Uncategorized

To the Protectors of the Rebellious

Several people have taken issue with me pointing out that a woman with a 16-point list of situations in which she will not submit to her husband–including such open-ended examples such as if she believed he was leading her into a false teaching–is not in any way, shape, or form submissive.To those who think that there can be caveats to submission: Let me explain why you are wrong, and why submission with caveats is not submission.

Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands. –Ephesians 5:24

Point #1–Everything means everything.

A woman that has a 16-point list of when she will not submit to her husband is not submitting to him in everything. Thus, she is not following the Scriptural imperative to “submit in everything” to her husband. Do not give cover to a rebellious woman. Everything means everything. The Scripture commands wives to submit to their husbands in everything. That’s about as direct and plain as it gets–those who see in that command room for a 16-point list of situations in which a woman may choose to not submit to her husband are more than wrong. They are speaking lies in hypocrisy; having had their conscience seared with a hot iron.

Point #2–Wives are to submit to husbands as the church submits to Christ.

So if there is a 16-point list on when a wife can choose to not submit to her husband, where is the analogous 16-point list of when the church can choose not to submit to Christ? Does the church get to rebel if asked to do something dangerous? Does the church get to rebel if Christ claims to have absolute authority over it and to be its primary Lord?

No?

Then wives don’t either.

A Tale of Four Churches

I grew up in the Seventh-day Adventist Church (SDA) as did my wife. I was homeschooled until my Junior year of High School, and my mother used almost exclusively Rod & Staff materials, so I was also heavily influenced by Mennonite thought growing up. Bible study eventually led me to reject certain SDA beliefs. However, one of the things that I retained is the simple belief that the Sabbath ought still be honored.

In fact, this belief is responsible for my later rejection of other SDA beliefs. I found SDAs to engage in the same justifications, obtusifications, and unteachings on say, head coverings, as they rightly pointed out when others attacked the idea that the Sabbath ought still be honored, and is still the same day of the week it was when Jesus walked the Earth.

And while I believe that the Sabbath ought be honored, I have no problem with attending church on Sunday. The Sabbath can be honored without attending church. Yet, as a matter of preference and convenience, all else being equal, I would choose to worship on Sabbath rather than honor the Sabbath and then worship on Sunday.

I share this background because I am searching for a church.

I’ve already mentioned my first 2 rules:

Rule #1 of my search for a church–must proclaim Jesus Christ to have come in the flesh, and be the only path to salvation. Rule #2–all congregations under the leadership of female “pastors,” “priests,” and “bishops” are automatically disqualified.

Now my observations from the first 4 churches I visited in my church hunt.

The first was a little Seventh-day Baptist church. We arrived in time for the “Sabbath School,” and found only the preacher and one other person present. No one else arrived until it was time for the sermon, and then one other family and a pianist showed up. My wife was the only woman covered. The sermon was milk, and was read off a piece of paper. There was no sense of worship, wonder, awe, or reverence. No communion was served, nor was any announcement made of when it would next be served–an issue for one who believes he ought to participate in the body of Christ regularly.

The second was a small Antiochian Orthodox church. We did not go to the regular worship service, but to the Saturday evening Vespers service. All the seats would have been filled, except that most people were standing gathered towards the front. The singing/chanting of prayers and scripture was beautiful and reverent, and indeed the entire ceremony seemed designed to engender worshipful and reverent behavior. About 50% of the women and girls were covered. No Eucharist was served, but it was made clear that it would be available at the Sunday liturgy. The priest’s message was simple, but relevant to Christian living.

The third was a small Seventh-day Adventist church. The church was about a third full, and there were two other men present. There were two High-School age kids, and after them their parents would have been far and away the youngest ones present (other than my family). None of the women other than my wife were covered. There was no sense of wonder, awe, or reverence–even the two hymns that were sung were played so slowly that they felt mournful. The sermon was preached by a 50 year-old-ish woman with a man’s haircut, and was titled “Jesus is a Good Friend.” No communion was served, nor was any mention made of when it would next be served.

The fourth was a Roman Catholic church. After the brutal experience at the SDA church, I was hoping to go back to the Orthodox church for vespers again, but I wasn’t able to. I then wanted to go somewhere Sunday morning, but was again unable to. So Monday morning we went to a Roman Catholic church (does any other denomination offer services every day of the week?) The service was in a small side chapel, rather than the main sanctuary, and the chapel was about 3/4 full. Naturally, with it being during the work day, the congregation was all older. My wife was the only woman covered. Eucharist was served, and there was a lot of kneeling.

I am still looking at various other churches in the area, and deciding where else to visit. Yet I hope to stop visiting and find a permanent home for myself and my family soon.

The Churches of God…

Now I praise you because you remember me in everything and hold firmly to the traditions, just as I delivered them to you. But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ. Every man who has something on his head while praying or prophesying disgraces his head. But every woman who has her head uncovered while praying or prophesying disgraces her head, for she is one and the same as the woman whose head is shaved. For if a woman does not cover her head, let her also have her hair cut off; but if it is disgraceful for a woman to have her hair cut off or her head shaved, let her cover her head. For a man ought not to have his head covered, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man. For man does not originate from woman, but woman from man; for indeed man was not created for the woman’s sake, but woman for the man’s sake. Therefore the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels. However, in the Lord, neither is woman independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. For as the woman originates from the man, so also the man has his birth through the woman; and all things originate from God. Judge for yourselves: is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him, but if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her? For her hair is given to her for a covering. But if one is inclined to be contentious, we have no other practice, nor have the churches of God —1 Corinthians 11:2-16 (NASB)

The churches of God have no other practice.

What then, shall I conclude about the many–and varied–churches I have visited in which my wife was the only woman covered?

Morning Musings

I’ve been sitting up for a couple hours after giving up on trying to sleep at 5:30 this morning.

We are finally mostly moved in. I need to go cut the lawn, but it’s still too wet from dew.

We haven’t found a church yet–and I’ll be traveling the next two weeks, so it will be awhile.

But I’ve been thinking about it quite a bit. I was reading recently about the Christological dispute that separated the Coptic Church from Eastern Orthodoxy, and thinking about how minor it was compared to the many current denominations that are not even Christian in any sense of the word.

Since I’ll be travelling for a while, and not home to do the myriad of things that need doing, maybe I’ll have a few more chances to write.

The last several years I attended a church that had swallowed the progressive pill big time. I regarded it as a missionary endeavor, and made some progress. I befriended the pastor, and kept bringing things up. He switched from pussy-footing around issues to speaking to them directly, and started preaching straight from the Bible rather than preaching feel-good progressivism.

But I moved thousands of miles.

And now I have a kid on the way.

Is it wise to try to exorcise a church if it means bringing my wife and child to a place where demons and the devil are not only present, but lauded as Holy God and angels? I’d far rather find a church whose soul is intact, and then fight to keep it that way.

Is that laziness on my part? Fear? Or just a change in my calling?

I’m not willing to endanger the souls of those in my charge to fight for souls not in my charge.

But is that part of the problem?

Are the souls of so many churches demon-possessed because fathers of the faith are keeping their families away from their demonic influence rather than reclaiming them in Christ’s name?

I don’t know.

The birds are singing. It’s a beautiful morning. I’m going to put this computer down, smoke my pipe and pray.

Because I lack wisdom, but God doesn’t.

But if any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all generously and without reproach, and it will be given to him. —James 1:5 (NASB)

Blue-Collar Blues (Cover)

Like Cane Caldo, I recently started a new job. (Which I enjoy greatly)

Unlike him, I’m not working two full time jobs.

But I am working a part time job, driving an hour and a half each way to my full-time job, in the process of buying a house, and preparing for our third move in less than 6 months.

Da da-da-da duh!

Thankfully, my auto work is done. (I hope)

The other day, I lost control on a country road and ended up in the ditch 15 feet from a power pole. Upon inspection, it appears that the outer ball joint was missing a cotter pin and the nut worked its way loose, causing the wheel to come out of position and separating the CV axle at the inner joint. Thankfully, it only took a day and a half to put it back together, and its been working fine since.

Da da-da-da duh!

But expect a post again soon. I’ll do it when I can.

Oh, and if you bothered reading all of this, the biggest news is probably that Courtney has informed me that, God willing, I will be a father in less than 9 months.

Consider the Puppy, Learn His Lesson

In a recent post, Donal laid out the two main options available to marriage-minded men today:

Good women who want to marry are few and far between, and their aren’t nearly enough of them to go around. This means that many young men who want to marry will have to choose one of these two options:
1) Refuse to marry because no worthy women are available
2)Lower their standards in order to marry

This is a difficult choice to make, and nothing I can say will make it any less difficult. I sympathize with those going through this. How could I not, as I am going through it myself? As a matter of recommendation I would suggest the first course of action, but I won’t belittle a man who chooses the second.

Now, Donal is a little bit wrong here: “Good women who want to marry” are not “few and far between,” they are non-existent–largely because there are no good women. There aren’t even any good men. Zero. Nada. Zilch.

Read more…