I grew up in the CRC, and am still here, along with my family. I'm married to Daryl, who has a construction business. I had a CPA license for 10 or so years, then I added EX to the front, and MOM to the back, so now I'm an EX CPA, MOM =). I am MOM to Duncan, Ian and Samantha. Our family also owns a raspberry farm, and in the summers we get to work out there together.
God warns us in His Word, over & over, at least 30 times, to not be deceived. Something is significant when it is repeated so many times, especially by the Creator of the Universe!
I have a long list of laments over things I was taught somewhere along my journey of life that, in some cases, actually was the opposite of what I find when I have searched & examined the Scriptures more in depth, and in other cases, hyper focused on one doctrine at the expense of others. I often use the phrase, both/and. Often both views are right in ways, and both views are wrong in ways. Ie. complementarian & egalitarian.
I love the Greek word "peithesthe". This was a word that opened Greek debates in various forums (this word is an entire discussion on its own). It is a word that means to be open to being persuaded/convinced. It is so important in this time of confusion and deepening division, that we, especially as the family of God, continue to be curious and conversational with others. When we love one another as He loves us, we treat each other with dignity and respect even when we deeply disagree. Jesus still washed Judas' feet, Jesus still served Passover, the Lord's supper, to Judas. Jesus still went to the synagogue, even though He compared it to a den of vipers. Jesus tells us to love our enemies and pray for them. Not saying, those we disagree with are Judas or enemies, but sharing how Jesus treated those whom He knew would harm Him.
God also warns us to test everything, to use discernment/wisdom.
It is a painful yet profound journey to admit where we have been deceived/wrong, yet God's truth is far more beautiful than whatever the deception was we were believing, and the process of discovery is often life changing and healing.
In case anyone wants a short context for the purpose of the Nicene Creed: here is a list of the heresies it was addressing... I have done my own research on this, but Grok summarizes this way better, faster & shorter than I can...
I find it fascinating and heartbreaking we are dealing with some of the same beliefs today... Ie eternal subordination of the Son (ESS) to limit women's serving in the church in certain ways (this is an entire discussion on its own even today still!).
The following is the Grok/AI compilation that I have researched in the past, but would take me awhile to compile:
The Nicene Creed, established at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD, was primarily formulated to address theological disputes, particularly those concerning the nature of Christ and the Trinity. Below is a list of the major heresies it aimed to counter, based on the theological context of the time:
Arianism
Description: Taught by Arius, a presbyter from Alexandria, Arianism claimed that the Son (Jesus Christ) was a created being, subordinate to the Father, and not co-eternal or consubstantial with Him. Arius argued that "there was a time when the Son was not," denying the full divinity of Christ.
Nicene Response: The Creed affirms that the Son is "begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father," emphasizing Christ's full divinity, co-eternity, and equality with the Father.
Sabellianism (Modalism)
Description: Also known as Modalistic Monarchianism, Sabellianism taught that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are not distinct persons but different modes or manifestations of a single divine being. This denied the distinct personhood within the Trinity.
Nicene Response: The Creed clearly delineates the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as distinct entities while affirming their unity in one Godhead, countering the idea of God merely appearing in different forms.
Adoptionism (Dynamic Monarchianism)
Description: This heresy posited that Jesus was a human who was "adopted" by God at a point in time (e.g., at his baptism or resurrection), receiving divine power but not being divine by nature.
Nicene Response: The Creed declares that the Son is "true God from true God," eternally begotten and divine by nature, not a human elevated to divine status.
Gnosticism
Description: While not the primary focus, Gnostic influences lingered, teaching that the material world was evil and that Christ was a purely spiritual being who only appeared human (Docetism, a Gnostic variant). This denied the true incarnation of Christ.
Nicene Response: The Creed emphasizes that the Son "became incarnate" and "was made man," affirming the reality of Christ's human nature alongside his divine nature.
Subordinationism
Description: A broader tendency in some early Christian thought to view the Son and Holy Spirit as subordinate to the Father in essence or rank, even if not as extreme as Arianism.
Nicene Response: The Creed’s use of "consubstantial" (homoousios) ensures that the Son is of the same essence as the Father, rejecting any hierarchy of essence within the Trinity.
Context and Notes:
The Council of Nicaea was convened by Emperor Constantine to resolve disputes, particularly Arianism, which was causing significant division in the early Church.
The Creed was later expanded at the Council of Constantinople (381 AD) to further clarify the role of the Holy Spirit, addressing additional heresies like Macedonianism (which denied the divinity of the Holy Spirit).
The primary focus in 325 AD was Arianism, as it posed the most immediate threat to orthodox Christian doctrine regarding Christ’s nature.
This list is based on historical accounts of the theological debates surrounding the Council of Nicaea, as found in early Church writings and scholarly analyses of the period. If you’d like a deeper dive into any specific heresy or the Creed’s phrasing, let me know!
The second aspect I find interesting and will share is the 20 canons that the Nicene Council also made along with the Creed. Nicaea - Canons of the 325 Council
These canons seem to have been ignored for the most part unlike the Canons of Dort. I find the Nicene Canons are quite helpful in giving additional context for what the early church was dealing with at the time. #1 Castration? #19 Paulianists (a different Paul than the Apostle Paul)? deaconesses? The contexts for these are very, very interesting and insightful and help us better understand other difficult texts of the New Testament, such as Paul's letter to Timothy.
interesting updates on NDAs... I've been wondering about this over the years since I presented this recommendation to Synod in 2018. It is confirming to see that this recommendation helped the CRC be a bit ahead of the curve re addressing NDAs.
The secular culture has had some pretty amazing changes to address NDA type documents in the last 7 years. NDAs were not just a problem in the CRC, but other denominations and institutions as well in covering up abuses of power and preventing necessary changes to address the abuses of power due to the silencing of those involved.
One of a number of reasons I find NDAs egregious in the Church is that there is no time limit. People were silenced for their entire life which often protected leaders who were abusing their power, for a short-term severance in return. RZIM (Ravi Zacharias Int'l Ministry) is a classic case of this. These abuses of power caused the deep wounds of God's daughters/people that Jeremiah 6 &8 mentions that the leaders failed to address well.
God's way is in the light. Even the Gov't is promoting transparency. We all still have a ways to go, but hopefully/prayerfully we can keep heading in the right direction.
here are a few examples of how NDAs are being addressed theologically, legislatively...
#NDAFREE started in 2021 addressing NDAs in the Church/ministry context...
"hell" is a conflation of the biblical Sheol/Hades/grave, gehenna, tartarus, lake of fire, the abyss, the outer darkness w weeping and gnashing of teeth and maybe one or two more concepts. Hades is also the name of the (demonic) Greek god of the underworld.
Eternal conscious torment is one of the traditional views of hell. It's not the only view, but it has become the primary one w Calvin's help. Luther disagreed with this view. I'm with Luther on this!
Eternal death is another view. God uses language that has a sense of finality 50+ times in scripture, such as death (ie wages of sin is death), destruction/destroy (ie fear the One Who can destroy both body & soul), perish (ie shall not perish), end, be no more...
the demons will be tormented forever bc they will be in God's consuming fiery presence (ie lake of fire) and they hate God.
Universalism is another traditional view. Quite a few of the Church Fathers believed this at some point in their journeys of faith.
If you want scriptural support (I have lists), further discussion, thoughts, questions, I would love to continue this "conversation" ... This is just a quick summary off the top of my head from my research a few years ago.
In the end, God promises He will make ALL THINGS NEW!
Interesting perspective! not sure what I expected when I clicked on this headline, but something possibly along the lines of addressing mental health. Thanks for sharing your personal journey of transformation through an unexpected path of brain trauma.
The Reformed/Presb./Calvinists (might just apply to Dutch/Friesians/Germans/Scots ;) seem to tend to be heavily intellectual, rational, and stoic, all good things, but there is so much more!
I did have a near death experience (NDE) I survived, the little one I had been carrying for 7 mos. inside me, did not. I will never be the same person I was before that. It was the start of what I call God converting me from a Ms. Martha to a Ms. Mary. Very painful, very profound journey. Intellectual -> Intimacy (spiritual), rational/transactional-> relational, stoic -> sensitive, linking the head and heart through the Holy Spirit revelation of opening the eyes of my heart to know Him more.
It's been almost 3 decades now since the loss of our first little one and my NDE. My husband and I have been blessed with 7 children, 3 living here with us and 4 with Jesus. The Spirit has transformed my faith and identity into a deep, rich and beautiful relationship with HIM, our Heavenly Father, as His precious daughter, as a new creation in Christ, as a temple of the Holy Spirit, and more, that I didn't even know was possible.
Bless your heart for being honest and still manage to be gracious as well. I would have ranted a whole lot more! Guess I need a lot more sanctification =/
Yes, what you share resonates (I'm on the west coast as well)....disconnect...resentment...frustration. so that's all I'll say before I say things I probably shouldn't... God's working on me to honor the crc as part of His Bride. and some days I really struggle for various reasons...
fyi, Rich, Dennis Fuqua will be in B'ham for a 4 hour pastors prayer summit on Monday, Oct. 3 from 8-12 if you are interested/available...
Thanks for your response Rob... lots of thoughts... I have a long, long list of laments of unfortunate, unbiblical, opposite of scripture, out of alignment with scripture stuff/traditions in the institutional church...
it's systemic - part of the institutional/denominational DNA... I grieve over the state of the Church & the CRC as that's my camp/expression/tradition that I've been a part of my entire life...I will save most of my response for later... but here's a few thoughts...
on God being pragmatic, I just found it humorous that God forming women for relationship, to help steward creation & be fruitful & multiply together, is not only beautiful, but so practical! The good fruit is often practical, helping others flourish & thrive!
Ok, on men & women being equal in inherent value... this is really only in the last 50 years - it's NOT the traditional view, it's a pretty recent view... before that, everything was pretty much through the lens of men being superior... read the church fathers, reformers, etc. there are some pretty demeaning quotes about women from them. Then there are the people that call themselves "comp" but are actually patriarchal... I would give Doug Wilson as an example, but I think he says he is patriarchal.
& I like to call it loving servantship (based on Phil 2/Matt 20) not leadership... & leading (verb) is not about a title or a position... it's about being an example (I have a compilation of verses on this) that convinces/persuades others by our character & love for one another to walk in God's Spirit & Truth together. Sometimes, that includes teaching/sharing/testifying/exhorting/etc.
3956pás – each, every; each "part(s) of a totality" (L & N, 1, 59.24).
3956/pás ("each, every") means "all" in the sense of "each (every) part that applies." The emphasis of the total picture then is on "one piece at a time." 365 (ananeóō) then focuses on the part(s) making up the whole – viewing the whole in terms of the individual parts.
Why did the church not endorse Women in Office until the 1970s when feminism arose?
They did ordain women for the first several hundred years... Marg's article gives examples of women serving as deacons & elders... so what happened?
QUOTE: Perhaps the biggest clue that a few churches (and not necessarily heterodox churches) had women elders is found in the Council of Laodicea. In a misguided move, this council banned the formal ordination of women who were elders, or priests, and who were serving their church as leaders.
It is not allowed for those women who are called ‘elders/ presbyters/ priests’ (presbytides) or ‘women presidents’ (prokathēmenai) to be ordained (kathistasthai) in the churches. Canon 11 of the Council of Laodicea (circa 360) EOQ from the following:
Posted in: We Are Blessed
Thank you, Eric, for reading through these and responding!
YES, the beautiful Aaronic blessing!!
It was listed #2 in my draft that I sent to the CRC network to publish, but not sure why it is not in included here.
Thank you for noticing that omission!
...
Posted in: We Are Blessed
Again, thanks Eric. I submitted an edit with the Aaronic blessing back in the list & added the rest of my title before the last paragraph ;)
WE ARE BLESSED... TO BE A BLESSING TO ONE ANOTHER
Posted in: In Search of Wisdom in the Midst of Doubt
God warns us in His Word, over & over, at least 30 times, to not be deceived. Something is significant when it is repeated so many times, especially by the Creator of the Universe!
I have a long list of laments over things I was taught somewhere along my journey of life that, in some cases, actually was the opposite of what I find when I have searched & examined the Scriptures more in depth, and in other cases, hyper focused on one doctrine at the expense of others. I often use the phrase, both/and. Often both views are right in ways, and both views are wrong in ways. Ie. complementarian & egalitarian.
I love the Greek word "peithesthe". This was a word that opened Greek debates in various forums (this word is an entire discussion on its own). It is a word that means to be open to being persuaded/convinced. It is so important in this time of confusion and deepening division, that we, especially as the family of God, continue to be curious and conversational with others. When we love one another as He loves us, we treat each other with dignity and respect even when we deeply disagree. Jesus still washed Judas' feet, Jesus still served Passover, the Lord's supper, to Judas. Jesus still went to the synagogue, even though He compared it to a den of vipers. Jesus tells us to love our enemies and pray for them. Not saying, those we disagree with are Judas or enemies, but sharing how Jesus treated those whom He knew would harm Him.
God also warns us to test everything, to use discernment/wisdom.
It is a painful yet profound journey to admit where we have been deceived/wrong, yet God's truth is far more beautiful than whatever the deception was we were believing, and the process of discovery is often life changing and healing.
Metanoia: Moving Beyond Mere Repentance | CRC Network
Being humble and open in our communication with love is a key!
Posted in: Resources to Commemorate the 1,700th Anniversary of the Nicene Creed
In case anyone wants a short context for the purpose of the Nicene Creed: here is a list of the heresies it was addressing... I have done my own research on this, but Grok summarizes this way better, faster & shorter than I can...
I find it fascinating and heartbreaking we are dealing with some of the same beliefs today... Ie eternal subordination of the Son (ESS) to limit women's serving in the church in certain ways (this is an entire discussion on its own even today still!).
The following is the Grok/AI compilation that I have researched in the past, but would take me awhile to compile:
The Nicene Creed, established at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD, was primarily formulated to address theological disputes, particularly those concerning the nature of Christ and the Trinity. Below is a list of the major heresies it aimed to counter, based on the theological context of the time:
Context and Notes:
This list is based on historical accounts of the theological debates surrounding the Council of Nicaea, as found in early Church writings and scholarly analyses of the period. If you’d like a deeper dive into any specific heresy or the Creed’s phrasing, let me know!
Posted in: Resources to Commemorate the 1,700th Anniversary of the Nicene Creed
The second aspect I find interesting and will share is the 20 canons that the Nicene Council also made along with the Creed. Nicaea - Canons of the 325 Council
These canons seem to have been ignored for the most part unlike the Canons of Dort. I find the Nicene Canons are quite helpful in giving additional context for what the early church was dealing with at the time. #1 Castration? #19 Paulianists (a different Paul than the Apostle Paul)? deaconesses? The contexts for these are very, very interesting and insightful and help us better understand other difficult texts of the New Testament, such as Paul's letter to Timothy.
Posted in: Separation Agreement Templates: Documenting the Goodbye
interesting updates on NDAs... I've been wondering about this over the years since I presented this recommendation to Synod in 2018. It is confirming to see that this recommendation helped the CRC be a bit ahead of the curve re addressing NDAs.
The secular culture has had some pretty amazing changes to address NDA type documents in the last 7 years. NDAs were not just a problem in the CRC, but other denominations and institutions as well in covering up abuses of power and preventing necessary changes to address the abuses of power due to the silencing of those involved.
One of a number of reasons I find NDAs egregious in the Church is that there is no time limit. People were silenced for their entire life which often protected leaders who were abusing their power, for a short-term severance in return. RZIM (Ravi Zacharias Int'l Ministry) is a classic case of this. These abuses of power caused the deep wounds of God's daughters/people that Jeremiah 6 &8 mentions that the leaders failed to address well.
God's way is in the light. Even the Gov't is promoting transparency. We all still have a ways to go, but hopefully/prayerfully we can keep heading in the right direction.
here are a few examples of how NDAs are being addressed theologically, legislatively...
#NDAFREE started in 2021 addressing NDAs in the Church/ministry context...
https://julieroys.com/nda-free-christian-orgs/
https://www.ndafree.org/stories/
https://www.ndafree.org/resources/theological-reflections/
TEXAS in 2025:
https://julieroys.com/tx-law-prohibit-misuse-non-disclosure-agreements-approved-house-vote/
FEDERAL AND WA STATE in 2022:
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/biden-signs-law-curbing-nondisclosure-agreements-that-block-victims-of-sexual-harassment-from-speaking-out
https://nwsidebar.wsba.org/2022/06/06/what-you-need-to-know-about-washingtons-silenced-no-more-act/
Posted in: What Does the Bible Say about Hell?
Interesting question Matt... Curious what prompted this question?
a lot of our traditional beliefs/ideas about hell are based on Dante's inferno and it's 9 levels written in the 1300s...
https://historylists.org/art/9-circles-of-hell-dantes-inferno.html
"hell" is a conflation of the biblical Sheol/Hades/grave, gehenna, tartarus, lake of fire, the abyss, the outer darkness w weeping and gnashing of teeth and maybe one or two more concepts. Hades is also the name of the (demonic) Greek god of the underworld.
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Hades-Greek-mythology
https://www.britannica.com/topic/afterlife-religion
Eternal conscious torment is one of the traditional views of hell. It's not the only view, but it has become the primary one w Calvin's help. Luther disagreed with this view. I'm with Luther on this!
Eternal death is another view. God uses language that has a sense of finality 50+ times in scripture, such as death (ie wages of sin is death), destruction/destroy (ie fear the One Who can destroy both body & soul), perish (ie shall not perish), end, be no more...
the demons will be tormented forever bc they will be in God's consuming fiery presence (ie lake of fire) and they hate God.
Universalism is another traditional view. Quite a few of the Church Fathers believed this at some point in their journeys of faith.
If you want scriptural support (I have lists), further discussion, thoughts, questions, I would love to continue this "conversation" ... This is just a quick summary off the top of my head from my research a few years ago.
In the end, God promises He will make ALL THINGS NEW!
Posted in: Are We Out of Our Minds?
Interesting perspective! not sure what I expected when I clicked on this headline, but something possibly along the lines of addressing mental health. Thanks for sharing your personal journey of transformation through an unexpected path of brain trauma.
The Reformed/Presb./Calvinists (might just apply to Dutch/Friesians/Germans/Scots ;) seem to tend to be heavily intellectual, rational, and stoic, all good things, but there is so much more!
I did have a near death experience (NDE) I survived, the little one I had been carrying for 7 mos. inside me, did not. I will never be the same person I was before that. It was the start of what I call God converting me from a Ms. Martha to a Ms. Mary. Very painful, very profound journey. Intellectual -> Intimacy (spiritual), rational/transactional-> relational, stoic -> sensitive, linking the head and heart through the Holy Spirit revelation of opening the eyes of my heart to know Him more.
It's been almost 3 decades now since the loss of our first little one and my NDE. My husband and I have been blessed with 7 children, 3 living here with us and 4 with Jesus. The Spirit has transformed my faith and identity into a deep, rich and beautiful relationship with HIM, our Heavenly Father, as His precious daughter, as a new creation in Christ, as a temple of the Holy Spirit, and more, that I didn't even know was possible.
For His glory and our good...
Posted in: Is It Just Me, or ...
Bless your heart for being honest and still manage to be gracious as well. I would have ranted a whole lot more! Guess I need a lot more sanctification =/
Yes, what you share resonates (I'm on the west coast as well)....disconnect...resentment...frustration. so that's all I'll say before I say things I probably shouldn't... God's working on me to honor the crc as part of His Bride. and some days I really struggle for various reasons...
fyi, Rich, Dennis Fuqua will be in B'ham for a 4 hour pastors prayer summit on Monday, Oct. 3 from 8-12 if you are interested/available...
http://lowpc.org/summit
Posted in: A Christian Discussion on Women in Office
Thanks for your response Rob... lots of thoughts... I have a long, long list of laments of unfortunate, unbiblical, opposite of scripture, out of alignment with scripture stuff/traditions in the institutional church...
it's systemic - part of the institutional/denominational DNA... I grieve over the state of the Church & the CRC as that's my camp/expression/tradition that I've been a part of my entire life...I will save most of my response for later... but here's a few thoughts...
on God being pragmatic, I just found it humorous that God forming women for relationship, to help steward creation & be fruitful & multiply together, is not only beautiful, but so practical! The good fruit is often practical, helping others flourish & thrive!
Ok, on men & women being equal in inherent value... this is really only in the last 50 years - it's NOT the traditional view, it's a pretty recent view... before that, everything was pretty much through the lens of men being superior... read the church fathers, reformers, etc. there are some pretty demeaning quotes about women from them. Then there are the people that call themselves "comp" but are actually patriarchal... I would give Doug Wilson as an example, but I think he says he is patriarchal.
& I like to call it loving servantship (based on Phil 2/Matt 20) not leadership... & leading (verb) is not about a title or a position... it's about being an example (I have a compilation of verses on this) that convinces/persuades others by our character & love for one another to walk in God's Spirit & Truth together. Sometimes, that includes teaching/sharing/testifying/exhorting/etc.
anyway, that's not even the tip of the iceberg...
Blessings...
Posted in: A Christian Discussion on Women in Office
Here's another example of "men" being added in the 84 NIV when the Greek is inclusive... Makes me cry & ask why?!?!? What is the reason to add it?
John 3:35 in the 84 NIV (& several other versions) adds men... the KJV puts it in italics to signify it is added...
"... By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another."
John 13:35 By this everyone will know that you are My disciples, if you love one another." (biblehub.com)
John 13:35 Greek Text Analysis (biblehub.com)
Strong's Greek: 3956. πᾶς (pas) -- all, every (biblehub.com)
all, the whole, every kind of.
HELPS Word-studies
3956 pás – each, every; each "part(s) of a totality" (L & N, 1, 59.24).
3956 /pás ("each, every") means "all" in the sense of "each (every) part that applies." The emphasis of the total picture then is on "one piece at a time." 365 (ananeóō) then focuses on the part(s) making up the whole – viewing the whole in terms of the individual parts.
Posted in: A Christian Discussion on Women in Office
Going back to one of Rob's opening questions:
Why did the church not endorse Women in Office until the 1970s when feminism arose?
They did ordain women for the first several hundred years... Marg's article gives examples of women serving as deacons & elders... so what happened?
QUOTE: Perhaps the biggest clue that a few churches (and not necessarily heterodox churches) had women elders is found in the Council of Laodicea. In a misguided move, this council banned the formal ordination of women who were elders, or priests, and who were serving their church as leaders.
It is not allowed for those women who are called ‘elders/ presbyters/ priests’ (presbytides) or ‘women presidents’ (prokathēmenai) to be ordained (kathistasthai) in the churches.
Canon 11 of the Council of Laodicea (circa 360) EOQ from the following:
An Overview of Women Ministers in the Early Church - Marg Mowczko