Tonight at bedtime, both Thomas and Tabitha expressed fear about dying as I was tucking them in. Although we often talk about Jesus, this evening was different because both children said specifically that they believed in Him.
My mind is not quick, nor do I boast having great theological knowledge, and I pray that God can even use such simple talk about Him to work in the hearts of my children:
Dr. Neill H. Payne posted this quote on the Reformed Theology Discussion List. It’s appropriate in many contexts.
Most of the major ills of the world have been caused by well-meaning people who ignored the principle of individual freedom, except as applied to themselves, and who were obsessed with fanatical zeal to improve the lot of mankind-in-the-mass through some pet formula of their own. The harm done by ordinary criminals, murderers, gangsters, and thieves is negligible in comparison with the agony inflicted upon human beings by the professional do-gooders, who attempt to set themselves up as gods on earth and who would ruthlessly force their views on all others — with the abiding assurance that the end justifies the means.
– Henry Grady Weaver, The Mainspring of Human Progress, 1947. (Thanks to the Future of Freedom Foundation)
A question for God: If Christians have the same spirit, why do they disagree so much?
I am really struggling with having patience with legalistic christians whose only joy comes from the delight in robbing it from others. I missed the part where holiness is defined by how loud one can gasp or by the ability to refrain from cracking a smile.
Hear my voice, O God, in my meditation;
Preserve my life from fear of the enemy.
Hide me from the secret plots of the wicked,
From the rebellion of the workers of iniquity,
Who sharpen their tongue like a sword,
And bend their bows to shoot their arrows—bitter words,
That they may shoot in secret at the blameless;
Suddenly they shoot at him and do not fear.
They encourage themselves in an evil matter;
They talk of laying snares secretly;
They say, “Who will see them?”
They devise iniquities:
“We have perfected a shrewd scheme.”
Both the inward thought and the heart of man are deep.
But God shall shoot at them with an arrow;
Suddenly they shall be wounded.
So He will make them stumble over their own tongue;
All who see them shall flee away.
All men shall fear,
And shall declare the work of God;
For they shall wisely consider His doing.
The righteous shall be glad in the LORD, and trust in Him.
And all the upright in heart shall glory.
Sorry for this being protected for a little while. After I posted it without comment, I thought that perhaps it could get me into trouble. I put the password on until I was able to write up these comments.
Yes, I’m caustic, polarizing, and transgressive. As the title of this blog alludes to, I readily admit that I live in a world who’s rules I’ve never agreed to. Have you ever seen the offense generated when children are playing soccer and one kid picks up the ball, breaking “the rules”. Everyone playing gets angry at that person because by playing the game, it’s assumed that everyone understands and agrees to abide by the rules. I make no such concessions.
I live in a world where the established rules are often in conflict with one another, and with God’s revealed moral law. People go through life with their own made up rules, without realizing that they don’t make any sense, and get upset when I blaspheme those rules.
Of course, I don’t do it through provocative story telling, or obscene works of art. I do it through humor, and my humor (consciously or unconsciously) is designed to offend people’s subjective sense of propriety. If someone thinks I’m in sin by drinking a beer, I make sure they know that I brew it in the basement and give it away for free. If someone is offended by overpopulation, I make sure they know that I have four beautiful children, and hopefully I’m just getting started.
So, the question is whether the analysis below that my humor is “vulgar” is accurate. I would say that it is, since vulgarity is often needed to upset many people’s Victorian sensibilities. It’s more than just being “shocking”… it’s forcing people to challenge the assumptions that they make when they impose their subjective morals on me. What right do they have to do that, and where does that authority come from? Think about it.
So, with that background, you can check out my scores on the 3 Variable Comedy Test.
Main Entry: strife
Pronunciation: ‘strIf
Function: noun
1 a : bitter sometimes violent conflict or dissension
“A *wrathful man stirs up strife, But he who is slow to anger allays contention.” Proverbs 15:18
“A perverse man spreads strife, And a slanderer separates intimate friends.” Proverbs 16:28
“For the churning of milk produces butter,
And pressing the nose brings forth blood;
So the churning of anger produces strife.” Proverbs 30:33
* “For the wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God.” James 1:20
Last nights meeting was a bit anticlimactic. After everything leading up to this point, the meeting lasted about a half-hour, with the crux being that Sarah and I pleaded not guilty to all four counts. We also made a number of requests of the prosecutor, based on the information listed in the indictment, including a request to see the affidavits that are mentioned.
I asked my dad to act as council during the trial, since I think he’ll end up being better able to see the trial as a trial, and therefore do a more level-headed job than I could do.
So, now we have at least two weeks before the beginning of the trial itself, but I’ll post periodic updates as we find out anything new.
After the premature decisions by Mississippi Valley and Central Carolina Presbyteries, Louisiana Presbytery has actually adopted a lucid position, and explicitly exonerated Rev. Steve Wilkins and declared him “faithful to the Confessional standards of the PCA”.
You can read the entire adopted report over at The Parchment.
UPDATE: William has also posted a response from a few “leaders” in the PCA (as much as the PCA has leaders).
This metaphor has much meaning to me, as nursing Micah – almost constantly- is part of my daily life.
For those of you who have never nursed a baby, it must be done tenderly. Babies won’t even suckle if you try to push their head against the breast! In fact, they brace their arms, push against you and cry. It must be done with gentle coaxing, especially if they are already upset or if they are just starting out. If you gently brush their face against the breast – sometimes even a few times, they open their mouth and then begin to eat. While they’re eating, you must quietly care for them and guard them from distraction or they stop!
It looks as though the Session has sought the wisdom of the moderator of the Heritage Presbytery, and thankfully, he has concurred with the interpretation of BCO that I stated in an earlier post. The email I received today from the Clerk of Session cancelled the July 25th meeting, and tentatively rescheduled the meeting for August 1.
His letter makes no mention of the list of witnesses. I guess we’ll see what ends up being delivered later this week (I guess by Friday).
“Where there is no wood, the fire goes out and where there is no talebearer, strife ceases. As charcoal is to burning coals, and wood to fire, so is a contentious man to kindle strife. The words of a talebearer are like tasty trifles, and they go down into the inmost body. ” (Proverbs 26:20-22)
In my last post, I quoted from Dr. Morton Smith’s commentaries on the Book of Church Order. Sarah was reading through other areas of the commentary, and found this interesting section, commenting on BCO 32-5, which states “In drawing the indictment, the times, places and circumstances should, if possible, be particularly stated, that the accused may have an opportunity to make his defense.” Smith writes:
An indictment that is made in vague generalities, thus not giving the accused opportunity before the trial to know specifically the offenses with which he is charged is justifiable ground for the accused to move the dismissal of the charges. A Court that allows such a vague or general indictment, without specifications, could well be deemed as prejudiced by an appellate Court. The purpose of the whole system of due process is the protection of both parties, and any proceedings that fail to protect the rights of both should be set aside by the appellate Court.
Heck of a way to start a vacation. Jim Sauer came by yesterday afternoon with a letter summoning me and Sarah to appear before the Session to “hear charges brought against” us.
They managed to get this done just under the wire, as they were about a week and a half short of the one-year deadline for beginning process.
I find it interesting that Jim Sauer has been named as prosecutor. This pretty much disqualifies him from sitting on the court for judgement. I’m a bit confused about who is actually on the Session right now. Sometimes, emails will go out from Jim to everyone on the Session, including Chris Catranis, Rob Miller, and Rich Pyle. Other times, it’s just to Ray Doreian and Rev. Van Ness. I’ve shot an email to Jim asking who is actually on the Session. Here is the letter I sent.
As far as the details of the letter, it’s pretty straightforward. The PCA Book of Church Order almost has a form that they need to follow. However, they seemed to have missed some major requirements on their part.
Anyway, I’m trying to clear this up with the Session before the meeting starts. For anyone who is concerned, we’re not too concerned for ourselves. We know, of course, that all things happen for God’s glory, and do look forward to clearing our name. In the process, I’m looking forward to the Church witnessing this spectacle. It’s obvious that restoration of relationships is the farthest thing from the goals of the Session.
We’ll keep you updated.
UPDATE: I may be mistaken regarding the timing of the delivery of the indictment. The question lies in the interpretation of BCO 32-3, steps 2 and 3. It does not explicitly say that the indictment must be delivered along with the citation… in fact, it doesn’t give any time frame for delivering the indictment to the accused, except when it is to be read to them at the second meeting of the court. However, in Dr. Morton Smith’s commentaries on BCO (which are not authoritative, but very instructional), writes “The citation to the accused must include a copy of the indictment drawn by the prosecutor, thus allowing him to prepare his defense.” So, while it seems that BCO is ambiguous as to whether the indictment comes with the citation, Smith thinks that it is explicit.
I was walking across a bridge one day, and I saw a man standing on the edge, about to jump off. I immediately ran over and said “Stop! Don’t do it!”
“Why shouldn’t I?” he said.
I said, “Well, there’s so much to live for!”
“Like what?”
“Well … are you religious or atheist?”
“Religious.”
“Me too! Are you Christian or Jewish?”
“Christian.”
“Me too! Are you Catholic or Protestant?”
“Protestant.”
“Me too! Are you Episcopalian or Baptist?”
“Baptist.”
“Wow! Me too! Are you Baptist Church of God or Baptist Church of the Lord?”
“Baptist Church of God.”
“Me too! Are you Original Baptist Church of God, or are you Reformed Baptist Church of God?”
“Reformed Baptist Church of God.”
“Me too! Are you Reformed Baptist Church of God, reformation of 1879, or Reformed Baptist Church of God, reformation of 1915?”
“Reformed Baptist Church of God, reformation of 1915!”
To which I said, “Die, heretic scum!” and pushed him off.
(via Fark)
