My passion is to strengthen the love for our confessions.
It is beautiful to see six high school students in my profession of faith class be able to clearly explain verbally to me and before the elders ULTIP, the inerrency and infallability of scripture, the substitutionary atonement, and other truths. Our confessions are not out of touch if high school students can verbally explain key doctrines I taught from those confessions.
We have a man in his young 20s and a woman in her mid fifties. Both come from prison backgrounds. They are hungry for the Word. What better way to teach them about the faith than take them through our confessions? They are hungry for truth and eat the complicated and uncomplicated stuff right up.
These two attended a synod awareness class I hosted last month. When they saw the difference in the CO vs the FOS, they were offended our denomination would consider removing the language "fully agree with God's Word" and "defend."
What a great illustration about your daughter comprehending deep and essential truths.
We contemplated doing some VBS material. We looked at how it treated sin. It treated sin so lightly as if just by breakign parents' rules you sin. We decided against the material.
We looked and seemingly found material that treats sin for what it is--total depravity. sin is our actions, but we have a sinful condition we are born in. And we felt unless kids understand how deep our misery really is, they cannot know Jesus. We don't want to teach our kids to be good Pharisees by using moralistic and exemplaristic VBS material. We beleive kids can understand quite well Lord's Day 3.
Why wait until high school to treach them these truths? If we put in the effort as parents and sunday school teachers, our children are much more capable than what some might think.
And for those who have difficulty with the CO, I ask why are you part of this denomination? Is it biblical and Christ-like to purposely cause division of this nature? If you can't sign it, then why are you in the CRC? If you can't buy into the organization then go someplace or submit to the organziation. Those who do not believe women should be in office submit to prevoius decisions, can't you do the same?
I am going to respond to you Jim, but it will only sound more contentious to you, probably. I hope not. But I feely unduly attacked by you calling me "contentious". I wish you would debate more of the issue at hand rather than talk about process and things like that.
"Needlessy contentious"
1. all the issues I bring forth are legimate issues and can be debated. I have not personally attacked anyone and have been respectful of all positions.
2. Just because what I bring up may be controversial doesn't mean the ideas shouldn't be discussed. This is the purpose of such blogs to discuss. Yeah, I raise tough questions, but that again is the purpose of such blogs.
"alienated readers"
1. What could cause someone to be alienated? My comments are no different in essence as what Chad and John post. If people don't like discussing hot topics or if my conclusions don't match up with what they beleive of course they won't read. I am alieated by many blogs other people write, but I don't complain. I respect other positions no matter what they are. It seems that just because people don't like what I write all of sudden I become contentious.
"But your responses clearly show that either you don't understand the rigours and processes of denominational
and committee work or you don't consider such subtle"
1. I appreciate the hard work invovled. I just didn't appreciate the outcome of the work of the first versions.
2. I have been on an advisory committee and worked with people who have come up wirth reports. I understand the work and debate and hair splitting issues.
3. I don't know see how writing about the importance of "fully agree" and "defend" and how the first versions of the CO missed this and what a danger that posed doesn't appreciate the work of the committee. What people are concerned about was the outcome. And that is what I am calling attention to.
"Thus what happened at Synod this year was simply not a major revision"
1. I don't want to repeat here. But the addition of "fully agree" and "defend" do constitute a major change. Becuase without that language we in essence open ourselves up to not having doctrinal standards. As Chad says, the advisosry committee took the teeth from the old and put it in the new.
2. again, I assert the only reason why the vote was unanimous was because of the addition of the langauge "fully agree." Othwise, the debate likely would have raged on like in 2011.
"whose doctrines fully agree with the Word of God" is by nomeans close to saying that the particular articulations of those doctrines in the confessions themselves fully agree with that Word."
1. Is this the loophole everybody wanted? I can beleive in election b/c the BC mentions it, but I will really believe in the Arminian idea of election? However, it doens't hold up.
2. the way a doctrine is articluated is a doctrine! It is to say the same thing! Your comment doesn't make sense to me.
This article was awesome. I hope this gets in the hands of congregation members. I have talked to many pastors who have had times of weeping because all they hear is criticism. Some pastors go through long spells of no appreciation shown. Unfortuantely, many pators are "expendable" to them--if they don't like somethign, they can be run out of town and treated like garbage.
Here are some stats that Thabiti Anyabwile cites from The Schaeffer Institute in an article he writes called "Don't Make Your Pastor a Statistic." http://www.9marks.org/blog/dont-make-your-pastor-statistic I hope the stats are better for our denomination.
Health and Well-Being
70% of pastors constantly fight depression.
50% of pastors feel so discouraged that they would leave the ministry if they could, but have no other way of making a living.
Marriage and Family
80% believe pastoral ministry has negatively affected their families.
80% of spouses feel the pastor is overworked.
80% spouses feel left out and under-appreciated by church members.
Church Relationships
70% do not have someone they consider a close friend
Longevity
50% of the ministers starting out will not last 5 years.
1 out of every 10 ministers will actually retire as a minister in some form
Posted in: Living Confessionally in Covenant
My passion is to strengthen the love for our confessions.
It is beautiful to see six high school students in my profession of faith class be able to clearly explain verbally to me and before the elders ULTIP, the inerrency and infallability of scripture, the substitutionary atonement, and other truths. Our confessions are not out of touch if high school students can verbally explain key doctrines I taught from those confessions.
We have a man in his young 20s and a woman in her mid fifties. Both come from prison backgrounds. They are hungry for the Word. What better way to teach them about the faith than take them through our confessions? They are hungry for truth and eat the complicated and uncomplicated stuff right up.
These two attended a synod awareness class I hosted last month. When they saw the difference in the CO vs the FOS, they were offended our denomination would consider removing the language "fully agree with God's Word" and "defend."
Posted in: Living Confessionally in Covenant
John,
What a great illustration about your daughter comprehending deep and essential truths.
We contemplated doing some VBS material. We looked at how it treated sin. It treated sin so lightly as if just by breakign parents' rules you sin. We decided against the material.
We looked and seemingly found material that treats sin for what it is--total depravity. sin is our actions, but we have a sinful condition we are born in. And we felt unless kids understand how deep our misery really is, they cannot know Jesus. We don't want to teach our kids to be good Pharisees by using moralistic and exemplaristic VBS material. We beleive kids can understand quite well Lord's Day 3.
Why wait until high school to treach them these truths? If we put in the effort as parents and sunday school teachers, our children are much more capable than what some might think.
And for those who have difficulty with the CO, I ask why are you part of this denomination? Is it biblical and Christ-like to purposely cause division of this nature? If you can't sign it, then why are you in the CRC? If you can't buy into the organization then go someplace or submit to the organziation. Those who do not believe women should be in office submit to prevoius decisions, can't you do the same?
Posted in: Living Confessionally in Covenant
I am disapointed that you have singled me out, when ohters have said pretty the much the same things.
My full response is at the bottom.
Posted in: Living Confessionally in Covenant
I am going to respond to you Jim, but it will only sound more contentious to you, probably. I hope not. But I feely unduly attacked by you calling me "contentious". I wish you would debate more of the issue at hand rather than talk about process and things like that.
"Needlessy contentious"
1. all the issues I bring forth are legimate issues and can be debated. I have not personally attacked anyone and have been respectful of all positions.
2. Just because what I bring up may be controversial doesn't mean the ideas shouldn't be discussed. This is the purpose of such blogs to discuss. Yeah, I raise tough questions, but that again is the purpose of such blogs.
"alienated readers"
1. What could cause someone to be alienated? My comments are no different in essence as what Chad and John post. If people don't like discussing hot topics or if my conclusions don't match up with what they beleive of course they won't read. I am alieated by many blogs other people write, but I don't complain. I respect other positions no matter what they are. It seems that just because people don't like what I write all of sudden I become contentious.
"But your responses clearly show that either you don't understand the rigours and processes of denominational
and committee work or you don't consider such subtle"
1. I appreciate the hard work invovled. I just didn't appreciate the outcome of the work of the first versions.
2. I have been on an advisory committee and worked with people who have come up wirth reports. I understand the work and debate and hair splitting issues.
3. I don't know see how writing about the importance of "fully agree" and "defend" and how the first versions of the CO missed this and what a danger that posed doesn't appreciate the work of the committee. What people are concerned about was the outcome. And that is what I am calling attention to.
"Thus what happened at Synod this year was simply not a major revision"
1. I don't want to repeat here. But the addition of "fully agree" and "defend" do constitute a major change. Becuase without that language we in essence open ourselves up to not having doctrinal standards. As Chad says, the advisosry committee took the teeth from the old and put it in the new.
2. again, I assert the only reason why the vote was unanimous was because of the addition of the langauge "fully agree." Othwise, the debate likely would have raged on like in 2011.
"whose doctrines fully agree with the Word of God" is by nomeans close to saying that the particular articulations of those doctrines in the confessions themselves fully agree with that Word."
1. Is this the loophole everybody wanted? I can beleive in election b/c the BC mentions it, but I will really believe in the Arminian idea of election? However, it doens't hold up.
2. the way a doctrine is articluated is a doctrine! It is to say the same thing! Your comment doesn't make sense to me.
Posted in: It Doesn't Have to be a Big Thing to be a Big Deal
This article was awesome. I hope this gets in the hands of congregation members. I have talked to many pastors who have had times of weeping because all they hear is criticism. Some pastors go through long spells of no appreciation shown. Unfortuantely, many pators are "expendable" to them--if they don't like somethign, they can be run out of town and treated like garbage.
Here are some stats that Thabiti Anyabwile cites from The Schaeffer Institute in an article he writes called "Don't Make Your Pastor a Statistic." http://www.9marks.org/blog/dont-make-your-pastor-statistic I hope the stats are better for our denomination.
Health and Well-Being
they could, but have no other way of making a living.
Marriage and Family
Church Relationships
Longevity