tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13519403.comments2023-09-08T10:15:41.426-04:00God EntrancedDan Waughhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13239327568868739040noreply@blogger.comBlogger626125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13519403.post-19994046983220699522020-01-12T23:49:16.536-05:002020-01-12T23:49:16.536-05:00This is precisely my experience. I remember being ...This is precisely my experience. I remember being in first grade and the teacher giving the invitation to Christ and asking everyone when we made the decision and asked to be saved by Jesus. I remember it so clearly like it was yesterday. During that time she was walking everybody else through the sinner's prayer I sat there and talked to the Lord. I told him that I thought I always believed in Jesus and we had a relationship. But if an actual date and decision is required then I wanted to get that out of the way. I knew if anyone asked my parents or grandparents they would tell you a specific event when I was age 3 that they call my salvation decision, but I was so young I didn't remember it. So I figured that wouldn't work as my official decision. Therefore I said, Lord I wish I could back date this but I just want to make sure today that I'm saved officially. I hope I've been saved this whole time but if this is some rule that is very precise, let's do this immediately. And I still to this day list that at my conversion point not because it actually was but because it was the earliest date that I can remember making that conscious decision.Jacquelinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01686171278001118189noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13519403.post-8139272821830017852019-09-30T11:35:28.356-04:002019-09-30T11:35:28.356-04:00Hello Pastor Dam, I am also a Pastor from Mumbai,...Hello Pastor Dam, I am also a Pastor from Mumbai, India. I am glad to stop by your profile on the blogger and the blog post. I am also blessed and feel privileged and honoured to get connected with you as well as know you and about you being aa Associate Pastor of Adult Ministries. I am blessed by your blog post on the Excellencies of Christ (and)His Church. I have thoroughly enjoyed th post which so well explained. I love getting connected with the people of Goda around the globe to be encouraged, strengthened and praying for one another. I have been in the Pastoral ministry for last 49 yrs n this great city of MUMBAI A CITY iwth a great contrast where richest of rich and the poorest of poor live. We reach out to the poorest of poor with the love of Christ to bring healing to the brokenhearted. we also encourage young and the adults from the west to come to Mumbai to work with us during their vacation time. We would love to have your young kids come to Mumbai or young people from your church come to Mumbai to work with us during their vacation time. I am sure they will have a life changing experience. I have been to Indianapolis for a good number of times to attend General Assemblies of church of the Nazarene once in four years. God willing I will be coming to the United States in the month of April 2920 and will be very glad to stop by your place and meet you. I always have worked crossing denominational borders to build the Kingdom of God in the city of Mumbai. Looking forward to hear from you very soon. God'srichest blessings on you your family and the ministry. My email id is:dhwankhede(at)gmail(dot)com and my name is Diwakar Wankhede.Diwakarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04390632072287440950noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13519403.post-48439073984890108892019-04-04T16:52:46.705-04:002019-04-04T16:52:46.705-04:00Preach! Preach! Lisa Joyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07449510308233234360noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13519403.post-87936720840815290282018-11-26T13:28:53.797-05:002018-11-26T13:28:53.797-05:00I think you are wrong to treat to the vertical and...I think you are wrong to treat to the vertical and horizontal planes as separate. Who's to say you don't grow in God through learning to love your neighbor better? It is through our interactions with other human beings that we learn to know and love God in the first place and it continues to be this way. Humans are generally wounded and do not love God perfectly. But this is not separate from how we love other people, in my opinion. We will be stuck spiritually if we try to love God by ourselves. We learn to love ourselves and others because of the love of God, but we learn to know the love of God better through the love of people in this physical world. They cannot be separated. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13519403.post-90123014562725308582018-07-08T01:22:43.773-04:002018-07-08T01:22:43.773-04:00Please help explain this further! I was baptized i...Please help explain this further! I was baptized in RCC church as infant and when I look back to that baptism, it is not very comforting. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04421648159077919094noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13519403.post-76016740909924606762011-12-18T22:09:58.852-05:002011-12-18T22:09:58.852-05:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.chris knoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13519403.post-65004175049799349012011-10-18T21:40:37.833-04:002011-10-18T21:40:37.833-04:00Glad you're enjoying his book! I prefer a broa...Glad you're enjoying his book! I prefer a broader definition of technology than John uses in his book. I like to include principles of organization. Thus representative democracy is a technology, as is something like congregational rule, or Roberts' Rules of Order. It's interesting to think about how these technologies play in the church as well and not just focus on devices or telecommunications.Marknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13519403.post-72832142308766862512011-10-07T15:36:51.363-04:002011-10-07T15:36:51.363-04:00As for the rest of your response, it was clarifyin...As for the rest of your response, it was clarifying, although it saddened me. I was hoping that you would see your inconsistency and back down from your claims--not pursue them into further lunacy. <br /><br />Concerning dating, I'm very sorry to think of the souls under your care as a college pastor. I'm sorry to have brought them into more danger, since because this conversation you will no longer command those Christians to be obedient to God by not dating a non-Christian. Do I dare point out the next inconsistency? I fear it will only make matters worse for those under your care. <br /><br />By your own admission, nowhere in the Bible are you given the right to tell people that they may not read certain books. Why are you willing to break the command of God by commanding people not to read pornographic books?<br /><br />If you are going to be consistent, you must change your position on this also. You must warn, and suggest that they not look at pornographic books. The only *command* you can give them is not to lust. But if they want to look at the book, it is the same as dating a non-Christian. You have no right to command them not to.<br /><br />Let me pose a question. If the purpose of pornography is to incite lust, what do you think the purpose of Rob Bell's latest book is? To have a dialogue?<br /><br />Remember that Jesus was known to hang out with prostitutes also. Does that mean you need to read their books to find out how to engage them? No, as a matter of fact, you don't. You say it can't be sinful to engage with wicked theologians. But God's command to Titus is to "avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and strife and disputes about the Law, for they are unprofitable and worthless. (Titus 3:9)" <br /><br />And now, lest I be guilty of disobedience to this command, I'm also done.<br /><br />In Christ,<br />-Joseph<br /><br />P.S. Your claim that souls aren't at stake makes me sick to my stomach. I can't tell you the number of college students I've seen abandon the faith as they pursue "foolish" relationships with non-Christians. I grieve for them, and I grieve for your attitude to this. I also grieve for those who have made shipwreck of their faith by reading Bell and Mclaren. I don't understand why you would even bother warning people against them, if there's no real danger to anybody's soul. What a staggering assertion. You need to repent of it.Josephhttp://clearnotechurch.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13519403.post-66096771840107239152011-10-07T15:15:04.395-04:002011-10-07T15:15:04.395-04:00Dear Dan,
First, in answer to your question, &quo...Dear Dan,<br /><br />First, in answer to your question, "So you're ok with pastors saying 'don't read this', but not 'don't drink this'?" Yes. Of course. Because the Bible tells us to silence some men. It never tells us to prevent people from drinking.<br /><br />You portray me as saying that "Pastors have the authority to bind consciences as they see fit without limiting their commands to what Scripture teaches". On the contrary. I'm simply arguing that you are refusing to bind consciences in the way that Scripture commands you to. I pointed out that Scripture tells us not to have anything to do with certain men *because* of what they teach. You've ignored it. I'm not making the claim that anybody who ever reads Bell is sinning. I'm pointing out that as pastors, we must be willing to be obedient to the commands of God that tell us to silence some men. Why? On what basis?<br /><br />Not, as you claim, because *I* decided he's bad. *Scripture* is the judge. You throw up your hands in helplessness and ask "Why our standard of morality and decency and not a teatotalling, pants eschewing Nazarene?" Don't be so postmodern. You know very well why one and not the other. You've been arguing it the whole time. Scripture is the final test. If you really can't figure out the difference between me telling a young Christian not to read Bell and another pastor telling a young Christian not to read Calvin, something's wrong. The difference between Bell and Calvin is not my opinion verses the other pastor's. It is the difference between Calvin who is expounding God's word faithfully and Bell, who is leading people to hell. There is such a thing as truth. You can't just play the relativism game here. <br /><br />...Josephhttp://clearnotechurch.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13519403.post-3956216521260762062011-10-07T14:36:50.375-04:002011-10-07T14:36:50.375-04:00Two more closing quotes (I'll not turn comment...Two more closing quotes (I'll not turn comments off, but I probably won't respond any more)<br /><br />John Owen: “The second principle of the Reformation, whereon the reformers justified their separation from the church of Rome, was this: ‘That Christian people were not tied up unto blind obedience unto church-guides, but were not only at liberty, but also obliged to judge for themselves as unto all things that they were to believe and practise in religion and the worship of God."<br /><br />Calvin: "Let my readers only bear in mind, first, that whatever be the offenses by which Satan and the world attempt to lead us away from the law of God, we must, nevertheless, strenuously proceed in the course which he prescribes; and, secondly, that whatever dangers impend, we are not at liberty to deviate one nail's breadth from the command of God, that on no pretext is it lawful to attempt any thing but what he permits."Dan Waughhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13239327568868739040noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13519403.post-47089884218644193922011-10-07T13:47:30.865-04:002011-10-07T13:47:30.865-04:00Joseph,
I believe you did point out an inconsis...Joseph,<br /> <br />I believe you did point out an inconsistency. Thanks. I wouldn't command a guy not to date a nonChristian girl. I'd advise against it. I'd refuse to marry them/ejoin them by God's word not to be married. But, if you're not going marry them, then why date them (unless you've got some sexual immorality in mind, right?)!<br /><br />I'm not sure I understand the second paragraph. So you're ok with pastors saying 'don't read this', but not 'don't drink this'?<br /> There is a clear difference between a pornographic book and Rob Bell's or Charles Finney (who'd be on my banned list for sure!). Is it sinful for me to read Finney or Bell or Eldridge? No. I do it all the time - to critique usually. Do I sin in reading them? Only when I loose my temper and throw their books across the run chasing with a string of profanity! Would it be sinful for me to pick up a pornographic book? Yes. That's the purpose of porn - to promote and feed lust. Looking at it IS looking at women in lustful ways and IS forbidden in Scripture THEREFORE I will command people not to 'read' Playboy! Engaging bad theology isn't sin. If so, Paul and even Jesus would be guilty of it!<br /> <br />Joseph, do you see the slippery slope you're establishing. If Pastors have the authority to bind consciences as they see fit without limiting their commands to what Scripture teaches, where does it end. Your first paragraph seems to suggest that the Calvin is a good teacher/theologian. I agree. Others disagree. Why my list of approved books? Because I deem them correct? Why not Pastor Finney's? Because we think he was in error? Why our standard of morality and decency and not a teatotalling, pants eschewing Nazarene? Or a Mennonite one? Lets forbid what Scripture forbids and stop there. <br /><br />Dating example...na, skip it. <br /><br />Too the accusation that souls hang in the balance. Really? So, DumbKid X marries someone he shouldn't. He's now going to hell? DumbKid Y reads John Eldridge and thinks he should camp more, and now he's hellbound? <br /> <br />Wow. I thought grace covered all those things, and a few more too?<br /> <br />Ok, I'm off to study Galatians 2 for this Sunday.Dan Waughhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13239327568868739040noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13519403.post-49212849290604609482011-10-07T13:35:49.390-04:002011-10-07T13:35:49.390-04:00I forgot to answer the rest of your questions.
A...I forgot to answer the rest of your questions. <br /><br />A pastor is obligated to command his congregation to care for the earth, and subdue it. <br /><br />An elder must command his flock to raise up their children in the nurture and discipline of the Lord, teaching them God's commands. If they can't do that unless they homeschool, then they need to homeschool. On the other hand, if homeschooling will prevent that, then they ought not to homeschool.<br /><br />There's a lot for pastors to say about how people should vote, but it doesn't have anything to do with political parties. It's about God's moral law. If that means that Christians can only in good conscience vote for one party after listening to their pastor, they have the other parties to blame, not their pastor.<br /><br />-JosephJosephhttp://clearnotechurch.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13519403.post-87472739085475193182011-10-07T13:10:47.944-04:002011-10-07T13:10:47.944-04:00Grr. I can't keep up!Grr. I can't keep up!Dan Waughhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13239327568868739040noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13519403.post-10251761906722747452011-10-07T13:10:24.550-04:002011-10-07T13:10:24.550-04:00Jody,
Thanks for your thoughts. I agree that abd...Jody,<br /> Thanks for your thoughts. I agree that abdication of authority is every bit as sinful as abuse of it or usurping it. I don't see how I'm abdicating authority. To abdicate means you have it and give it up. I don't believe I have it. To take it would be to violate Christian liberty and usurp authority that doesn't belong to me. <br /><br />Also, I believe the abdication of authority is in many cases a response to pastoral abuse of authority. People/Pastors see authority abused and so fear that they don't exercise the biblical authority they do have.<br /> <br />While it may be true that authority is more often neglected than abused, that doesn't mean we should speak against the abuse of it. Polygamy isn't common, but I'll preach against it if a text demands I do. <br /> <br />Additionally, I fail to see how my argument is a Straw Man. To begin, I invited readers to test my conclusions. Second, the biblical point that some submission is sinful hasn't been contested. Third, the examples are real life examples from three different churches I have first hand knowledge of, spread throughout the country.(I didn't even include the example of the women to talked with me last week about being kicked out of her church after getting caught wearing pants during the week).<br /> <br />The principle doesn't come from the examples, but from Galatians and other texts - don't submit to slavery - to the unbibilical binding of conscience. I applied that to pastors who abuse authority. I didn't construct my case from the examples. <br /> <br />My hope is that people will increasingly be able to discern God's authority in his word and differentiate that from human opinion, man made rules and traditions.<br /> <br />Lastly, and since you don't know me (i dont' think), I can understand why you may think I don't care enough to command people not to read so and so's book. To me, that would be the easy way to deal with it (though unbibilical). Instead, when someone asks me if I read the latest Bell or Eldridge book, I don't tell them not to. Instead, I read it too so I can interact with them about the book, teaching them to discern truth from lies. Trust me, I didn't want to read Love Wins or Fathered by God or numerous other books I feel compelled to read. Probably 25% of what I read is strictly so I can debunk heresy and help the people I teach/lead do so too.Dan Waughhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13239327568868739040noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13519403.post-89211858630817408062011-10-07T13:00:29.494-04:002011-10-07T13:00:29.494-04:00But even if I were to grant that pastors are limit...But even if I were to grant that pastors are limited in the way you describe, you are still completely inconsistent. Where does scripture command you to forbid a Christian from dating a non-Christian? It doesn't. You are not obeying your own rules for what pastors can do. You're only allowed to command them not to get married. You have no right to say anything to them about dating, since the Bible doesn't address it specifically. To use your own words, you are "going beyond scripture."<br /><br />Now let's talk about that theoretical dating relationship further. Let's say a young man, (let's call him Fred), shows up a couple of times at church with a girl who hasn't been going to church, but who he says might be interested in becoming a Christian. By your own admission, you would forbid Fred from dating her. Furthermore, you know that Fred just broke off a sinful relationship, filled with sexual immorality less than a month ago. It simply adds further conviction to the command, doesn't it? Now suppose Fred says, "I have no intention of dating her."<br /><br />Then two weeks later he says he's going to start dating her. You tell him, "I already warned you that you can't do that." He says, "She's a Christian."<br /><br />That's always the way it works. You ought know that from working with college students. He wants to marry somebody who isn't a Christian, so they both summarily declare that she is now a Christian. Are you satisfied by that? Are you going to just say, "Oh, Fred, why didn't you say so before? I didn't realize that after you guys had a nice hot make-out session last night that you convinced her to start calling herself a Christian. Now that she's a Christian, what more can I say? I'm so excited for you two! Can I have the privilege of marrying you?"<br /><br />On the contrary, you say, "I see little or no evidence to support your claim that she's a Christian. You may not date her."<br /><br />He says, "Tough cookies, Dan-the-chump! I say she's a Christian, therefore she is. Furthermore, Pastor W from Church X says I shouldn't listen if my pastor tells me not to date somebody that's a Christian. In fact, he suggested maybe I should flaunt my rebellion by taking a picture of us kissing, and send it to you. He also says that it would be sinful for me to submit to you in this. As a matter of fact, he says I should leave the church because you're trying to make me sin. I'm outta here! And if you try to discipline me, I'm going to make sure everybody is informed how wickedly authoritarian you are."<br /><br />The consequences of your argument are terrible, Dan. Eternal souls hang in the balance.<br /><br />In Christ,<br />-JosephJosephhttp://clearnotechurch.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13519403.post-64370345558108672422011-10-07T13:00:09.689-04:002011-10-07T13:00:09.689-04:00Dan, of course there is dissension and division. J...Dan, of course there is dissension and division. Jeremiah was surrounded by it, as were all the prophets, and Paul, and on and on. But who is causing dissension and division? Jeremiah? Paul? Calvin? No! Those pastors who are refusing to teach God's truth in the doctrines of grace are at fault. They are the ones causing division in the body. So those pastors are to be avoided.<br /><br />Further evidence that they ought to be avoided is that they bind up consciences, saying "do not taste, do not touch" alcohol, which is clearly unbiblical. (This also answers part of your last question.)<br /><br />But can we please do away with this straw man, that you claim you would never forbid a book? You would do so if it was a book of pornographic photos, would you not? And on what basis? Because the Bible gives commands that bear directly on avoiding the material in the book. You don't need a command in scripture saying, "Pastors can forbid wicked books", in order to forbid wicked books. You don't need a command in scripture saying, "Elders can forbid people from viewing wicked websites" in order to forbid your people from viewing wicked websites. And concerning books, remember that in Acts 19 they had a good old fashioned BOOK BURNING!<br /><br />Moving on, you said, "I don't have a text to quote, and honestly, I don't believe I need one. I do not turn to the Bible to tell me exactly what I'm to do as a father. Certainly I can do nothing that goes against Scripture, but I don't need to validate every parental decision on with a text. On the other hand, I do have to be able to point to a text to exercise pastoral authority. I have no pastoral authority other than what is outlined in Scripture." You simply state this by fiat. You don't support it in any way scripturally. On what basis is the father allowed to do this and the pastor not? You can't support it for the father without giving up the heart of your claims about pastors. Try.Josephhttp://clearnotechurch.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13519403.post-68719172582920861442011-10-07T08:33:27.530-04:002011-10-07T08:33:27.530-04:00Would you command your people not to go to the Bum...Would you command your people not to go to the BumbleChunk church?Jodynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13519403.post-60232439474332430482011-10-07T00:06:33.900-04:002011-10-07T00:06:33.900-04:00... It does boil down, it seems to me, to a differ...... It does boil down, it seems to me, to a difference almost akin to the Regulative principle vs. the Hooker principle. Seems like you're saying that if Scripture doesn't restrict a pastors authority in a specific way (like circumcision), then the pastor can assume it falls under the broad authority to protect. Me, more in keeping with the Reformed Regulative principle, would argue that unless a pastor is specifically given the authority to bind his flocks conscience in a specific way, he must not. <br /><br /> I will continue to warn people about certain authors - especially the babes in Christ. I will refuse to infringe on the Christian liberty. And no, I won't be perfectly content when my advise is disregarded. I'll be broken and sad - but not angry. They've disregarded counsel, not broken a command from God. Obviously there is a difference between a 2yr old and a babe in Christ. The two year old doesn't have the vocubuary to understand warnings, a neophyte in Christ understands words like 'dangerous', 'heretical', 'not edifying', 'shipwreck your faith'. I will counsel, advise, but refuse to be a add commands where God hasn't. <br /><br /> Off the topic of the books, what do you think about a pastors right (?) to command obedience to things like tea-totalling, homeschooling, going green, voting Republican or Democrat?<br /><br />in Christ, danDan Waughhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13239327568868739040noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13519403.post-18128967074475547012011-10-07T00:05:50.659-04:002011-10-07T00:05:50.659-04:00Hey Joseph,
Sorry I misunderstood your line of q...Hey Joseph,<br /> Sorry I misunderstood your line of questioning. Probably had something to do with responding and watching the baseball game at the same time!<br /><br /> Let me clarify too that I support the use of church discipline to bring members to repentance (and serve as a warning to others).<br /><br /> To the issue, you're right, I don't have a text to quote, and honestly, I don't believe I need one. I do not turn to the Bible to tell me exactly what I'm to do as a father. Certainly I can do nothing that goes against Scripture, but I don't need to validate every parental decision on with a text.<br /> <br /> On the other hand, I do have to be able to point to a text to exercise pastoral authority. I have no pastoral authority other than what is outlined in Scripture. <br /><br /> On Calvin and Owen, I doubt you're right, but maybe. I haven't finished the Institutes - maybe there is a list of banned books at the end. Somehow I doubt it because that was the kind of binding of the conscience Calvin was breaking free from in the Catholic Church (where there was a list and the Institutes was on it). I know Luther has my back, at least when it comes to beer! Even if they did command (not advise, but command) their flock not to read certain books, they weren't always consistent with themselves. <br /><br /> I fail to see your distinction regarding the pastor who commands his church to stay away from Calvin. Ask someone in the Southern Baptist Convention if he's caused dissension and division! Lots of pastors would like the trouble caused by men like Piper to go away and the Young Reformed crowd to fall back in line. Thank God some will disobey their pastors! Those pastors would argue Piper, Calvin, et al are contrary to biblical teaching, 'of the devil', etc. (I've been given copies of David Hunt's horrible book 'What Love is This' by pastors and I know I wouldn't be asked to preach in some of my families churches because of my Calvinism). <br /><br /> Ok, so there's a church in East BummbleChuuck Mississippi. The pastor of the We're the Real Christians Church commands his flock not to read Calvin, Piper, Edwards, Spurgeon, etc because their theology is of the devil. How will someone from the church know their pastor is off their rocker unless they read them and test the ideas for themselves? What is to check our theology from drifting into unorthodoxy? How can we honor the committment to always be reforming if we're not allowing our people to challenge us, read people we disagree with?<br /><br /> We should, as pastors, rebuke false teachers. I've called out many of them by name on my blog, in my classes, from the pulpit...Dan Waughhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13239327568868739040noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13519403.post-23596093278228822011-10-06T23:37:35.334-04:002011-10-06T23:37:35.334-04:00Actually, no. It's worse:
You're arguing ...Actually, no. It's worse:<br /><br />You're arguing against a Straw Man, and creating a principle from it that will cause your readership to feel even more justified in rejecting Godly authority next time it comes knocking.Jodynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13519403.post-48588530123528065132011-10-06T23:18:02.467-04:002011-10-06T23:18:02.467-04:00>To warn the spiritual babe, when he doesn'...>To warn the spiritual babe, when he doesn't understand the danger (what does poison mean to a two year old?), and then to let him disregard you and be led astray, is to have his blood on your head.<br /><br />Precisely so. Abdication of authority is just as abusive as the overextension of it, and every bit as sinful. The neglect of authority is a condition infinitely more common in the churches today than any "going beyond Scripture" in the discharge of office. So much so, Dan, that I can't see the post as anything other than your arguing against a Straw Man.Jodynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13519403.post-79067123524003670652011-10-06T22:45:33.612-04:002011-10-06T22:45:33.612-04:00Dan, you don't need to add more support provin...Dan, you don't need to add more support proving that spiritual authorities must not go beyond the Bible (at least for my sake). We're agreed on that.<br /><br />The point of my line of questioning was to get you to examine exactly what is and isn't biblical for pastors and/or fathers to do. In an attempt to cut short the back and forth a bit, let me make an argument now.<br /><br />The example of reading a book is perfect because it translates so well between the two categories. You still haven't answered whether you have the right to tell your son not to read a particular book, and if so why. You claim that you "have been give broad authority by God to raise [your] children, to provide for and protect them spiritually..." To be crystal clear, I agree. But you don't support it biblically. Why not? Because to do so is largely to undercut your main point. The fact is, the church leaders have been given broad authority to provide for and protect the people in their church spiritually as well. And an argument supporting your right to give commands to your son, such as "You may not read this book." will also support the same conclusion for pastors and elders.<br /><br />It all comes down to the question "What exactly does being "limited to the word" allow and prevent?" Now Owen, Calvin, and the men who wrote the Confession would never agree with how you are using their texts. None of them would have had any qualms with commanding their flock not read a particular book. Why? Because that's perfectly biblical.<br /><br />"Now I urge you, brethren, keep your eye on those who cause dissensions and hindrances contrary to the teaching which you learned, and turn away from them. For such men are slaves, not of our Lord Christ but of their own appetites; and by their smooth and flattering speech they deceive the hearts of the unsuspecting." (Romans 16:17-18)<br /><br />"For there are many rebellious men, empty talkers and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision, who must be silenced because they are upsetting whole families, teaching things they should not teach for the sake of sordid gain.... <br /><br />"These things speak and exhort and reprove with all authority. Let no one disregard you." (Titus 1:10-11 and 2:15)<br /><br />The problem with the pastor who tells men to stay away from Calvin isn't that he is abusing his spiritual authority by telling people to stay away from certain men. That's *clearly* biblical. The problem is that he's telling them to stay away from a man who does *not* "cause dissensions and hindrances" and who is *not* "contrary to the teaching". He is unbiblical, yes. But not in the way your arguing. <br /><br />The fact of the matter is that if a pastor is not willing to *command* the sheep, whom he is given broad spiritual authority to protect, to stay away from certain men who are "causing dissensions and hindrances," then that pastor is not being obedient. If he is just warning people about a particular author, but he is perfectly content to be disregarded in the matter, he is not being biblical. He is not caring for the sheep.<br /><br />Just as there are physical babies, so there are spiritual babies. To point at the bottle of poison and say to your two-year-old, "That's poison. You should probably stay away from it." simply isn't good enough. You have to command with all authority. "Don't touch that!" and then you have to refuse to be disregarded in the matter. The same is true of spiritual babes and poisonous doctrine taught by wicked men in books that they wrote to make sordid profit. To warn the spiritual babe, when he doesn't understand the danger (what does poison mean to a two year old?), and then to let him disregard you and be led astray, is to have his blood on your head.<br /><br />In Christ,<br />-Joseph BaylyJosephhttp://clearnotechurch.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13519403.post-76683567641317286972011-10-06T21:25:18.662-04:002011-10-06T21:25:18.662-04:00Joseph,
Thanks for the push-back. I don't th...Joseph,<br /> Thanks for the push-back. I don't think I implied parents have unlimited/absolute authority (though I may have unintentionally). As a father, I do not have the authority to excommunicate my children, administer the sacraments, etc. That authority belongs to the church and its ministers. Moreover, my authority is limited by age - I will have less authority over my grown/adult kids who don't live under my roof.<br /> On the other hand, I have been give broad authority by God to raise my children, to provide for and protect them spiritually and physically.<br /> The church also has been given authority, but it is limited to the spiritual nurture and can go no further than Scripture allows. So says the Westminster Confession.<br /><br /><i>XX.2: God alone is Lord of the conscience, and hath left it free from the doctrines and commandments of men, which are, in any thing, contrary to His Word; *or beside it, if matters of faith, or worship. So that, to believe such doctrines, or to obey such commands, out of conscience, is to betray true liberty of conscience*: and the requiring of an implicit faith, and an absolute and blind obedience, is to destroy liberty of conscience, and reason also.</i><br /><br />Owen, one of my favorite Puritans also sums it up well in comments on Hebrews 13:17, <br /><br /><i>1st. It is not a blind, implicit obedience and subjection, that is here prescribed. A pretense hereof hath been abused to the ruin of the souls of men: but there is nothing more contrary to the whole nature of gospel obedience, which is our “reasonable service;” and in particular, it is that which would frustrate all the rules and directions given unto believers in this epistle itself, as well as elsewhere, about all the duties that are required of them. For to what purpose are they used, if no more be required but that men give up themselves, by an implicit credulity, to obey the dictates of others.<br /><br />2dly. It hath respect unto them in their office only. If those who suppose themselves in office do teach and enjoin things that belong not unto their office, there is no obedience due unto them by virtue of this command. So is it with the guides of the church of Rome, who, under a pretense of their office, give commands in secular things, no way belonging unto the ministry of the gospel.<br /><br />3dly. It is their duty so to obey whilst they teach the things which the Lord Christ hath appointed them to teach; for unto them is their commission limited, Matthew 28.20; and to submit unto their rule whilst it is exercised in the name of Christ, according to his institution, and by the rule of the word, and not otherwise. When they depart from these, there is neither obedience nor submission due unto them.</i><br /><br />Wow. Now this has turned into another post, not just a comment!Dan Waughhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13239327568868739040noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13519403.post-87516251820921963022011-10-06T21:12:56.526-04:002011-10-06T21:12:56.526-04:00I invited people to test my conclusions, so I welc...I invited people to test my conclusions, so I welcome the exchange. <br /> <br />Jody, in answer to your questions: if the book reader was wandering away from the faith, I'd guide him back. If he committed apostasy, I'd command repentance and church discipline would be appropriate. I would not, however, command someone not to read a book for fear that it would lead them astray. Some read heretical writings, writings by the new atheists, etc. and have their faith shipwrecked. Others read the same writings and have their faith confirmed as they are exposed to the hopelessness of the alternative. Myself, I've been greatly enriched by Calvin's Institutes. If I attended some churches, I would have been commanded not to read that 'heretic' (I know this first hand). The pastor who would have prohibited it would have done so because he thought he was doing my soul a service, protecting it. Unfortunately, he would have been depriving me of a fountain of deep and rich theology. <br /><br />To the drunk, I would command him not to get drunk. I would not command him not to have a drink (though if drunkenness was a struggle, I would advise against it). Moreover, if he was a drunk, church discipline would again be appropriate to bring him to repentance - NOT TO PUNISH HIM FOR HIS SIN OF DRUNKENNESS. <br /><br />To the couple fornicating, I would command them to 1)stop, or 2) get married. If they stopped, I but out. If they get married, I pray I'd have the privilege of helping them move from a life of sin to one God will bless.<br /><br />Hope that helps.Dan Waughhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13239327568868739040noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13519403.post-2612161796710300382011-10-06T17:44:00.333-04:002011-10-06T17:44:00.333-04:00Ok, so parents and elders have been delegated diff...Ok, so parents and elders have been delegated different authority. And they've also been given different kinds of discipline to love those under their authority with.<br /><br />And you imply that the difference between a father's authority and an elder's authority is that the father's authority is absolute, and the elder's is limited. I don't think you believe that. (And it certainly isn't biblical.)<br /><br />So, again, can a father tell his son not to read a particular book? If so, on what biblical basis?Josephhttp://clearnotechurch.comnoreply@blogger.com