Attempts at Honesty

Reflections on the interplay of the Bible and Culture

Home Archives for government

Shaw on Civil and Religious Liberty

Posted on Written by 1 Comment

LibertyMy previous post highlighted a quote from Robert Shaw’s commentary on the Westminster Confession of Faith (download PDF version) which I have been reading. I found another paragraph in that work that I would like to share with you.

“The civil government appears to be impelled by something like infatuation, and is introducing, or giving countenance to, measures that are darkly ominous to both civil and religious liberty, as if hastening onward to a crisis which all may shudder to contemplate. The masses of the community are in a state ripe for any convulsion, however terrible, having been left for generations uneducated and uninstructed in religious truth.”

Does this resonate with you? It certainly did with me.

Shaw’s work was first published in 1845 and was written in Scotland where he was a Presbyterian minister. I heard Malcolm Muggeridge quoted as saying, “new news is old news happening to new people.” The point being that we face the same issues over and over again.

It is both comforting and chilling to think that in 1845 Shaw highlighted issues in his social climate that we are facing today. It is comforting in that we are not alone, nor are we facing a brand new challenge.

It is chilling that even a casual examination of our situation reveals the lack of progress brought about by civil government.

I live in a country that is increasingly intolerant of Christianity and is inching (slowly at this point) toward some form of totalitarian state. But even as I watch our freedom being eroded, I am reminded that God remains in control and whatever the outcome, it will be in accordance with his plan.

The one thing that can reverse our current trajectory toward a totalitarian state is a spiritual awakening. As Shaw points out, one of the contributing factors to the loss of civil and religious liberty was ignorance of religious truth. The church failed in the mission to make true disciples.

Yet, from Shaw’s time until our own, there have always been those who have faithfully proclaimed the Gospel of Jesus Christ through word and action. This has been done under various forms of government that range from democratic to despotic.

If the church (regardless of denominational affiliation) takes seriously its mission to make disciples and properly instruct them in Biblical truth, then we can be used by God to bring about the revival that we so desperately need.

What do you think? Whether you agree or disagree, I’d appreciate hearing your thoughts on this. Please use the comment section below to share your opinion.

On corruption in government

Posted on Written by 6 Comments

CorruptionI recently heard a radio commentator say that according to a survey done around the world, one of the foremost concerns of people is corruption in government. I doubt that many people are shocked by this since it is not a new problem. From the beginning, human government, made up of flawed and fallen humans, has been corrupt because the men and women who make up the government have been corrupt.

Saint Augustine, writing in the early 5th Century addressed this issue when he wrote the following:

“. . . it was the business of such men as were prudent and wise to deceive the people in matters of religion, and in that very thing not only to worship, but also to imitate the demons, whose greatest lust is to deceive. For just as the demons cannot possess any but those whom they have deceived with guile, so also men in princely office, not indeed being just, but like demons, have persuaded the people in the name of religion to receive as true those things which they themselves knew to be false; in this way, as it were, binding them up more firmly in civil society, so that they might in like manner possess them as subjects. But who that was weak and unlearned could escape the deceits of both the princes of the state and the demons?”

As Augustine points out, the result is that those who rule are likely to espouse positions that they do not believe so that they can remain in power. Whether or not religion is involved, deception remains.

Now, you might argue that in 21st Century America, we do not have a state religion. But is this true? Are we not moving into a period where there is indeed a new state religion, that of evolving morality and tolerance?

The dirty little secret of the tolerance movement is that they themselves are intolerant of anyone who disagrees with them. I have yet to meet the man (or woman) who lives as though all opinions on any subject are equally valid. Yet, this is the mantra of what appears to be the new state religion of the United States, a religion that is forced upon us despite the establishment clause.

What is the Christian supposed to do in response to this? A few thoughts come to mind.

  1. God remains in control, even when governments are corrupt and antithetical to Christian belief. The power of the gospel to change lives cannot be thwarted by any human government, religious or irreligious.
  2. We should not be dismayed when we learn of corruption because our ultimate hope is in God alone. Neither should we be surprised, when we understand that each of us carries the taint of Adam’s sin and corruption lies within our hearts (see Matthew 5 – 8).
  3. We should use whatever power we are given to help reform government and fight corruption when it is found. This power may be limited to the right to vote. Some are called to participate in government as elected officials and have a higher responsibility for their response to corruption.

Church Membership – A Response to Matt Chandler

Posted on Written by 23 Comments

Full disclosure update: As of 2012, I no longer attend a Calvary Chapel.  While I still feel that church membership is not mandated by Scripture, I am now convinced that membership is beneficial because the member makes a clear commitment to be accountable for the church and be in support of the church.

imageA friend of mine, @kksine, asked me to read and comment on an article by Matt Chandler entitled Is Church Membership Biblical? which was published on the 9marks.org web site.

The question is a valid one: should there be a formalized process for determining who is and who is not a member of the local fellowship?

I agree with almost all of what Matt Chandler writes, my response is intended to provide clarification rather than rebuttal. We share the same goals but choose slightly different paths to get there. This is a preference issue and we have freedom to have or not have a formalized membership process in the local body.

Clarification #1 – Formalized Membership Process

Scripture does not mandate, nor does it preclude a formalized membership process. The verses cited in the article identify what should be done, but do not specifically indicate that a formalized membership process is necessary for compliance.

In 1 Corinthians 12:12-31 and Romans 12:4-8, where Paul uses the analogy of the Church as the Body of Christ, it is not necessary to infer a formalized process to determine who is a member of the body. In a sense, any believer who attends a local fellowship is a member of it, in that he is a part (the most basic sense of the word member) of the body of Christ.

I attend a Calvary Chapel which does not have a membership process. In Calvary Chapel, we have elders who make decisions with regard to church polity, we have church discipline, we have submission to the ruling elders [Update: The largest reason we left Calvary Chapel was because it is not elder ruled. There is an elder board but they are there to support the pastor in his decisions. Calvary Chapel has an episcopal form of government with the pastor holding the power.] and we know who is associated with our body. We seek to be obedient to Jesus Christ as a body and we seek to follow the Apostle’s direction as to how the local congregation should function. All are done without a formalized membership process.

Those who attend our fellowship on a regular basis have a sense of belonging and understand that to continue belonging to our fellowship, a submission to Jesus Christ, Scripture and the elders is required.

Clarification #2 – The Goal of Membership

The goal of membership is not stated in the article. Is the goal to determine who can vote and who cannot?

I can find no direct support in Scripture for a congregational form of church government. What I do see in Scripture is that the elders are to rule and lead the church. Scripture gives no indication that church members should be allowed to vote on church policy, the calling of a pastor, electing elders, etc.

Congregational government requires formalized membership as a means of controlling who can vote. If you want congregational government, you have freedom to do so, but you cannot make a case that Scripture demands this form of government.

Clarification #3 – Accountability and Church Discipline

In the article Matt seems to assume that without membership, church discipline would be impossible. I’d like to assure him that this is not the case.

I would turn this around and ask what he would do with someone attending his church without being a member who gives evidence of living in sin. Would he confront the sin? Or, is it only those who go through the formal process who are confronted? Do you allow the “sinner” to continue attending and only confront the issue when he comes forward for membership?

We have found that church discipline works without membership. When an issue comes to our attention, it is confronted. Typically what we find is that the one confronted either repents and works toward change, or he stops attending or goes to another church.

Clarification #4 – Maturity and Membership

Matt assumes that membership is necessary for a believer to progress toward maturity.

I agree that associating and belonging to a local fellowship is an expectation that Scripture places upon us. I also agree that belonging to a local fellowship is necessary for optimum spiritual growth. I do not agree that a formalized process and the signing of a document are necessary to have this sense of belonging.

In our fellowship, we see people who sit under the teaching of Scripture, interact with other believers in small groups, serve in the body and progress toward maturity, all without a formalized membership process.

Conclusion

There is nothing wrong with having a formalized membership process. Scripture does not have anything negative to say about this that I can find. If your fellowship functions in this way, I am happy for you.

My point is that it is not mandatory to have this formalized process. Many local church bodies function according to Biblical priorities without this process.

This is a preference issue and if you prefer membership, I’m totally OK with that.

A Celebration of Death? – Response to the Death of Osama Bin Laden

Posted on Written by 3 Comments

The announcement of the death of Osama Bin Laden reminded me of a post originally published in February of this year. I have taken the text from that post and added additional comments below.

February 2, 2011:

ColosseumAs we toured the Colosseum  in Rome, the guide  described the events that were staged in that structure over a four hundred year period. There were gladiatorial battles, men hunting animals, animals hunting men, executions and other grisly displays. Each spectacle ended only when one side in the battle was killed or rendered unable to continue fighting.

Our guide made a special point about the fact that they would put sand on the wood floors to allow the competitors and victims to have traction in the midst of the blood that would inevitably flow.

In the 21st Century, we can easily feel superior to these Romans who sat and applauded such waste of human and animal life. We wonder how civilized people could enjoy such entertainment.

Upon further reflection, however, I have to come to grips with the fact that there are many movies and television shows that are just as graphic and grisly as the entertainment in the Colosseum. The fact that real blood is not being shed does not make the acts displayed any less despicable.

What does it say about a society when death and violence are seen as entertaining? What does it say about us as individuals when we can watch graphic violence (even if it is only special effects) and derive pleasure from it?

I’m asking these questions of myself and sharing them with you as food for thought as we consider what is healthy and appropriate for entertainment. Before we condemn the ancient Romans, we should be honest about how much we are like them.

May 2, 2011 Update:

Yesterday it was announced that Osama Bin Laden was killed. Should Christians rejoice in this? I don’t think we should.

Perhaps there should be a sense of relief that a man who pursued evil has been prevented from inflicting further harm. Romans 13:1-7 tells us that governments have been put in place by God to restrain evil. Osama will no longer be a threat and this is a relief.

Yet, I cannot find any evidence in Scripture that there should be rejoicing in this. Ezekiel 33:11 tells us that God does not rejoice when a wicked man dies, neither should we.

Jesus tells us in Matthew 5:4 that those who mourn will be blessed. Today we should mourn that this death was necessary. We should mourn the evil that that made this death necessary. We should mourn that others will follow in Osama’s footsteps.We should mourn that the tendency toward evil is present in our own hearts.

Yet in our mourning, we should remember that God is in control and is moving events toward his ends in his time. One day all will be set right. Then we will rejoice.

 

Categories

Archives

Blogger Grid
Follow me on Blogarama