It was Like This, See?
From “Empathy as the Headwaters of Cruelty”:
“There are of course some people’s children who never paid much attention in English class, and who simply use empathy and sympathy as loose synonyms. Because we here at Mablog are governed by a spirit of charity, we are prepared to nod at that kind of person benevolently.”
I dare say! Did you actually just *qualify* something? In a post you put up in *November*?? The very idea.
Nathan
Nathan . . . see below.
Greetings Mr. Wilson, there’s something I need to bring to your attention.
I was reading through your recent post “Empathy as the Headwaters of Cruelty,” and to begin, you develop an argument so as to criticize those who appeal to empathy in place of sympathy. Setting aside for a moment the grossly un-Christ-like behavior connoted by such verbs as “arguing” and “criticizing” (I seem to have misplaced my favorite clutching pearls), you proceed with a rather odd digression:
“There are of course some people’s children who never paid much attention in English class, and who simply use empathy and sympathy as loose synonyms. Because we here at Mablog are governed by a spirit of charity, we are prepared to nod at that kind of person benevolently. Our war is with the advocates of a therapeutic totalitarianism . . .”
Pastor, I’m afraid I have a very serious accusation to voice: is not this a qualification?
You purpose to rebuke a group of people (those who preach ungrounded empathy), and then, in an aside, you provide supplementary criteria for who qualifies to be in said group (the totalitarian bunch) and who does not (those who conflate the terms in question). Is this not the very essence of a qualification?
It’s easy to miss, since by narrowing the target of your critique, you help to explain the precise nature of the problem; this section does indeed serve a rhetorical purpose beyond mere self-defense. But imagine if you used this same approach to comment on the recent bloodshed:
“There are of course some jihadis who experienced X, and who are simply motivated by Y as a result. Because we here at Mablog are governed by a spirit of charity, we are prepared to nod at that kind of person benevolently. Our war is with the real terrorists who . . .”
Assuming for the sake of argument that there exist real noun phrases for filling in X and Y in that sentence (I certainly can’t think of anything substantive), this would clearly have the effect of qualifying your prior condemnation!
And what’s with all this “spirit of charity” business, anyway? I thought this was a month for truth and flamethrowers. Am I misinterpreting the rhetorical intent behind this passage? Are we doing Just-A-Widdle Quarter November this year? We should surely expect a timely explanation for this apparent violation. Don’t tell me you forgot to grab the sharpening files for that serrated edge of yours!
Nicholas
Nathan and Nicholas, it was like this, see? I was writing and writing along, and this qualification just kind of spurted out. But, as it is November, I recognized that fact immediately, and we just kind of stared at each other. And so then I carefully edited it so that it would serve as a mild slam on some people’s children who don’t use their words properly, and then charitably forgave them for their offensive behavior. At the same time, I am fully prepared to admit that you do have a technical point, and that the section in question could be read as a qualification. But at the same time, I have a point, in that I labored to turn it into something that was less of a qualification. And so, in the words of some Gilbert & Sullivan operetta, I forget which one, “You are right, and I am right, and everything is quite correct.”
Isker and the Jews
I watched your discussion with Andrew Isker about Jews and Antisemitism and found it really interesting. However, it occurred to me in watching it that the term “Jew” was not being defined or used consistently. You are clear in saying that Jews who reject Christ have cut themselves off from salvation, but you seem to think they still have some special role in salvation history. While you said that in Biblical terms genetics does not matter, and it is culture, language, etc. that matter, it seems to me that this is not the case when pointing to contemporary examples (whether positive or negative) of Jews. In response to Isker’s view that the Jews no longer hold any special status in salvation history, you suggested that there is a consistent line of Jewish thought going back to ancient times. You cited the fact that the reformers went to the Rabbis to learn Hebrew as evidence of this historical continuity. While I think this would have some plausibility with respect to modern Orthodox Jews who would trace their tradition back to ancient times, I don’t see how this works with other Jews (the vast majority) who don’t follow a tradition with ancient roots. Orthodox Jews are generally very conservative, and most of them are Republicans, but they are a small minority of total Jews (at least in the US). The Jews that are usually brought up as negative examples in these discussions (people like George Soros) are usually atheists or have only a very loose attachment to the religion of Judaism. While it is easy to think of prominent Jews who have done very bad things, such as in Communist movements, I can’t think of a single one who was an Orthodox Jew following a tradition that goes back to ancient times. Most of the examples that come to mind were atheists who wanted nothing to do with Judaism. Really the only sense in which many of these individuals could be said to be Jewish is genetically (as in when survey data has a category labeled “Jews”). Nowadays, we even have the term “secular Jew.” While it could be said that there is some sort of secular Jewish culture, it bears little resemblance to Judaism of the Apostle Paul’s day. I agree with your assessment that a lot of antisemitism can be attributed to envy, but I don’t see how this either requires or implies some special position for Jews at this point in salvation history. It seems to me that the sinful human heart naturally covets those who are more successful (do not covet was even one of the ten commandments). You have cited Thomas Sowell on a number of occasions, and in his writings he cites a number of groups, including but not limited to Jews, who faced persecution as a result of envy. Sowell’s explanation, which makes sense to me, is that groups like Jews are successful in a way that is a threat to one’s ego. If a Kennedy or Rockefeller is successful, one can attribute it to their privileged position in life, but if someone who faced huge barriers still becomes successful in spite of them, one has to either face the fact that they did more with less opportunity than themselves (which is a shot to their pride) or one has to attribute their success to a grand conspiracy, as many have with respect to the Jews. This is just the sinful human heart, I don’t think it requires us to attribute a special status to the Jews at this point in salvation history.
The Apostle Paul himself says that a man is not a Jew who is only one outwardly (Romans 2:28), does it really make sense to think of Jewish individuals who want nothing to do with historical Judaism as Jews in a biblical sense that would give them a special status in salvation history?
William
William, I agree with a lot of your observations. But my reason for thinking they still have a place in God’s timetable is not because of the Jews’ behavior, but rather because they are beloved on account of the patriarchs. Let God be true and every man a liar.
I enjoy your teaching and have learned so much from it. I’m studying the covenants and I have a question from your blog post Affection for Israel as Biblical Requirement. In there, you state “Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jews are Jews by covenant.” Could you please explain that statement? What covenant? I thought based on Hebrews 8 that the first covenant was becoming obsolete and growing old and is ready to vanish away. My understanding from Galatians 3:29 is if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise. Again, my understanding is this is the covenant we as believers in Christ are part of. Is there a different covenant for Ashkenazi and Sephardic Jews? If so, where is that located in Scripture? Wouldn’t they only be part of the covenant if they were believers in Christ, just as anyone else? Also, isn’t the house of Israel the Church, Hebrews 8:10?
I understand that sometime in the future “All the ends of the earth shall remember and turn to the LORD”. Then they will be in covenant with Christ.
Thank you for taking the time to read my letter. I hope to hear back from you.
Sincerely,
Peggy
Peggy, great question. The unbelieving Jews today are not in covenant with Christ, whether that be in the old covenant form or the new covenant form. The apostle Paul teaches us that they are in effect Ishmaelites, and the covenant they are under is in effect a covenant to miss the point of the covenant. Sarah and Hagar are two covenants, and the unbelieving Jews are acting the part of the children of the slave concubine (Gal. 4:24-25).
Listened to your interview with Andrew Isker today. Left feeling incredibly discouraged. Absolutely no clue what you’re talking about regarding Deuteronomic blessing. Can you give some historical examples where this type of blessing has resulted in Jews being converted to Christianity? Doesn’t it play into the stereotype of Jews being greedy materialists? Sinners come to Christ because they need a savior. Isn’t the alternative something like Simon the sorcerer? Also I just don’t understand your take on envy as it relates to antisemitism. It totally feels like special pleading. Can you give me an example of something that you’re “anti” because of envy? How does this principle work out in your own life? Without a better understanding your knee jerk accusation of envy seems designed to kill the conversation. You simply level the accusation and find the defendant guilty based on any conceivable response.
You also seem to hide in the “historic Reformed tradition” as if it’s “settled science”. Anyone outside of “Puritan thought” becomes a “denier.” Then there’s the matter of high performing persons. When you prattle on about this it makes you seem very out of touch with actual hard working Americans. The masses are being crushed by an economic system that brings all money into existence as interest bearing debt. People closest to the creation of the money get it at the cheapest interest rate and spend it into the economy before inflation hits. I could tell you stories about people I’ve worked with for 130-140 hrs a week keeping oilfield roads open during a blizzard, but I know these aren’t your type of people. Your admiration appears to be reserved for high performing types such as insurance salesmen, lawyers, usurers, high frequency traders, market manipulators, coin clippers and successful investors like Nancy Pelosi. As soon as hard working Americans push back against those who plunder their purchasing power by way of inflation and other scams you rush out with a bull horn to accuse them of envy. You’re probably doing a fine job of reading a Moscow room full of hob knob elitist types, but you come across as belittling, smug, aloof, and supercilious once you get a few miles away from your loyalists in the CREC echo chamber. When Jews diligently exercise “in group preference” you sing their praises like the Mormon Tabernacle Choir, but as soon as hardworking Americans do it you chide them for kinism. People are struggling to keep their heads above water and when they gasp for breath you remind them that the ruling class have also put out some good violinists. Talk about reading the room. Your painfully out of touch on this one. I’ve appreciated quite a bit of your humor and perspective on various issues throughout the years but I’m becoming increasingly convinced that you’re uncharacteristically discussing this topic in bad faith. I hope I’m wrong. Sincerely,
Dale
Dale, it is not possible to enjoy Deuteronomic blessings in a crass materialistic way. It has to be the result of God’s blessing, and a true-hearted return to the Lord. I emphasize the historic Reformed position because some who are being lured by antisemitism still have respect for that tradition, and want to use it in other settings. I have been a pastor for about forty-five years, and I think I know what envy smells like. And when there is an antisemitic troll swarm in the comments section, well . . . it smells like that. And last, I have nothing but admiration for all the hard-working people who are still holding this country together, despite the egregious lunacy that is propagated by our ruling elites. And whether or not you agree . . . all in good faith.
“These pro-Hamas rallies are nothing but round two of the BLM protests.”
While I think this is true, along with the rest of this article, I think there’s a deeper spiritual truth under antisemitism & anti-zionism in general: Satan & his domain—which still includes the majority of the earth where the Kingdom of Heaven hasn’t advanced into, by my count—still hates the first covenant, even fulfilled as it is. It’s a prominently visible reminder that God exists, makes covenants, and faithfully honors them. The existence of a Jewish people, and furthermore a nation state identified with that Jewish people—even while they’re unrepentant—is an absolute affront whose destruction may serve no real strategic purpose but almost must be attempted regardless.
Ian
Ian, thanks. I do think there is some sort of ancient enmity there.
Rigney’s tweet in this blog makes me think of something I read on the Mark Steyn website once: The intersection of intersectionality is Jew-hate junction.
Tim
Tim, thanks.
What are your thoughts on Zionism and Christian Zionism?
Juni
Juni, I disagree with Zionism in both forms. This means I don’t think Israel’s claim to the land is grounded in the promise to Abraham. But I do think they have a strong claim to the territory on other, more ordinary, grounds.
Do you think that antisemitism is part of God’s judgment on the Jews for their continued rejection of Christ?
Sam
Sam, I think that in the first instance, antisemitism is a direct judgment on the antisemite himself. For the other, to reapply something some of the rabbis have said, in all the afflictions that the children of Israel have gone through, there is something of the golden calf.
I have become progressively more Reformed throughout high school but attend a dispensational-in-all-but-name Baptist church where my parents met and were married. I was wondering if you had any tips on how to speak to godly people at my church about the Israel-Hamas conflict. I feel something tug in my heart anytime someone says anything Israel-related because of their dispensationalism, but also I want resist swinging the pendulum too far the other way and risk sounding anti-Israel—particularly during this current phase of the fight. Any advice would be appreciated.
P.S.
I promise to read American Milk & Honey, but in the meantime, I would love some direction.
Cooper
Cooper, I would treat as people getting the right answer via a wrong method. For the time being, I would not challenge anybody over the method, and simply nod. When the conflict is over, or has died down, then you can afford to talk about it without things getting unnecessarily heated.
KSP and Rigney
A Prior Dilemma
Last night I had your and Joe Rigney’s conversation with Karen Swallow Prior bumped to the top of my phone. It was edifying, inspiring, and appalling. I watched every point either of you made be skipped or twisted, every unearned conclusion be asserted, every scriptural reference be ignored. One might say she was a real Karen about the whole thing.
This is pretty par for the course for twitter. Not especially noteworthy. What I saw next though really got under my skin in a way internet discourse rarely does. For years in your weekly comment section, I’ve probably given the impression of being emotional or furious more than once. This is rarely actually the case. Its just a side effect of coupling my usually severe and exacting word choices with the coldness of pure text without intonation on the internet. This however unsettled me. In that way the algorithm decides that if you click one something once, so it is now the only thing you ever want to see, my phone was now the host to pages and pages and pages of responses to this conversation. The responses themselves weren’t noteworthy either. Lots of How Dare Theys, and hand-wringing over blaming the victim. You expect the masses on twitter to fail to engage with the substance behind points. You expect them to ignore context and inaccurately reproduce sentences and appeal to emotion and defy scriptural precedent for Christian behavior in an ethical dispute. The shocking thing was what happened when I started clicking on their profiles.
Christian PhD’s. Lots of them. Christian Doctors of medicine, Christian clinical psychologists, not just any professors but professors of seminaries, pastors, authors, and church leaders all falling into the same disingenuous and brainless social media melodramatic preening theater as you would expect of a 14-year-old girl pledging her instagram page to a cause she heard of that day. I must have seen a hundred responses from those who ought to be leaders of Christian thought utterly and embarrassingly incapable of engaging with a point. I’m not even saying I necessarily agree with your point. The culpability of a 17-year-old girl is almost impossible to have a useful opinion on without knowing the details or having ever met the girl. She could be an absolute viper, or be as pure and innocent a victim as can be imagined based on the level of information about the situation that was made available on twitter. What I’m saying is that any thinking Christian should be devastated that the top-shelf thinkers of Evangelicalism are incapable of reasoning their way out of a paper bag. That so many would disagree with you is in theory fine. That evidently none of them are capable of disputing the thesis at a higher level than porcine grunting is not fine.
We are in trouble. I don’t mean you and I, I don’t mean conservatives, I don’t mean CREC members either, as I’m only loosely associated with the denomination. I mean the large “C” Catholic church as referenced in the creed. Ours is a God of Order and a God of reason. While I’m first in line to point out that Christians need not be scholars to be good Christians, I even took heat for that in an argument not long ago here on the site, the commandments themselves that make up the purpose of the Church are themselves based in order and reason. The Church itself in order to serve its function definitionally must reflect that order and reason. The Church can’t be the Church built on the foundation of personally emotionally gratifying reactionaries.
We face large odds here in clown world. You know this. Its what you spend most of your time talking about. Being patient on a large time scale is the blessing of insight. You don’t expect to convert a world of acolytes to Rousseau in one lifetime. I just had really hoped we wouldn’t have to spend a couple centuries setting right our own house beforehand. I suppose the silver lining is with a low bar for quality, opportunity abounds. With Evangelical elites like this, the ideological market is flush with opportunity.
Justin
Justin, you have described the situation . . . well.
Food Stamps
I am in need of some wisdom on a topic that I know almost nothing about.
My wife respectfully broached the subject of food stamps with me the other day and quite frankly, I’m baffled as to a response. To put this into perspective, according to the government—due to my income . . . plus the number of my children—we are technically at the poverty level. That said, we truly have almost everything we could ask for. The predicament is that my wife and I bought our house years ago when we had dual income—and the mortgage reflects that. For the last five years she has been a stay at home mother—and we both agree that it is God’s good design. We wouldn’t have it any other way, and there is no thought of going back. That said, I have taken the brunt of the work—and our pay scale is still under construction. In a few years, God willing, the point will be totally mute. But for the time being, we are a few hundred dollars short, and my debt is growing as I take on my household (HVAC system replacement, new fridge, washer, etc). It’s piling on, but God is good.
My question is this—would it be wrong according to Biblical principle to take food stamps while I wait for my pay to catch up?
My personal thoughts without depth of thought would be “yes, I believe so.” I think the main issue for me is any type of government assistance or program. I hate the thought of empowering a system that I believe enslaves s so many in our country—and I’m not sure if we are exactly the type of demographic that they intended to give food stamps to.
That said, I also don’t want to be an ingrate. Do you have any experience or wisdom you could share on this topic Doug?
Thank you for all you do—both you and your family.
Anon
Anon, I obviously don’t know all the variables in your case, but I would strongly encourage you to resist the move to food stamps. I believe that Christians should strive to resist the benefits first. I can’t say that it would be sinful in every situation, but it is certainly something to be avoided if possible.
My family attends a small and relatively new church, about two years old by now. The Pastor and elders recently hired a new staff member as a director for one of the non-ministry technical disciplines – meaning, a role in which the responsibilities do not involve spiritual authority over laity. The man they hired made a very poor choice a long time ago as a young teenager (he is middle-aged now) and did something sexual to a little girl which only recently came to light within the past few years after the now-grown woman decided to make it public. He was arrested and confessed to everything, pleading guilty to misdemeanor charges. Even worse, he was a paid ministry leader at a church when he was arrested and there are news articles about this that you can find easily by googling his name. He was fired, of course. By the grace of God, he completed his sentence with marriage and family intact (he has children of his own).
Now he is hired at our church. Church leadership had him tell his story at a member’s meeting the other day in which he spoke openly about his background, what happened and why, and his remaining testimony. Then the pastor spoke afterward about why they chose to hire him. They assured us that even though they believe his days of acting on sexual sin are decades behind him, they will not allow him to work in or be near children’s ministry just as a precaution. They also assured us that his role is not one of spiritual authority and that they consider him permanently disqualified from anything like elder or pastorate.
This stirs up feelings for everyone, with the most common sentiments I hear against him being something like “Is he fit to be a leader of any kind even if with no spiritual authority?” and “What will outsiders think of our church if they hear about this? How can we be of good repute?” After filtering my gut feelings through prayer and scripture, I think it is permissible to hire him as long as it is 100% clear that he exercises zero spiritual authority because then he is not considered an overseer (“episkopos”) and therefore not subject to the same requirements for overseers as per Timothy—alongside the stipulations that he can never be around children’s ministry (a la the AA-type philosophy of “once an alcoholic. always an alcoholic”—even if your last drink was years ago). I understand worrying about our reputation but I fear us becoming the Pharisees of John 8, which leads to spiritual death and an even worse outcome than potentially offending some outsiders with his presence. What do you think?
Thanks,
DT
DT, from what you have described, I think I agree with your distinction. In other words, something like this could be lawful. But being lawful doesn’t make it a good idea. If he is simply the lead janitor, then maybe it could be a good idea. But if he was in actual ministry when he was arrested at his previous church, that indicates that certain connections are not yet being made.
Kuyperian Plumbing
Re: The Joy Juice of Democracy
Thank you for this post. This isn’t so much a question, but a comment regarding how we can talk about theonomy with other believers, people who truly desire the righteousness of God in this world.
I have been asking this question: “If you led a man to Christ, and his occupation is a plumber, can you explain to him the ways in which plumbing will be different as a Christian?”
Many would think about honesty, fairness, and earning money to fund ministry. None of this is false, but it is incomplete. The plumber needs to know how his work is an essential element in the fulfillment of the Dominion mandate. Because of indoor plumbing, disease has been vastly curtailed and clean water can be delivered.
This might make sense.
Then I ask, “If you led a (judge, magistrate, parlimentarian) to Christ, what you say to them about their discipleship (keeping Romans 12:1- 2 in mind)?” Honesty and integrity could be a challenge, but what about their roles in legislation or application of human law? Can they step out of their Christianity for a secular task? Knowing that following Christ could be career-ending, would they prioritize the laws of Christ over the laws of man?”
I think these questions could help a fellow believer understand what is at stake in following Christ, and hopefully help him understand the level of pietism present in current evangelical Christianity.
I have been applying Scripture to these kinds of scenarios, and received perhaps the greatest encouragement from one man who said, “This is the first time I felt, in a Christian congregation, that my job is a real vocation; it is more than the money I can make and give to the church. My business matters.
Keep it up, Doug.
Scott
Scott, thanks. And keep asking those questions.
CREC Confessions
Not to any particular article, but rather a CREC question: One thing I’ve noticed, looking at the CREC requirements for creeds and confessions, is that the Athanasian creed is not listed, and instead we see the Apostles’ Creed, Nicene Creed, and the Definition of Chalcedon. I’m curious why that is?
Brandon
Brandon, it is not missing because of any disagreement with the Trinitarian dogma found in the Athanasian Creed. My difficulty is with the pronouncement on the eternal destiny of anyone who fails to embrace every detailed formulation. I don’t the eternal destiny of Murphy is a confessional issue.
Cyber Restitution
I am writing in reference to some (fairly) recent responses you have written regarding making restitution for online movies/music that were not paid for. How/what would you recommend me make restitution for watching movie/tv show clips that were posted on YouTube without the creator’s consent? I did not think it was a issue since they were clips (and not full movies/shows); however, I did recognize that some were posted illegally even as I watched. I will certainly be more careful from here on.
Thank you for your direction here,
AS
AS, sure, be careful. But I wouldn’t be too fastidious about it. There are certain means of snipped communication now (memes, gifs, etc.) that are entirely acceptable from a Golden Rule standpoint. When someone makes a meme, the earnest wish is that it go viral. But going viral means a lot of sharing without permission.
Deception in Warfare
Greetings from a free man, from impoverished and subjugated Argentina! Thanks for the free books in November. I had a doubt, which, given my reality with thugs and drug dealers sitting on the throne, it would be useful for me to clarify (just in case). You spoke of Rahab, David and the Egyptian midwives as “using lies as a weapon of war,” as a just act in certain cases. Could you clarify that point for me? Thank you!
Joaquin
Joaquin, sure. All murder is killing, but not all killing is murder. The death penalty is commanded in Exodus 21, one chapter after the Ten Commandments prohibit murder. In the same way, all lying is deception, but not all deception is lying. In a time of war, it is not necessary to paint all your tanks and ships a bright orange for the sake of honesty.
Paedo Peaceweaving
How important is it for a young man to find a woman to marry who shares his paedobaptist convictions? Is it absolutely necessary that she believe in paedobaptism, or is it a matter of her being willing to abide by that teaching and be taught over time to come to those convictions?
Reagan
Reagan, I would not go into a marriage unless there was clear agreement on what was going to be done with the children, and what the children were going to be taught. If the man is the paedobaptist, and the wife is a sweetheart baptist, fully committed to living out Ephesians 5, I don’t see a problem at all.
A Great Article
I wanted to bring this article to your attention and ask your opinion on the classifications proposed. Would you significantly alter it in any way?
Nathan
Nathan, no, I wouldn’t. Great article.
Doom Stuff
I’ve read (and heard) you mention before that the ascendant secular humanism of the last 100-200 years bears a passing resemblance to a post-millennialist eschatology, with its faith in ever-improving evolutionary progress.
This comparison made me reflect that, in some ways, the apocalypticism of the climate crisis movement bears a passing resemblance to dispensationalist premillennialism. World-ending/change disaster is always right around the corner yet never seems to totally materialize; and successive epochs (geological or dispensational) are the primary method by which to “read” history.
Just a thought spurred by your thoughts!
LC
LC, yes. Thanks. There are more than a few resemblances.
A General Equity Issue
Do you believe Exodus 22:16-17 and Deuteronomy 22:28-29, which mandate marriage or bride price for premarital sexual active couples or worse scenarios falls under Ceremonial, Civil, or Moral Law? If Civil, then what principle ought we apply in our culture today? I ask on the behalf of a young man who became a father from a one-night stand and is now engaged to another woman. His son is just a couple months old and now will have all of the consequences fatherlessness entails. What ought a Church counsel?
BC
BC, there are many variables. But to answer your question, I would place those passages under civil law, which means that the general equity of them today would mean a young man could, under certain circumstances, we required to marry a girl he had seduced. But, depending on the variables, it might be determined that this would be a terrible idea.
Postmodern Drinking Song
Saw a letter suggesting this for you and came upon it today. Just in case no one else took it upon themselves to get you the link.
Todd
Todd, thanks. See below. I enjoyed it, at any rate.
Big Tech Vulnerability?
I see that a lot of your book giveaways are on Amazon kindle, and I assume canon also sells many other titles on that platform. Are you concerned that Amazon might begin editing content that it finds offensive? It’d be much easier now with AI bots being able to copy literary styles. Partnering with big tech seems rather risky at this point.
James
James, yes, there is a risk in using such platforms. To date, the advantages outweigh the risks, but we are preparing for the time when that is not the case.
Take a Listen
I know you’re extremely busy but I was wondering if you’d be interested reacting to my Music Video. It is about the Circus that we as Christians find ourselves in. Here is the link if you are able to find the time.
Thanks For All You Do,
Don
Don, thanks. For the rest of you, see below.
Let Us Crowd Source Again!
Just a quick question, would you or anyone in your acquaintance be able to recommend a good Reformed church in the Dover, DE area? Thanks.
John
John, I sure don’t know, but some of our people might. People? . . .
Christian Ed Questions
Thank you for all you do.
I have two questions in regards to Christian education. I am currently a teacher employed by a small Christian school, and I teach Bible and Keyboarding. The school is non-denominational, not classical, and has only recently sought to improve our historically lackluster academic standards (I am an alumni, and there has been much filling in the gaps over the years). Our model is basically we will take anyone and everyone, even if they can’t offer any parental partnership, for the sake of evangelism. We also experienced some growth during Covid as we did not close down, and there were many politically conservative families that switched because we were open, not necessarily because we are Christian or because of the quality of the school.
The first question is related to your book, Recovering the Lost Tools of Learning. In your section on the goals of Logos you discuss discipline within the school and that continual disruptive students are subject to expulsion. We have many disruptive students who, though they are disciplined within our structure (detentions/forced study hall), continue incessantly and even compete with one another to see who can be disciplined the most. The only offenses that have forced the hand of expulsion have been violence and drug abuse on campus. That being said, I have also heard you and others discuss the idea that boys in schools should not be crushed into effeminacy. Are there any guiding principles to walk that line between an orderly school and an effeminate one? I think this question is borne of my own ignorance. I do not think I have ever really been exposed to a school environment that you describe in Logos.
Secondly, as a Bible teacher who works primarily with middle school students, I have found that all of this, the lack of Biblical grammar, lack of order and families who are politically conservative but are coming from effeminate churches, leads to discussions in class devolving as soon as we encounter any issue that runs against the cultural grain. The primary culprit has been the roles of women in the church and in the home. This has come up naturally, simply as we are working our way through the New Testament. I have been careful to encourage students to submit to their own pastors and parents. I have even avoided discussing women’s roles in broader society (political office and the military), and tried to steer the discussion toward the home and church. There have been several parents (mothers who work full time outside the home) who have complained to administration about these topics even being discussed. Administration’s response was to tell me to frame all of these discussions as a secondary issue debate among Christians and not declare one side as true. The question is, how to walk a line between clearly communicating iblical truth, yet not subverting the authority of parents, apparent feminists though they be. As I am writing this out, it also occurs to me this may be a question regarding which secondary issues, if any, may be out of bounds in this context?
Thanks again!
Nick
Nick, for the first situation, my recommended standard is that the school only serve disruptive kids up to the point where continuing to enroll them would be to rob the students who are not being disruptive of the education they are paying for. So the violent ones have to go. If the rowdy ones are moved into a separate detention, that might be a poor use of the school’s money, but it would not be robbing the orderly kids in the classroom. For your second question, there is no compromise in teaching the issue, representing both sides accurately, and then referring them to the parents or pastor. But I think the school should not budge on whether to talk about the issue at all.
Actually . . . No
I’m curious why you interacted with such a bold case of Bulverism by Strachan, or at least didn’t mention that it was Bulverism.
It doesn’t seem like you disagree with anything he mentioned, but just different forms of what he thinks the things he mentioned means. For example, you also believe in a multi-ethnic state, just not a forced multi-ethnic state.
Sounds a bit like he forced you on your heels to defend yourself?
Joseph
Joseph, well, actually not. There is a vast difference between saying “I believe in a multi-ethnic state” and “I believe that a multi-ethnic state is lawful.”
KJV Mostly!
I have a question for you but I also wanted to take the chance to say that I have come to appreciate your ministry as I was first introduced to you and Christ Church by watching Dr. James White’s Dividing Line and then the sweater vest dialogue videos as well as when Dr. Jared Longshore moved to Moscow, and your conversations with Dr. Voddie Baucham and am glad to know that you aren’t what “Reformed Twitter” paints you out to be—that you are minister, firm on what you believe based upon your reading of Scripture.
With all that being said my question is do you have a preferred Bible Translation you use and if so why? I have seen on some of The Canon + videos that some will quote KJV and then some will quote ESV sometimes which made me curious what your preference is. Again, appreciate your ministry.
Trevor
Trevor, I prefer the KJV, but use other translations on occasion. I prefer the KJV because of the manuscript family it is based on, because of the stric translation philosophy the translators had, and the fact that it is in the public domain.
Carefully Overseen
I’ve just finished the “Repairing the Ruins” book and I have a question about the logic teaching part. One of the recommendations for logic practice given in the book is to encourage students to engage in polite debate with people in forums/twitter etc, in which they would be able to defend what they believe against people who believe the opposite.
My question is: What is your view of getting the students to prepare material and debate each other, with one of them defending a position contrary to Scriptures, i.e. playing the part of the secular adversary? Is it good practice to exercise defending a position that they don’t believe in or is it harmful to the student’s conscience?
Rafael
Rafael, I believe that a good teacher will oversee that kind of thing carefully, but I believe it is a really good exercise.
A Small Bundle of Questions
I’m pursuing my MTh, and living a peaceful life. I attend a 9Marks type church, but I get all my spiritual growth from your ministry. Thank you!
My parents live about 2-hour-flight journey away from where I am. They are charismatics. As a man who aspires to gladly assumes responsibility, should I move to where they stay, along with my pregnant wife, and try and influence them to attend a Bible believing, Calvinistic (unfortunately still 9Mark type) church?
I’d be giving up the peace and tranquillity and possible MTh degree for a chaotic, argumentative, sometimes fun-filled life with family, with the slim possibility of the upside that I might be able to influence them to move to a better church.
Also, 1) can you please read the “Bitcoin standard” by Saifedean and teach the church to be wise in how they “manage” money? and 2) can you please send godly qualified elders to start a CREC church in India?
Peter
Peter, in order to justify such a move, I think you would need better odds than the current long shot you have. Second, I ordered the book. And third, one of our Greyfriars students is from India. Already on it.
The Problematic Circumcision of Timothy
Thank you so much for your ministry and your commitment to be truthful. You have been very instrumental in helping me be consistent in the faith. My church small group gave me lots of flack for the following question:
Why in Acts 16:3 does Paul circumcise Timothy, if Paul is SO opposed to the circumcision party? He goes over it ad nauseum in many gospels about not circumcising converts.
The small group was upset that I’m not willing to bend on certain things to ‘reach the unreached’ . . .
In a very cursory reading, the text is telling me to sacrifice my preferences so that I will not have a stumbling block to the unreached.
Follow ups: If Paul was right to circumcise Timothy, why would we not: wear a face mask? get a covid jab? use pronouns? accept mothers of aborted children as ‘victims’?
Brady
Brady, great question. Why did Paul flatly refuse to circumcise Titus, but was willing to bend when it came to Timothy? And the answer is that Titus was a flat-out Gentile. Timothy was brought up by a pious Jewish mother and grandmother, and he had known the Scriptures from infancy on. And yet, everybody knew that his father was a Greek, which meant that they knew he was uncircumcised. Of course, everybody knew that Titus was uncircumcised as well, but he dressed like a Gentile, walked like a Gentile, talked like a Gentile. Timothy was brought up as a cultural Jew, and looked and talked the part. But everybody knew his father was a Greek. So Paul was willing to circumcise Timothy because that would not bring him under any kind of a yoke he was not already under.
What’s That Lyric?
Hi. I enjoy the Plodcast but have a question. The song that plays where the woman sings, “God don’t never change,” etc. is broken up throughout the show. When transitioning to the second segment, it sounds like she sings “Always WEARY God . . . ” This drives me to distraction each time and I have to know:
What is she actually saying here?
ST
ST, “Always will be God . . .” And here is the whole song.
Anon, take the stamps and provide for your family. You can work to disqualify yourself from them via income and vote against the policies as you go. As long as the plan is not to be dependent forever, use the means available to bless your family.
I doubt there are any Christians who believe the taxation we have today is theft who are going to forego social security benefits, or wouldn’t call the police, fire department or an ambulance if their family needed it.
If I may wholehearted disagree, when you take food stamps, you are using the power of the sword (through the civil sphere) to forcibly take funds from fellow citizens (forced redistribution of wealth). If your situation is such that you would be considered poor by biblical standards, you should ask for a non interest loan from member of your church, or charity from your church, since they would be the closest to your situation and could determine whether help is needed, or instructions in finances, or just obtaining more or better work. Theft by the civil magistrate is still theft.… Read more »
” when you take food stamps, you are using the power of the sword (through the civil sphere) to forcibly take funds from fellow citizens” Well no, you objectively aren’t. The sword has already been used, the funds already stolen from your fellow citizens. You not taking the benefit will not in any way reduce either the sword application or the funds stolen. This is not to say that there isn’t an argument for what you say. Merely that there *is* a distinction. “Theft by the civil magistrate is still theft.” This is where your comparison falls apart. Who’s doing the… Read more »
Justin, you are making the point that much of our civilization is built upon ungodly standards, which I agree with. I agree with most of what you said, however I think distinctions should be made. If I am understanding you correctly, you are saying that the taking of stolen property isn’t theft, that the moral issue isn’t with the final user of the stolen property, but with the actual thief. However, legally, “Receiving stolen property is a crime that a person is guilty of when the person receives stolen property that is known to be stolen and the person has… Read more »
With respect, and I do respect that you’ve responded with honesty and thoughtfulness, I do not think you have followed the implications of my examples. “Can I get a loan from a bank even though the bank is probably going to sell the loan to Fannie or Freddie? Can I buy from Amazon even though they are woke? Can I function as a normal person in society? I would say that yes, you can. You can get a loan from the bank even though the bank may sell the loan.” That was not the reasoning I gave for the loan… Read more »
Justin, all good questions. Let me try a couple: By what standard do I determine the percentage I allow to be funded by stolen government funds: I would prefer zero. The standard should be the law of God. This would require honest money, which we don’t have. However, although I cannot control the government stealing from myself and others through excessive taxation and inflation, I can reject the forms of theft that I have control over. I honestly don’t know what other options there are, other than to attempt to function without the American currency. If a man pays a… Read more »
I don’t think we disagree on any serious point of principle, merely how those principles need be interacted with in the modern age. “However, although I cannot control the government stealing from myself and others through excessive taxation and inflation, I can reject the forms of theft that I have control over.” You get to decide for yourself personally what degree of lack of control is reasonable to consider it acceptable. Christians *could* as a rebuke of the lending system, never buy real estate but in cash. We don’t because that would be wildly and spectacularly inconvenient for no discernable… Read more »
Justin, I agree that we don’t disagree on the main principals. And I did bring the critique upon myself. I would appreciate, since you have taken the time to interact and attempt to show where I am not being consistent, for you to explain why you believe it is moral to take the food stamps, particularly in answering some of the questions you skipped from my prior answer. They were as follows: It appears that your position on welfare is as follows: Since there is theft and immorality in every purchase using the American dollar, and in our economic system,… Read more »
We must be under some kind of miscommunication, because I did not skip those questions, I wrapped them into a single answer. “A man on the board of the Federal Reserve is held to a higher standard on the topic than we are, and so to we are held to a higher standard than beggars. The reason I did not draw a line, and would discourage drawing a line, is that we do not know the circumstances of anon. Is he held to the beggar standard, our standard, or the Federal Reserve standard? Wilson did not draw a hard line… Read more »
Justin, our taxes keep going up to take care of various ungodly programs just like a large portion of today’s ungodly government. How is the power of the sword used correctly when our tax money is given to illegals? When I checked a few years ago, in my state, each illegal receives benefits at the same cash level that a family of four earns annually. The illegal receives Social Security benefits immediately after being assigned a court case number, they have free health care, they are not required to have auto insurance or in many cases even a driver’s license,… Read more »
Just to set the record straight: the Federal Reserve isn’t part of the federal government. It’s a wholly private entity owned largely by the Rothschild family.
Does this mean you don’t/won’t call the police or fire department under any circumstance? And you stay off of public roads?
He isn’t saying the gov dosen’t have a job, he is just saying it isn’t overseeing the redistribution of wealth.
His stance on taxation is not clear to me.
I pay for all of the above with taxes.
Okay, so you’re not talking a simplistic “taxation is theft” stance?
Nope, Romans 13. If all taxation was theft, than any taxation would be immoral, which is obviously not the case.
You are right to acknowledge Romans 13 and not look for a way around it, as some Christians do. Now I don’t see the admonition to pay taxes there as telling me to only do so if I approve of the way revenue is spent, though I do care about that. Do you say taking food stamps is theft because you assume the recipient is not paying taxes like the rest of us? If so, is the non-taxpayer then not entitled to the benefits of public services either, i.e. police, fire department, roads, etc.? Or is more that he or… Read more »
Romans 13:6 For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God’s ministers, attending continually upon this very thing. Food stamps is theft because it is stealing. It is a coerced redistribution of wealth. It could be from the rich to the poor, or the poor to the rich. It is outside of the sphere of authority that God gives to the civil magistrate. This is different from public services, which are services we pay for (whether we want to or not, although there would be a different argument for which one’s are within the purview of the… Read more »
I’d vote against the policy, but the money has already been taken via taxes. Leaving it on the table is effectively giving to pagans what could be used for a Christian family.
Since, as Christoper notes, the money has already been taken via taxes, which we agree are not theft and we are obligated to pay in keeping with obeying God by being subject to governing authorities, I would not call it theft to accept food stamps. My tax money once in the government “coffers” (which is partly before I ever see it) is no longer mine but belongs to the government. That I might not agree with the particulars of how my taxes were paid doesn’t change that. The government, to use a collective term, has authority over how public money… Read more »
I’m impressed with how charitably this exchange was handled. Points were well made on each side. This exchange draws out just how deeply compromised the entire system has become. Sam Rutherford wrote: Food stamps is theft because it is stealing. It is a coerced redistribution of wealth. It could be from the rich to the poor, or the poor to the rich. It is outside of the sphere of authority that God gives to the civil magistrate. This is different from public services, which are services we pay for I’m in complete agreement that the State ought to get out… Read more »
Katecho, more than half of my local and state taxes are supporting government schools. There is more than enough money to actually teach, but the tax money for education softly slips into other arenas. They are still under the umbrella of education, but are not required for education. When DIA first opened outside Denver, the access road from I70 to DIA was posted at 45 MPH. The cops ticketed and made huge amounts of money. A CPA acquaintance, who relaxed by looking at the Colorado budget, noticed that the money for the DIA access road was diverted from federal funds… Read more »
I agree with Sam’s basic premise… avoid government redistribution. If possible, work something out within your local congregation.
‘“These pro-Hamas rallies are nothing but round two of the BLM protests.”
https://naomiwolf.substack.com/p/cities
This is better explanation than “Muh, anti-Zionism!” The same protesters/rioters were part of the “You whites hate all brown people including Jews!” chorus a few months ago.
Andrew Isker, you should be careful about sharing a foxhole with a coward. To Doug Wilson Christian Nationalism is a marketing gimmick…like setting fire to a dumpster. When the pressure is on he’ll stab you in the back.
I grew up on professional wrestling. I know how this goes. This is the part where Jared Longshore pops out behind you with the folding chair.
When prophecy is finally fulfilled and the Jews are converted the Christian Church will have millions of Spencer Klavans.
And even more Thabiti Anyabwiles.
Anon, I would suggest you get help in the same order as your loves should be ordered. 1: God: Pray to God to improve your financial situation. There is nothing “prosperity gospel” about asking God to help you make ends meet. God really promised to take care of our needs, it’s in the Bible. 2: Family: If you have family members willing and able to help for the time being, that should be your first step. There is no shame in asking for help from a wealthy dad, father-in-law, or uncle. I believe the biblical way for them to help… Read more »
I have been studying sex abuse in the church for about ten years. The questions that you are asking are common and they are wrong questions to ask. The biggest question to ask is how could this man hurt the children in our church if he wanted to? Is he really repentant or is he pulling the wool over my eyes? Is he a biblical wolf? How to tell? Keeping him out of the children’s wing is a waste of time. As soon as kids are old enough, they are running from one end of the church to the other.… Read more »
“While you are talking to the cops, ask who they would recommend for lie detector services.
Insist that this man take a lie detector test with the following questions:”
I would not advise anyone to rely on a lie detector test for any decision of importance. It is a device that has been misnamed. It would be more accurately called a tension detector. People can be tense in response to a question for a wide variety of reasons.
DT, the man abused a child at a church where he served as a minister. He abused the trust of so many people so profoundly that he should never be employed in a church again. If he had any shame at all, he’d support his family by finding a different job. He has disqualified himself forever. This should be blindingly obvious. What’s more troubling is the stance taken by your church’s leadership. Hiring a child sex offender to serve in ministry in any capacity betrays an appalling lack of judgment and/ or intelligence on the part of church leadership. If… Read more »
Predators can spot this kind of leadership. It is tragically common. Jimmy Hinton says that it comes from bad theology. We don’t teach what the Bible says about wolves. Hinton is a small-town Church of Christ pastor, who has taught how wolves operate to manipulate churches into protecting wolves instead of banishing them. Except for his support of Boz Tchividjian, I think he is a good man to be aware of. He has a large number of videos on You Tube on the subject called Speaking Out Against Sex Abuse Podcast.
Y’all need to up your reading comprehension. It was clearly stated that the abuse took place when he was a young teenager; it was only found out when he was in ministry at a church, some 20-30 years later. We also have not been told what “something sexual” actually was. It could have been rape, it could have been indecent exposure, it could have been masturbating in her presence or with her coerced cooperation. Wide variety of possibilities in “something sexual.” That still, IMO, disqualifies him for any authority in the church. But accuse him of the things he actually… Read more »
I still recommend going to the police and ask them what his criminal record is. If he was eighteen, then it falls under an adult record. It won’t be sealed.
Well AKA, would you hire someone who masturbated or exposed himself in front of a little girl and then hid the fact for decades while pursuing a career in ministry? Would you not call that a profound breach of trust, not just the act itself (which is disgusting), but the fact that he shamelessly sought spiritual authority for decades without repentance? This is not a person to be trusted and nothing shows this more clearly than the fact that he’s still seeking out a position at a church. He should find another job. He’s done enough harm.
By this standard, a Road to Damascus is insufficient to allow Paul to take his place in the Church.
By general rule I agree with you, but the general rule does not exist to replace intelligence and discernment. Neither of us know the man. Evaluating his repentance is a task for those that do.
The key difference would be that Paul never hid that he persecuted God’s church, nor was he professing Christ at the time. This man molested a child (presumably as a professing Christian) and then concealed the fact for many years while proclaiming the word of God. Even assuming this man did not victimize another child during all this time, he still brought the church where he served into grave disrepute. By pursuing a position at a new church, he’s threatening to cause harm to the reputation of a new church. This man, if he has repented, should have the wisdom… Read more »
I do not presume he was a professing Christian, maybe he was maybe he was not, the details given say nothing about that. I don’t know exactly what is meant by “young teenager”, to me that implies about 13 or 14, but it could have older. As has been pointed out, “something sexual” is a very vague term. I’m not going to construct a narrative in my head with insufficient data, and neither should anyone else. I agree, the church should obtain a police report and any other relevant records if possible, and they should have a thorough background check… Read more »
“It’s time to find a different line of work.”
I couldn’t agree more. It’s time for most, if not all employees in the public school system to find a different line of work. If they aren’t actively molesting children, then they’re exposing children to rank pornography and trying to recruit them into the alphabet soup of sexual deviancy.
Parent Nightmare: Public Schools Sex Abuse 100x Greater Than in Catholic Church – Report (westernjournal.com)
“Will” sounds oddly familiar.
Hi Cherrera and The Commenter Formerly Known As fp, we were discussing the credentials of a former sex-offender, not sex abuse in the public schools (which heaven knows, is a problem). I’m not sure what either of you guys are getting at, or why I sound oddly familiar to Cherrera. Could you explain?
“Which heaven knows is a problem.”
A far, far bigger problem than what’s being discussed here. Yet somehow, this one person whom you don’t know with a long-dead, amorphous skeleton in his closet is getting a lot of your energy.
Oh well, enjoy the decline. I’m sure straining at this gnat is worth all the brownie points you’re getting.
This is asinine, and I don’t know why you think you’re qualified to speculate about my motives (“brownie points?”). Also, why do you think I’m defending public schools, or that I enjoy their decline? I didn’t even mention them. Your entire comment is bizarre. Of course there are far bigger problems in the world than the one we’re currently discussing. So? We’re not talking about sexual abuse in government schools–we’re talking about it in the church. Just because sex abuse is a bigger issue somewhere else doesn’t mean churches should let down their guard. This is so obvious I don’t… Read more »
You may not send your kids to public school, but you’re still paying for it. Through the nose.
But please, do go on about this one guy who you know next to nothing about and doesn’t receive one red cent from you. It’s not asinine at all.
Your take on another post about employers rightfully being able to fire non-Branch Covidians based on double-blind studies on masks and clot shots (a take that’s aged horribly) sounded a lot like someone who used to post here. As I recall, he complained about having “long COVID” (a symptom of many jabbed) and disappeared suddenly awhile back. He also didn’t like being censored (after shotgun commenting for years) but had no problem with Big Tech censoring, memory holing and cancelling people. After all, they were on his side.
Like the kids say, iykyk.
Your phraseology and writing styles are very similar as well.
Anyone who ‘seeks spritutual authority’ should be avoided like the plague.
I just want to go on record that I’m willing to make due with Gentile cardiothoracic surgeons.