Contents
Reckoning with the Means
Western civilization is certainly dependent on the influence of Christianity which has so influenced the culture. How much weight do you put on Christian influence in the culture as opposed to factors like geography, flora/fauna etc? I’m thinking of the argument in Guns Germs and Steel, for example, that the West developed much faster because of those factors. Also do you attribute it to particularly Protestant Christianity? Arminia is typically considered the first Christian country—but they have not had the same development as the West.Cole
Cole, I do recognize many “earthly” factors that contributed to the prosperity of the West. But I also believe that the God who keeps covenant is the one who uses those means, and who arranges them for His people beforehand. Canaan was a land of milk and honey before the Israelites got there. In other words, I treat it as all of a piece.
Define “Nice”
One of the frequent lines I hear coming out of Moscow is the decrying of “niceness” on the part of the Christian, typically in speech. I typically hear this with little qualification, (if my memory is serving me correctly), and with all the fire and razor edge of the Moscow Mood.
I’ve never actually been clear as to what y’all define as “niceness.” Is there not biblical precedent for being nice, kind, and gentle? I know y’all would say that there is, but how are Christians to live that out? What is unbiblical niceness and what is biblical niceness? Jesus was not full of rebukes all the time, but often took a tender stance, especially with the Gentiles.
Is there also not a danger with decrying “niceness” as a whole that can breed a contemptuous and scoffing culture amongst the brethren? If a serrated edge is needed in this day and age (and to some extent I agree) should not that same edge, be cooled with kindness so that it doesn’t overheat? I say this out of concern for the effect that an overheated serrated edge may have on Moscow’s ministry.
May God guide you in paths of righteousness.Kenneth
Kenneth, whenever you enroll in a math class, you have math problems. When you take up a sharp blade in order to use it, you will have sharp blade problems. So yes to the caution. They way I understand problematic “niceness” is when the mandate to be polite has become more important than the command to be righteous. It is, in effect, the idolatry of manners.
Women in Worship
Regarding 1 Cor. 14:34 and this post:
I am a member of a PCA church that just had a woman lead liturgy for the first time. I was dismayed but not exactly surprised. I think that there is a strong argument to be made that doing so is “leading” or “teaching” and therefore not appropriate. I immediately thought of 1 Corinthians 14:34 and I looked that reference up on your site to see what you have to say. By the way, I love the Scripture reference feature of Mablog. I commend it as a useful commentary. I found the blog post “No Flat Prohibition” and it gave me pause. You argue that women can prophesy and pray in church in an orderly way that is not prohibited.
I have no agenda in the matter other than to follow the Bible. I do have a concern that the spirit of the age regarding feminism has obviously infiltrated the church and the lack of teaching on biblical gender roles and biblical masculinity and femininity is sorely missing in my church. I think it is a far more of uncomfortable topic to the elders and pastor that biblical sexuality. I actually don’t think they have a clue how to address it at all.
So my question is how should I be thinking about women doing the liturgy? The pastor said they would not be allowed to do the “prayers for the people” section yet she did the call to worship, the prayer for the offering and introduced the confession of sin. She also served communion with him as the server of the second line.
Where does the line get crossed where praying and prophesying in church is allowed for women and is not leading or teaching? Where is the line that beyond which only elders and pastors should be participating?Luke
Luke, all of the things that you describe I would call “leading,” and thus prohibited. I don’t believe that a woman is prohibited from praying, but I do believe she may not lead the congregation in anything.
Postmill & Universalism
A question on postmillenialism.
One postmil strength is taking passages such as: ‘taking away the sin of the world’ (John 1:29), ‘that the world through Him might be saved’ (John 3:17), Christ being ‘the propitiation for the sins of the world’ (1 John 2:2) and ‘reconciling the world to Himself’ (2 Cor. 5:19) in a fairly full and unlimited manner in the sense that B.B. Warfield describes—’that in the age-long development of the race of men, it will attain at last unto a complete salvation, and our eyes will be greeted with the glorious spectacle of a saved world.’
However, Colossians 1:16,20,21 says God will ‘reconcile all things to Himself . . . whether things on earth or things in heaven, having made peace through the blood of His cross’. But how does that apply to non-elect humans, fallen angels, hell and the resurrected wicked dead?Henry
Henry, the reconciliation is truly general and universal, but not head-for-head, each-and-every universal. The world will be saved, but not every last member of it. But it will be the case, when all is said and done, that there will be many more people in Heaven than in Hell.
The Great Commission
The Introduction for Greyfriars Hall includes this section:
“In a similar way, the Great Commission was given to the apostles, but in a way which ensures the commission is self-perpetuating. Christ told the apostles to teach obedience to everything which Christ had commanded (Matt. 28:18-20). This would of course include His last command, that the nations be discipled. This means that the apostles who received the initial commission were to pass it on to the next generation, and the next generation was to do the same. But this commission is given to the church, not to every individual Christian. This means that the leadership of the church is to receive the commission, and the leadership of the church is to pass on the commission.
Our generation is so individualistic that we tend to interpret everything in private terms. The notion that God may have given the government of the church a set of instructions for the preparation and training of future leaders, their qualifications, their duties, etc. is entirely foreign to us. But this is one foreign notion which we must learn to make our own; we must come to speak the language of Scripture again.”
I am coming from a Southern Baptist church, and therefore this is not a concept that I have heard voiced before now. The more I think about it, however, the more sense it makes. Do you know of any resources that describe this understanding of the Great Commission, as well as the biblical responsibilities unique to church leaders in general (like 2 Tim. 2:2), in greater depth? Anything would be appreciated!
God bless you and Christ Church,Will
Will, I am sorry that I do not know of any book-length argument for this. That is a shame because I believe it is greatly needed. If any of our readers know of something, please pipe up.
Abolition Thought Experiment
I want to make this as succinct and as brief as possible. I watched your conversation with the abolitionist Russell Hunter. I would like for you to pose to him and others this thought experiment. Let’s just use the exact same scenario with you being the governor and instead of signing a heartbeat law it’s a law that would extend the life of one of Russell’s children. Say the child is the victim of some sort of environmental crime and the bill doesn’t go as far as making it totally illegal for anyone else to do what was done to her but somehow the bill will either extend her life for another year until we can address the flaw(s) or by not signing it she dies immediately. Which one do you think Russell would be in favor of? Maybe you can work that example out better than I have expressed it but hopefully you get the point and it will help them understand those of us who want exactly what Russell wants but know that this is similar to our sanctification it will be a process. Blessings.Bruce
Bruce, thank you. Using an imperfect system to do some good is good, while acquiescing in the imperfections would not be.
The Moral Law and Incest
“The moral law doth forever bind all . . .” WCF 19:5
What about incest? Is it a ceremonial law? A civil law? Why wasn’t it binding for Adam’s kids?Yana
Yana, as should be obvious, Cain and Seth each married their sisters. Such incest was not prohibited until the time of Moses. Abraham married Sarah, his half-sister. In the second generation of humanity, the genetic deck of cards was not yet shuffled and so there was not the concern we would have about birth defects and so on. So I would say the prohibition of such incest would be a taboo, rightly contained within the civil law, and with moral ramifications.
Modesty Within the Home
I greatly appreciate your availability and dedication to all of Christ for all of life. You are a valuable resource in many ways.
I want to ask if you have any insights or thoughts on the topic of modesty within the home, particularly regarding immediate family members. My fiancée and I come from slightly different cultural backgrounds on this subject, and we’ve been discussing how best to approach it in our future household. How should one think about changing clothes in front of family members or being lightly dressed at home—such as wearing a t-shirt without a bra or wearing very short clothing? What should one consider, and what potential implications might there be?
And does Leviticus 18 has any relevance to this issue? As it uses the idiom “uncovering nakedness” in the context of sexual relations. Why is it “implicitly” condemned with those words? The Bible “explicitly” condemns sexual sin in other contexts, so I wonder if this passage carries a broader meaning and application, such as the idea of not exposing oneself in front of family members. And I have also been wondering if the story of Noah and his sons in Genesis 9 has any relevance to this topic?
Thank you in advance for your time and insight. God bless.Sam
Sam, I believe the home is not a place where you get to be immodest. Rather, it should be the place where the kids all learn modesty. And anyone who believes that home is a “natural” place where sexual temptations do not occur is someone who doesn’t get around much. Stay as far away from that sort of heartache as you can.
Allergic to Lies
In your conclusion to “What’s Wrong with Human Rights” you talked about having an allergic reaction to lies. My husband and I had quite a visible reaction to the C19 lies here in Canada. We were both fired from our jobs for refusing to validate the fraud. Our compromised/corrupt corporate, religious and legal systems have meant we have been denied any sort of justice. The cartoon of the man “sifting through past injustices” felt a bit like a pinch, as we have repeatedly been accused of insisting on rights unfit for Christians who should love their neighbor above themselves. I wonder how we are to know when requesting justice, like the poor widow, crosses some line into being selfish. We have been told it was our choice we lost our jobs and we should just move on. We have done our best to find new jobs, support our kids through losses they experienced, and have found a new church that believes in the authority of God and all of His word. We have be intentionally and gratefully waiting on God for justice, but in light of current events to “live not by lies” is a lonely road. Our allergies to lies have meant we are treated as lepers.
I write to you to say thank you for your weekly reminders that we are not crazy nor alone. Knowing there are others who understand that Truth remains during our wait for seemingly impossible justice is a hope-shaped anchor. It appears quite possible that darker days are ahead but our God is Light eternal.
May He continue to shine His face on you and give you peace.B
B, well done. Don’t become weary in doing good.
The Finger Issue Continues as a Topic of Conversation
Hello dear brother. First, I thank you for being a blessing to myself and my family. We have learned much from you and your people. Second, I encourage you in wielding that serrated edge. You are cuttin’ things that need cuttin’. IMO you are being merciful. I read EX 34:13-14 and I think “Doug & Co. are getting a fair amount of this work done in a God-honoring and neighbor-loving way.” Third, the Cash Finger was fine. It was pointed at an enemy of God.Thane
Thane, thanks.
To the Proprietor of this Fine Establishment,
Not to stir up additional controversy (but I’m not going to let that stop me), I’d like to comment on “the NSA middle finger ad.” What I would like to address is what the detractors of NSA/Moscow Mood are not privy to from behind their computer screens. “That” ad represents a place to grow the next generation in the fear of the Lord, fight dragons, tear down idols, and do so joyfully. The last 3 summers our oldest son has attended the NSA Called Conference, the most recent being this past July. Prior to the conference he told me he wished he could attend Christ Church while he was in Moscow, but, unfortunately it did not seem that would be possible this trip. The Saturday morning I was to pick him up from the airport I awoke to the news his flight had been canceled due to a worldwide software glitch. My immediate reaction was “Thank you, Lord, for answering his prayer, and giving him this extra time to experience Your people in Moscow!” I expected both NSA and Christ Church to come together on behalf of those who were unable to reach their families that day. I was not disappointed. From the Called staff, who stepped up to give the “Minor Setbacks” (as the kids so aptly named themselves) the leadership they would need for Called “Week 3,” to Christ Church, and the generosity of a family who fed an additional 14 young people that Sunday after church, I see the fruits of Johnny Cash’s “favorite finger” in Moscow; Christians who are tearing down the idols in their own lives in order to walk in the good works God prepared for them from the foundation of the earth. I know this because my family has been the recipient of those good works.
P.S. That finger (and the other nine) played guitar around the corner from us in a house once owned by a member of St. Johnny of Cash’s band. Sadly, this was long prior to my residency in the neighborhood, but still a fun bit of local lore for this Johnny Cash fan.Grateful Mom
GM, thanks very much. And please give my greetings to your minor setback.
Brother Doug, I need to add this letter to the pile I’m sure you’ve already received about “the middle finger ad.”
The camp that I fall into is the same one you discuss in your “Doug and Friends” episode (which I will be referencing periodically), the camp that loves what Moscow is doing, but thought that “this nano second was a juvenile distraction and not worth it.”
My concern is exactly the same as Pastor Matt’s from Canada in your last round of letters. I’m indebted to him for expressing my opinion, so now I get to carry on the conversation.
In your response, you said “to insist that [the f-word] has kept that sexual component everywhere it goes is just not accurate.” I don’t think Matt ever insisted this, but what he did insist on was the “meaning” of the word, regardless of how people use it. There is no need to explain what NSA “intended” by the ad. No reasonable person should need to be told that y’all were not encouraging people to “dry hump your idolatry.” I think it’s worth pointing out that the material that comes out of Moscow is a beacon of truth and accuracy in a time where language is muddled and confused. It is odd to me that, in this instance, you seem to be appealing to the culture’s definition or sense of a particular word to justify your use of it.
As a case study, you have defended the term “Christian Nationalist” on the basis that you are a “Christian” and a “nationalist.” I’m paraphrasing many articles of yours, but essentially your defense of the term goes back to the basic definition of the words. The culture has hijacked the term “Christian Nationalist” to use it as a way to sling mud at those of us who hate secularism. But you and I don’t care about how the culture defines it. We don’t care that they have made it synonymous with “white supremacist” and “homophobic”; other terms that they have hijacked. No sir, we defend it on the merits of what it is and enrage the culture at the same time. It’s a win win.
Using this logic, why do we care how the culture uses the f-word? Yes, they use it as an intensifier, but they speak ignorantly. Some in the culture use the f word so frequently in conversation that it is like breathing. So often the culture is blissfully unaware of what they are actually saying, but uses a word or phrase for its dramatic effect to get people riled up. This seems like a habit that Bible-believing, well-educated Christians ought not stoop to.
The ad was offensive enough to the evanjellyfish with every second outside of the middle finger, but I think that nanosecond was needlessly offensive to hordes of people that really love y’all a lot. To echo Heather’s letter, I have spent a lot of time defending you to others at my church. I truly believe that our church and your crew in Moscow agree on more things than we disagree, but many of my close friends have eaten all of your jalapeños on a single cracker. I have worked with many of them explaining your biblical usage of strong language. With all my heart, I believe there are good things coming out of Moscow and I want fellow believers to join me in applauding it and imitating it. I fear that in the process of alienating yourself from those who hate the work you are doing, you are alienating yourself from others who would otherwise be on your side.
PS: I know you didn’t make the ad, but I’m addressing you because you accepted responsibility for it and stand behind it.John
John, thank you for a judicious and responsible letter. Your disagreement is the kind of good faith disagreement that we welcome. I would go back to your statement distinguishing “the ‘meaning’ of the word, regardless of how people use it.” I would say that the meaning of a word or gesture is how people use it. But when something has a multitude of meanings, and you are addressing hundreds of thousands of people (as the ad did), it is necessary to make choices that will not be universally understood. That said, time will tell if we hit our intended target.
God’s Chastisement?
This isn’t about any post in particular, just looking for some pastoral counsel… At the time of writing this letter, my wife and I are almost sure we are having a miscarriage. We will confirm this early next week. We are still praying for a miracle, but all signs are pointing to tragedy.
My question is this . . . This would be our third child. For the previous two, I had spent far more time praying over them before they were born than I had at the same stage of pregnancy as our new little one. Am I at fault for my baby potentially dying for not being in prayer as I should have been/had been previously? Did my lack of action in prayer (or perhaps sin in some other area of life) lead to this, as it did with David and Bathsheba? This isn’t a matter of me being angry with God—He is good, and if my third child is to grow up in Heaven and I meet him or her there, then all the more glory to God for that. But I am struggling with despair over my own neglect.Anonymous
Anonymous, agonizing over such “would have, could have, should have” issues is a counsel of despair. Resist it as a deadly temptation. A parent should feel guilty over straight-up sin and neglect, of course. A parent who leaves a child in a hot car and the child dies is a parent who should confess the sin for what it was. But to assign responsibility to yourself for “not praying enough” is to make yourself automatically guilty for anything whatever. If something bad happens, you can always say “I could have prayed more.” And if you don’t say it to yourself, the devil will.
Of Statues and Such
Re: On the pulling down of statues
Really well said. It is important not to start into one argument and allow people to subtly change the subject. “Churchill was the villain in WWII,” and then “Churchill is not above criticism.” Not the same point. Either we stay on point or the discussion cannot be had.
Seems like this is an example of the “motte and bailey” approach to argument. Come out torches and pitchforks to tear down the statue. Then say “how can you say person xxx was without fault—you are just believing in the narrative etc.” No, actually we are just saying leave the statue alone, you can’t be trusted to take down statues until you know how to put a decent one up. The original idea was crazy and we are not going to let you switch it out for a reasonable one all sneaky like. We have noticed you’re crazy and we won’t stop noticing.
Up here in Canada we have similar problem with our first PM John A Macdonald. People want to desecrate and tear down his statue—it’s not a reasonable discussion. These people just want to blow away the foundations and level everything so they can start something else. And if they succeed you don’t need “conspiracy theories” to figure out how that works. Read up on USSR, Maoist China, Khmer Rouge , maybe check out what the current Chinese Communist Party is up to and you’ll understand enough.
Then get back to the old books because you’ll need a cleanser.Roger
R
In your most recent blog post (On Churchill and the Pulling Down of Statues) you said in the conclusion that we shouldn’t help tear down any more statues.
How does this relate with the Satan statue in Iowa’s capital building that was torn down late last year?
Or perhaps this blog post has nothing to do with Christians tearing down idols, and everything to do with Christians helping Leftists tear down statues of historical figures?
Thank you so much for your time.Timothy
Timothy, I was talking about tearing down long-established statues of historical figures. Tearing down the Satan statue was in effect stopping the erecting of a new (abominable) statue.
Law School?
I went to a reformed bible college (Boyce College) and learned greatly under that worldview while gaining my humanities degree. Since then I have pursued my law degree and am finishing up my last year. During my time in law school I have been exposed to very liberal teaching, many times at the expense of my education. To put a finer point on it, even the law books we’re required to read include authors such as Erwin Chemerinsky. I was further shocked when I was one of a small minority of students who considered myself an originalist, and most students view the Constitution as outdated and largely irrelevant. I believe this trend is the norm in law schools across the nation. Would you ever consider a small hybrid (remote/in-person) law school with a Reformed Christian worldview?
Thank youTaylor
Taylor, yes, I have thought of that. Not a front burner thing, but that pot is on the stove.
Teasing Mom
I’ve noticed that sometimes, the advertisements for New Saint Andrews College (no, not [that] one) seem to tease prospective students’ mothers. Maybe “tease” isn’t the right word, but that’s what I’m going with. For example, in the “Not All Rigor is Mortis” ad, one of the lines says, “When your mom calls us with concerns about the rigor of our program, we promise to ignore every word she says.” Another ad says that the students’ moms “should worry more about how spiritually distant even a nearby godless campus is.”
I don’t necessarily disagree with either of these quotes. I think an proper education should be rigorous, and a nearby secular college can indeed corrupt young Christian adults. I can also see what the marketing team is trying to do here—they want to push back against mom’s excessive softness. But are you not concerned that these parts of the ads may tempt people to violate the Fifth Commandment? If not, why not?
Thanks,Brandon
Brandon, I would describe those sorts of references as examples of mild teasing. But it is teasing that establishes a marker, one that helps godly moms navigate what we are seeking to do. But at the same time, it is not a constant refrain—that Rigor ad is something like twenty years old.
A Translation I Haven’t Read
I have read and watched some of the blog posts and videos in which you explain why you prefer the King James Version (due to your preference for the Textus Receptus / Majority Text). What do you think of Young’s Literal Translation, also based on the Textus Receptus?Shaw
Shaw, very sorry. I have not read that one. I just ordered it though.
Budding Presbyterian
What reading materials would you suggest for a budding Presbyterian? Specifically in regards to church governance and liturgical practice?Rhys
Rhys, I would start with this.
More on Concupiscence
Re. “Justification and Concupiscence”, 5/15/24
Thanks in advance for all the work you and the Moscow crew do for the kingdom. Your focus on concupiscence and temptation has stuck with me for the past several months and to the point, I recently watched a pastor from a Wesleyan/Arminian tradition answering a question about homosexual desire. For what it’s worth to the context, he prefaced everything by saying that the Bible never condemns homosexual desire, just homosexual acts.
He later asserted that a person doesn’t need to be straight as to sexual desire prior to salvation to be saved, which I would generally agree with from a Reformed perspective with a caveat or two. But from the Arminian perspective prevenient grace is offered to all people, opening their eyes to their plight and giving them the opportunity to accept or refuse salvation as an act of their own creaturely free will.
But if salvation in the Arminian view is an act of will to repent and believe, then a person cannot choose to repent and believe and not renounce sin in response to the knowledge of sin given via prevenient grace. So either God’s prevenient grace would have to make straight prior to salvation or the person would need to choose to be straight as part and parcel with accepting salvation.
Is it not incoherent to say that God gives a person the ability to recognize homosexuality as sin and requires a willful act of repentance from sin in order to be justified, and also the person can persist in homosexual orientation post-salvation as this pastor seems to assert?Jason
Jason, yes. That would seem to be a point of tension.
Hard Times Ahead Revisited
I warned a gent named John last week that he was headed for marriage trouble. A number of you responded, as did John. His letter is last in this section.
Doug’s response to Cussin’ John is a great example of how a prediction can also serve as a concise rebuke. Positively prophetic.Jennifer
Jennifer, thank you.
On your last edition of letters to the editor, you responded to John under the heading “Hard Times Ahead.” What would you recommend his wife do:
She is scared of social ramifications and does not go to a healthy church, and there are no good churches around that she could trust for counsel or help.
Should she tolerate him shouting at her in front of people, saying “shutup” in front of family, etc.?
Would the belief and practices of this man be grounds for separation or divorce?AA
AA, no, not grounds for divorce. But it would most certainly be grounds for insisting that they get help for their marriage, which they desperately need.
I have to admit the letter from John in your last letter responses was incredibly troubling (the one titled “Hard Times Ahead”). I have rarely seen such blatant misogyny, (and I try not to bandy that term about), and it is very worrying. I love the benevolent use of the role of husband, a role I hope to fill someday, but there are few things that incense me quicker, and more easily than those who demean those under them. Especially men talking of ill of women, treating them like decorations that give birth, or some other such wickedness.
I lay the reality and conception of feminism at the feet of men who abdicated through tyranny or weak will. However, anger can blind, and while it is a God-given thing, and has the potential to do great good, it has potential to do great harm. How can I respond to actual misogyny (as defined by the Bible), in a stern way that holds as little tolerance for it as I hold for feminism? What can I do to make anger in such circumstances, protective, and not destructive?Kenneth
Kenneth, this kind of thing does call for anger. But when Paul tells us to “be angry and sin not,” not letting the sun go down on it, he is telling us that if there is nothing constructive we can do with our anger, then we simply need to let it go. If you saw this kind of thing in your brother, you would go talk to him. If you see it in a letters column, and there is nothing to do about it, then give it to God and drop it.
I was pissed off when I wrote the letter, which you titled “Hard Times Ahead.” You replied: “John, for all kinds of reasons, too many to list here, I am afraid that you are headed for some really hard times, the origins of which you probably won’t understand.”
Aside from all the foul language, which I’m certain is not what you think is the main problem, can you please show me where I’m going wrong.
I’m asking for help. Even if you just point me to some resources, that will do. I want to change course and understand the reasons and origins for why I’d end up in hard times.
Thanks,John
John, the first thing to learn is how to stay silent, not speaking or writing, when you are pissed off. There will always be less of a mess that way. When it comes to the sexual confusions of our era, it is essential to remember that feminism is the enemy, not women. Those who treat women as the enemy are falling into the trap that feminism baited, just for them. For reading, I would suggest my books Federal Husband, Reforming Marriage, and Decluttering Your Marriage. I hope my prediction for you fails.
Judgment Call
Is it a sin for a Christian not to go to church? I mean a Sunday morning worship gathering. I understand providential hindering, but I’m asking if it’s a sin for any other reason to miss even one week (inclement weather, family coming to town, travel, etc).
Specifically, when the author of Hebrews says, “Don’t forsake the assembling of yourselves,” is it really a fair interpretation to say that missing one week is “forsaking?” If I don’t go to one of my family’s Christmas events one year, but am involved in everything else, am I really forsaking them?
Looking for guidance . . .Caleb
Caleb, no, I don’t think missing a week is “forsaking.” But it might be an indication that it is not as high a priority as it ought to be. But all of this is a judgment call. Inclement weather could include a light drizzle and church is five minutes away, or a savage blizzard with the church an hour away. I do believe that worship should be a very high priority.
What is the history of the name “Christ Church?” I do not mean your church in Moscow, but the first one by that name. Where was the first one? Who founded it? Why isn’t it “Christ’s Church,” in the possessive? Why did the name catch on so much among Episcopals and Presbyterians? It does not seem to be a denomination in itself, but it has a clear association with the Reformation. Can you fill in these gaps for me, or point me somewhere to look?Tyler
Tyler, no, I honestly cannot. I don’t know which was the first historic church to use this name. Anyone?
The Heavenly City
Hebrews & postmillenialism
Heb 13:14: “For here we have no continuing city, but we seek the one to come.”
See also Heb 11:13-16.
How does this theme of being ‘strangers and pilgrims’ here and seeking a ‘heavenly city’ rather than our present earthly one fit with a postmillennial worldview that seeks to build and see the kingdom of God come all over the earth?Henry
Henry, even when the gospel is victorious, and the nations have all come to Christ, we will not yet be at the eternal resurrected state. A man will be considered cursed when he dies at one hundred, but everyone will still die. The last enemy will not yet be put under, and will not be until Christ returns. We will consequently still be looking for the city that is built without hands.
Leadership Resources?
Are you familiar with any ecclesiological resource that would be helpful describing the way elders lead in a church? I seem to be at an impasse with my board who “lead by serving” and then resist making any definitive decision without first getting the approval of committee under their charge. If they sense a proposal, good or bad, will cause a stir with the congregation or committees they become quite sheepish. I’ve tried explaining that this is not a democracy and that we’ve been given a certain amount of authority to make decisions and take responsibility for them. This is getting me pigeon-holed as authoritarian. I offered to research the way church leadership historically relates to their congregation and this seemed to be a momentary relief for them because it has closed the conversation for now.
So, are you aware of any book that might prove helpful for my situation?
Many thanksJordan
Jordan, this sounds like this might be a problem best solved by installing new men on the session over time. But in the meantime, check out Alexander Strauch’s books Biblical Eldership and Meetings That Work. Start there.
Uncanny Resemblance
Have you compared Kamala’s “word salad” to the World’s Foremost Authority of the 60’s/70’s? My goodness, the similarity is incredible.Mark
Mark, thanks for the reminder!
Re Prophetesses and leading. The prophetesses were prophesying before 1 Corinthians was written. Since their prophesies were Divinely inspired, everyone had to listen to them. The Old Testament spoke of prophetesses, so their existence was part of what was to be. That being said, God didn’t want their prophesies in the Canon, so we don’t have them. This is not an accident. This falls under God’s decision as to what we have to work with. In other words, yes there were prophetesses and they really prophesized, but it is a moot point. The leadership of the church is to be… Read more »
1 Cor 14 instructs how prophesying should be done in the church assembled and its purpose. Something for men and women, if all prophesy the unbeliever has the secrets of his heart disclosed; yet in any one meeting only three, and what is said should be weighed. The women being silent in church is as I see it during the weighing of the words of prophecy. If you make it an absolute, then this contradicts what Paul earlier said about women praying and prophesying. The latter is by definition public, and in context I reckon the praying is as well.… Read more »
My thoughts are about the time before Paul’s conversion, in other words, before 1 Corinthians was written.
On the subject of the name Christ Church, I am asking this question because I am involved in planting a new church and we are discussing potential names.
I like the heritage that seems to be attached to the name “Christ Church,” in many old reformed churches, but I have no idea where it originated. One of our elders asked “why isn’t it “Christ’s Church” in the possessive? I don’t know.
The oldest church buildings took their names from the saint or saints to whom they were dedicated. Usually relics of the saint were deposited under the altar. Some churches were also dedicated to the Trinity. On a quick Internet search I don’t see many ancient or medieval churches dedicated primarily to Christ. However, in the late sixth century Augustine of Canterbury dedicated the cathedral in that town to Christ. Maybe that’s why so many Anglican and Episcopal churches use the name, “Christ Church.” For example, at the Reformation many churches that were turned over to Protestants kept their names, but… Read more »
When I read John’s first letter, I got the impression that he was seeking a wife, not that he was married.
This is for Taylor, the law student: Please look into the Blackstone legal fellowship associated with Alliance Defending Freedom. If resistance to the decay of righteous legal order is important to you, it will be right up your alley.
I offer an alternative theory on the marriage laws. My best guess is that God intended brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles, parents, and grandparents for a special relationship other than marriage, but delayed forbidding marriage between brothers and sisters, or aunts and nephews and uncles and nieces until it had gotten to a point when almost everyone could find a suitable spouse outside of his immediate family. God also forbade marrying one’s stepmother, mother-in-law, and aunt-by-marriage, apparently, and certainly in the former two, even after one’s father, father-in-law, or uncle had died. He did not forbid cousin marriage, which can occasionally… Read more »
To Will asking about the Great Commission: I recommend The Greatness of the Great Commission by Kenneth Gentry.
“A preference cascade occurs when numerous individuals, around the same time, realize that they are not “the only one” who thinks the way they do. Before the moment arrives there is an established orthodoxy which remains unquestioned in the official spaces, but as people are left alone with their own thoughts, they find themselves thinking in various heterodox ways. And then, one day it happens. Numerous individuals discover, all at once they discover, that many others believe that the reigning acceptableness is . . . unacceptable. When that happens, there is a lurch, a revolution, an unexpected plot twist. And… Read more »
Whatever else may be said about Winston Churchill, I am sure he would have opposed the mass migration in Britain today at least as furiously as he did Hitler. He may prove to be less of a hero than he seemed eighty years ago, and the Holocaust may someday prove to be an event of lesser magnitude than it is usually thought of, but he was not a villain like Dr. King.
Holy cow. Holocaust denial, and MLK is worse than Hitler. What are y’all smoking because I want some.
You want to be a Holocaust denier, too?
So you are admitting to be one? Can’t say I’m surprised in a Doug Wilson comments section.
And I just am having a long Wednesday, and you all seem to have the same stuff Alex Jones got and he looks to be having a blast. We truly are one step away from gay frogs conversation. Smoke that Info Wars pack.
I don’t know why I’m giving a careful response, as it’s just a waste of time, but here goes: “So you are admitting to be one?” No, of course not. “Too” was made in reference to James. (Or at least your interpretation of James’ comment — I don’t know his exact position on the Holocaust, so it’s unfair for me to attribute a blanket label to it.) The Holocaust was a real, horrendous event which claimed the lives of millions of Jews. “Can’t say I’m surprised in a Doug Wilson comments section.” If you’re attributing Holocaust denial to Doug Wilson… Read more »
Please do not refer to “holocaust deniers”, as this term is now considered to be offensive. The preferred nomenclature is “preference cascaders.”
“For example, Dr. Martin Luther King came on the scene less than 10 years after WW II. It’s not widely known, yet, but it’s pretty well established that MLK was a commie, a fraud who didn’t believe the Bible but used it for gain, that he had scores of affairs with both males and females, both legal and underage, and blew much of the money he received in donations on hookers and booze.” Assume all of that to be true. None of that is the reason you hate him. You hate him because he ended segregation and promoted racial equality.… Read more »
To Chris: I did not mean to say that the Holocaust did not happen,or that MLK was worse than Hitler, but that Churchill, regardless of the magnitude of his opponent’s genocide or the level of his own heroism, Churchill loved his country and was not a villain like MLK. To Kathryn: The question about Dr. King’s work should be whether it was beneficial to both whites and blacks in the long run. If neither, there is no reason to celebrate, and if it ultimately hurt whites more than it helped blacks, we probably shouldn’t celebrate it either. I’m not quite… Read more »
I’m not talking about equality in the sense that everyone has the same standard of living; I’m more of a capitalist than I am anything else, and people will get different results. I’m talking about political and legal equality, and equal access to the economy. Where a bright, hard working young man or woman will not have barriers put up in front of him or her because of their race. Where a black vote carries as much weight as a white vote on election day, where a black person’s dollar spends just as well as a white person’s dollar and… Read more »
My question was not whether it benefited whites as much as blacks, but whether it was helpful to either in the long run. It is possible for full democracy to make things worse for the liberated people, as happened in Zimbabwe. I’m not a Jim Crow segregationist, and I’m glad we don’t have slavery anymore. But I also do not think that blacks have as much right to this country as whites do, at least in places where slavery was never common or even existent. And now places where slavery was never practiced are in trouble. Ohio, since statehood, never… Read more »
The Zimbabwe problem was that Mugabe, a thug, seized power and maintained power through fraudulent elections, and then ran the country into the ground. (Though since he was hostile to abortion and homosexuality at least some here were no doubt just fine with that.) With fair and honest elections he would have been gone after one term (if elected in the first place). There are other black-majority democracies in Africa that are doing just fine. And there are white majority countries that are basket cases. So I don’t think you can write it off to race. It seems more to… Read more »
I would like to know which black countries are safer and nicer to live than certain white countries. Today, I checked the list of countries by murder rate, and only one white country, Uruguay, seemed to be higher than the majority of black countries. After Uruguay comes Russia and the USA, and in the latter, blacks commit nearly half of murder, much more than they should statistically. The poorest and most corrupt European countries–Serbia, Albania, Moldova, Ukraine, Bulgaria, Belarus, Armenia–have lower murder rates than the average black African or Caribbean country, and those few African countries which have murder rates… Read more »
Crime rates are only one aspect of whether a country is a nice place to live, and all countries have parts with higher crime rates than others. But I was thinking in terms of having a good economy, political freedom, a functioning government that governs well, good infrastructure, and stability. And from the standpoint of any of those things, Botswana, Kenya, Togo, Mauritius and South Africa are all far better places to live than Moldova, Albania, Russia or Belarus. And many of Africa’s current problems can be laid at the doorstep of colonialism. Not all of them, but enough. The… Read more »
At least the first three African countries are below those European countries on the human development index. Mauritius is not a purely black country, and South Africa, it is acknowledged, is increasingly corrupt. Kenya (where I’ve been) is not a bad place, but it has had several upheavals on election years, which the Trump riot does not compare to. Botswana has one of the worst Aids rated in the world, at 22 percent. And, to give you something on which we hopefully can find common ground on, I have covered my eyes in Anthropology class as a girl of Togo… Read more »
James, you sound like a weak beta male. Go outside and touch grass instead of reading about crime rates.
John’s letter on the middle finger raises an important point. If Moscow is going to keep putting out this sort of material, then it’s going to mean in practice that anyone suggesting/using/promoting/etc. any of Moscow’s output is going to have to spend increasingly more of their time explaining to others who don’t fully share Moscow’s “cultural ethos”, “serrated edge” or whatever you want to call it, in talking about sticking up your middle finger, burning your sofa, or whatever next month’s allegedly “Chestertonian” jape is. And people who aren’t deeply inside the Moscow world (in whatever form that is for… Read more »
So you are saying the Moscow mood is causing people to actually interact and have a conversation? Most folks I’ve encountered that cringe at such creative provocation to think are quite lacking in the realm of reading, to include the Bible. We are a non reading culture. When I find myself “explaining” such provocations the conversation usually ends on the encouragement to go read a book. Too many “Christian” children being raised illiterate and without fathers to introduce them to the rated “R” version of the Bible. And here we are carrying on about a middle finger. Can you imagine… Read more »
Isn’t there a commenter in this chat asking about cousin marriage? That’s WEIRD. Keep crying about your straw man idea of government schools.
Nice suit, you look kinda of familiar.
No, my proposal that we don’t jump off the cliff isn’t because I secretly sympathise with shooting ourselves in the head.
John in “Hard Times Ahead” has asked for resource recommendations. In addition to Wilson’s list, I would also recommend that he read David Copperfield, by Charles Dickens. His local library should have a copy.