was doing nationwide, and been ready for the 7 lean years. If they didn’t, then then had to rely on what Joseph had done. Re worship, the Anglican church in Chattanooga did a drive-thru… Read more »
Re “crash course in civics,” since I am forced to teach online this quarter, I have made my American Government class available on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCIbcMO0u73MQFyDE8TKVgtA?view_as=subscriber. I have spent six years working on the curriculum. In the process I have gotten many good leads from Blog & Mablog, the Plodcast, and recommended books. So thank you!
Note I am a Southerner and speak slowly. Fortunately YouTube has a speed listen function.
Also, Hillsdale has terrific, free online courses on the Constitution and now American History.
Re worship, Canon Press published “The Lord’s Service: The Grace of Covenant Renewal Worship” by Jeffery J. Meyers.
Joe, I am quite happy to say that God uses stuff like this as a judgment, but I balk at the idea that we can draw direct lines. You said: “I actually think that one dimension of God’s providence in this pandemic is a judgment on the church for the various distortions of worship.” I don’t dispute that modern-day American worship has jumped the shark. But how can we connect this pandemic to that? Could we not also connect this pandemic to anything else that is out of accord with God’s law? If you will forgive some self-promotion, our church’s… Read more »
Malachi 1:6 – 2:9 1:10-11 10 Who is there even among you [h]that would shut the doors, and kindle not fire on mine altar in vain? I have no pleasure in you, saith the Lord of hosts, neither will I accept an offering at your hand. 11 For from the rising of the sun unto the going down of the same, my Name is [i]great among the Gentiles, and in every place incense shall be offered unto my Name, and a pure offering: for my Name is great among the heathen, saith the Lord of hosts. Never have America’s churches… Read more »
I apologize if I am being dense, but I don’t follow.
These passages demonstrate that when God is not pleased with the worship, he considers closing the doors to the temple.
Closing churches is indeed a judgement from God due to improper worship.
Malachi is a quick read. Go for it.
I don’t’ really have an objection to this idea in principle, but here’s where I get hung up. It’s only the American church and those who take their cue from it, that are obviously guilty of such corrupt worship that such a judgment might seem likely. But the situation is worldwide. For me that creates two problems: why are the faithful in other countries, notably some in which they are seeking to worship faithfully under extreme persecution and duress, being subject to the same judgment as those not worshiping faithfully? And second, how is it that those faithful ones are… Read more »
Jane, the other issue is that the majority of the damage has been done to Chinese atheists and Iranian Muslims, despite their failure to report a reasonably accurate number. I suspect God is doing more to damage that world to make room for His Kingdom growing there more than He is condemning American worship. It seems rather convenient that the two places where the church is growing the fastest are the places hit the hardest and the two regimes in charge are floundering to cover their rears.
Based on American intelligence sources, not official reports from the regimes, China and Iran have the lion’s share of infections and deaths. That part is factual.
The other part of my post was a suspicion on my part. I don’t claim to know what God is doing, but I just think it is interesting that this virus has hit the places where the church is growing the fastest and the regimes are tottering (Iran more so than China).
“Based on American intelligence sources, not official reports from the regimes, China and Iran have the lion’s share of infections and deaths. That part is factual.”
BJ, can you give me the strongest source you have to substantiate that? I certainly find it within the realm of possibility, Iran in particular was reporting deaths with a pacing that made no epidemiological sense, but haven’t seen any hard evidence yet.
Our host has explained worship over the years: https://tinyurl.com/y98d82m3 (Explaining form of worship) https://tinyurl.com/rquzljh (function of worship as warfare / evangelism) Toss this one in to tie it together: https://tinyurl.com/v3njaua Assuming CREC churches to be the gold standard, assuming that they have form, function and the necessity of worshiping in Spirit and Truth correct, has anyone been reading about the SBC or the Methodist church and how the culture is overwhelming them (to say nothing of the Catholic Church)? How many of them comprehend what is explained above? If they don’t understand it, how can they worship effectively? In your… Read more »
Ron,
You are not proving your point. I am happy to criticize the worship of many American churches, though I doubt our opinions align on this. I am happy to criticize the wokeness of the SBC and the PCA. There is definitely room for all of that.
It still does not establish a connection between our worship services and this pandemic.
BJ, I appreciate your honest engagement. I’m simply making a few points: A. As you’ve previously stated, American worship has “jumped the shark” (Happy Days reference is not lost on me) and is no longer up to God’s standard. B. In Malachi 1:6 – 2:9 The Lord himself cries out for one who would shut the doors, that we would no longer worship in vain. C. In recorded history, America hasn’t had an instance where many/most/nearly all of it’s church doors were closed on a Sunday, much less Resurrection Sunday. (Overlooked perhaps, because it was week 3 of a national… Read more »
Ron,
Fair enough. Thanks for being patient with my thick-headedness.
You said: “I’m not certain which of these points you’re disputing, or if your simply reluctant to draw a line connecting them.” It is the connecting them that I balk at. You may be correct, and we certainly need some correction. I guess I am reluctant to speak for God in an absolute fashion, short of clear Scriptural teaching.
And I love the word Plandemic.
https://tinyurl.com/y98d82m3 (form of Worship) https://tinyurl.com/rquzljh (function of Worship) https://tinyurl.com/woywyzz (capstone) As our host DW has shown us often, there is a biblical way to worship. For the sake of argument, let’s assume that CREC has it perfectly right. Form, function and they do it in Truth and in Spirit. In your zip code, how many CREC churches are there? Better yet, what’s the ratio of plumbers to professional “pastors”? I’ll bet that you have 7 to 20 times as many “pastors” in your town as plumbers. How can that be? Is God so variable? Multiples more than plumbing (Water still… Read more »
The old testament temple is not the same as church buildings. Old testament worship was very well defined. In Amos the Lord describes them doing worship properly at the appointed times while oppressing their neighbors. This made Him repulsed by their proper form of worship. If you know the history of the new covenant Church’s worship there isn’t a unified voice on how it should be done.
I say all of this not to defend the contemporary American church’s worship practice. I bring this up to draw attention to the fact that your claim reasons poorly from scripture and history.
Help me follow this out consistently. Every year dozens or even hundreds of churches have to close their doors temporarily due to facility issues, accidents in the building, or circumstances nearby the building that need to be addressed. Can we follow this logic to condemn their worship? When the early church met in homes, and the Roman authorities seized their property and closed the doors, was that God judging their worship?
Not being snarky, this is a serious question, because I do believe God will use things like this to judge people’s behavior.
The saddest part of all of this is that 99% of the decision to close the churches came not from the government, but from the churches themselves. If we decided to close the doors (contrary to the command of God) then we deserve the judgment of having our doors remain closed by the edict of government.
When are we going to learn to just obey the commands of God in childlike faith?
Corey,
Do you think it was sinful for churches to close in an effort to slow the spread of a virus? You might challenge the accuracy of the information they acted on, but assuming the info was correct, do you think the elders were wrong to try and protect their folk?
DCL, I guess I don’t like the knee-jerk assumption that most pastors are lefties and just worried about money. I am a pastor and I absolutely despise the cultural marxism of America. I am also not worried about my personal finances. I will be fine if I have to take a salary loss. I know dozens of conservative pastors who feel the same way, and we all decided to close on Sundays for health and safety reasons. We might have been wrong on the facts, but our motivation had little to do with the government. Here in Ohio, we are… Read more »
The “threat” of this particular virus was never high enough for most elders to cease Lord’s Day worship. Sure, canceling kids activities, choir practice, Wednesday night meals and the like is certainly prudent and careful, but from the very beginning we knew that the elderly and those with other health conditions were the most at risk and they could have been encouraged to stay home without completely closing the churches to the rest of the congregation. All that talk about the long incubation periods and being contagious before showing symptoms could be true at any time, and about any other… Read more »
I don’t think the logic of the math works from the very beginning, as infection isn’t an isolated event. The issue is that every person infected on average infects 2-3 others. So it isn’t an isolated equation where you’re only measuring your own risk. If you get sick, you infect others, who infect others, who infect others, and so on. Your individual illness, several passings down, could easily lead to 20-30 others or even more getting ill, especially if you aren’t maintaining recommended social boundaries. And several of those people who get sick may well be vulnerable, as it’s almost… Read more »
Also personally, we’ve held family services in our home since the outbreak, but on Easter there was also a fully interactive online service where we were able to see and talk to each other and worship as a body, even with the opportunity to break into smaller groups afterwards and catch up some. I think some people still assume an online service means watching some video, but current technology allows it to be quite relational in a best-case scenario.
A pertinent development: Department of Justice Files Statement of Interest in Mississippi Church Case
https://breaking911.com/breaking-doj-intervenes-in-mississippi-drive-in-church-case-says-citys-actions-target-religious-conduct/
That was quick: “Mississippi mayor cancels fines to churchgoers as DOJ intervenes in coronavirus dispute”
https://justthenews.com/nation/religion/doj-files-statement-interest-siding-mississippi-church#.XpZgdp7fJxI.twitter
I would think our president declaring his “absolute power” over the states would be a bigger deal than the model shifting to “just” 60,000 deaths. Does anyone else find it odd that trying to critique scientific models has become a pastor’s main focus? I’m having trouble seeing how anyone views this as anything other than full-on political partisanship at this point. Trump was out there in January/February saying that cases would be down to 0 in no time, that this would all be over by April, conservatives in March including in the White House were still passing around the survey… Read more »
And every day I think there is a new peak for absurdity only to be surpassed the next day: Late Monday evening, the U.S. Treasury Department ordered the Internal Revenue Service to print President Donald Trump’s name on the stimulus checks it is sending to millions of Americans nationwide, reports The Washington Post. The Treasury Department’s order could cause the checks to be delayed by several days or longer, senior agency officials told the publication. The unprecedented decision will mark the first time in history that a president’s name has ever appeared on an IRS disbursement. Usually, presidents’ names don’t… Read more »
Coming soon: Trump’s picture on the new $3 bill. Initial printing will total $666,666,666.00.
” if it were Obama in his seat?”
“Absolute power” was a dumb statement that received a lot of backlash from conservatives, but actions are ultimately more important than words. Smooth-talking Obama single-handedly put DACA into law, even though Article 1, Section 8 puts immigration rules solely in the jurisdiction of Congress. “Honest believers” are more concerned about what’s done than hot air, and spend more time worshipping the Father, Son and Holy Ghost than CNN, Newsweek and the Washington Post
So GP, if actions are the true measure, then Trump giving himself sole authority to disperse $500 billion to corporations after Congress had explicitly designated oversight for that money falls where in your power rankings. And lol that you went to “but Obama” with the DACA stuff in order to claim conservative purity. If that was really the conservative standard, then how is Reagan still the standard-bearer after his amnesty executive order? How is it okay that Trump has been trying to write new immigration laws without Congressional approval since the moment he entered office….and why did the “conservative” Supreme… Read more »
Also JP, you well know that Jesus has some very specific words for those who would deny the work of the Spirit in the lives of believers. I posted an article from the news. For you to suggest that means the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are not active in my life is to tread on extremely dangerous ground.
How anyone can take Douglas Wilson’s pontificating on COVID-19 seriously is beyond bizarre. But then, these are the same folks who agree with his views on slavery, excuse his propensity for plagiarism, cheer his treatment of sexual assault victims in his own flock, and applaud his misogyny.
These and similar comments may be obnoxious on their face, a symptom of that ubiquitous internet thread phenomenon that leads to comment sections going away and the rest of us being told “That’s why we can’t have nice things;” but to me they are fundamentally good news. After all, if all we have left to worry about is partisan political disagreements, doesn’t that suggest that things are not so bad out there?
Pretty sure that even as the apocalypse comes upon us, people will still be instigating partisan political arguments on the internet. Look at the fall of Rome.
Pot, meet kettle.
Today’s new peak is Trump claiming he has the power to unilaterally adjourn Congress (so he can make recess appointments without interference) and threatening to act on it?
As a statistics fan…all this tracking has caused me to look into the other things we track:
https://www.worldometers.info/
Not sure why they put the HEALTH section at the bottom – but it puts COVID-19 into some perspective.
Thank God that He is over all!