Wednesday, March 13, 2024

"Being Elisabeth Elliot" by Ellen Vaughn - BOOK REVIEW

I finally got to reading this book! If Ellen Vaughn’s first book (“Becoming Elisabeth Elliot” which tells the first half of Elisabeth's life) was excellent, than this second part was something far beyond that. It was really hard to put down…. I for sure lost some sleep this past week being up reading. And I wept at the end. (I had a good idea/spoilers of the ending ahead of time, but still, I wept.)  I should also add that the only disappointing aspect of this 2-part biography was there were NO PICTURES! (If you'd like some, and a timeline of her life, here's a great resource: https://elisabethelliot.org/about/timeline/)

 

I so appreciate how Ellen wrote this book. Like Ellen, I am a realist. Like her and Elisabeth I know that those we admire should never be put on pedestals as (near) perfect saints. Like her and Elisabeth, I want the whole truth to be spoken, regardless of other people’s opinions/reactions. And Ellen modeled, “speaking the truth in love”.... although I know I could grow in that particular aspect - I am probably more like Elisabeth in that regard.

 

I left the reading of this book with two emotions. One was utter sadness at the ending of Elisabeth’s life and the wrong/hard last years she suffered… largely because her views on marriage/submission were rather sadly twisted (which caused her and many she advised harm). My heart broke so for her (and her daughter/family members who had to watch) as it does for other women stuck in similar controlling marriages (this is a passionate area for me, one I’ve written about and continue to speak out about). While submission is one aspect of marriage, while someone making you “feel like a woman” is great, there is so much more to what God’s design is. Elisabeth desperately wanted to feel secure, she missed the signs of Lars’ anger/control issues (although to give her some credit, so did everyone else around her), and she believed that a wife’s submission meant inferiority and being under a husband’s authority (which I agree Jim’s unintentional but unfortunate treatment of her during their early courtship contributed to - see the first book for more on that). Marriage was not intended by God to be authoritarian, even though because of sin, it often ended up that way. Marriage, as in Ephesians 5, is mutual submission, it is not one-sided, even though the wives’ submission is emphasized, and the husband's responsibility to love is emphasized. It is supposed to be mutual love, respect, submission, Christ-like giving, working together for the kingdom of God. Elisabeth, for her part, tried to do just that. But unfortunately, she married a man who actually wanted to control her, not love her like Christ. There are still abusive, controlling men (and women) in churches today. There are popular pastors teaching authority/submission imbalance in marriage, overlooking and even defending abusive behavior (even actual abuse that should be reported to the police), all the while teaching on “God’s grace” and “love for others”. If Elisabeth’s third marriage saddens and rather makes you angry that’s good… but pay attention to the fact that it’s still happening all around us. I should clarify here that I am a committed "soft" complementarian... I cannot reconcile the Egalitarian views on gender/marriage with Scripture. However, many "complementarians" are actually authoritarians or defenders of "Biblical patriarchy" so it's very important that we are careful and clear about what we mean in this area. For more reading on this topic, I highly recommend THIS series.

 

The other emotion I was left with after reading this book was still, a very great admiration. Elisabeth was human, she made mistakes… but still, I came away admiring her faith, her endurance through so much suffering, her commitment to what she believed, her willingness to “tell it like it is”. She spoke out about many things and was indeed rather a “seer” in her generation. Despite being married to a controlling false believer for the last period of her life, God used this season for her to write most of her books and influence thousands for Christ. Our suffering is never for nothing, and despite our/others' sin, God uses us. 

 

Elisabeth was a faithful servant of God who persevered to the end… I seek to learn from her, follow her example in some ways and to do better in other ways, and earnestly praise God for the good He did in and through her life. 

 

Saturday, March 2, 2024

My Response to Why I Warn Against the Wilsons

 A friend of mine recently asked me why I didn't like Rachel Jankovic (author and daughter of Pastor Doug Wilson) and thought she was a hypocrite. Here is my response. (I will probably add to this as time goes on and I have more time to write more specific things.)

So my primary concern with Rachel is her affiliation and similar teaching/theology as her father (thus this post is about "the Wilson's"). I have done extensive digging into his theology, character, and handing of church/other matters and would put him in the category of a false teacher. There are too many serious concerns to not to. I believe his teaching to be dangerous. In fact, I consider Doug Wilson a dangerous false teacher and an abusive narcissist. So, while I will admit I have not thoroughly examined Rachel's writing/speaking very specifically, as she and her father work together and teach/hold to the same things I haven’t felt it was necessary to spend the time to do that. 

 

As for their hypocrisy... a hypocrite is someone who says one thing and does another. If someone claims to be an orthodox, Biblical teacher, but teaches things that are opposed to, even offensive to the truths of Orthodox Christianity, than umm yeah that makes them a hypocrite. So the real issue here is whether or not what the Wilson's teach is consistent with Scripture and Orthodox Christianity.

 

I will below list my main areas of concern with the Wilson's (and by this I mean Doug Wilson, his family or really anyone associated with him). Please note I don’t necessarily agree with everything his critics say or believe themselves, but when it comes to the topic(s) at hand, I believe they are absolutely right in their critique and concerns. Those who have gleaned good things from the Wilson's may think they are just throwing stones, but most of them have tried very hard to be fair in their critiques and concerns. Some of these are or seem small, but small things add up as well. Small flaws in character add up to bigger ones. The more small things I saw, the more I slowly became concerned. It will take some time for you to get through all this…. It was several months of me listening, reading and researching to come to the convictions I have now.

 

Doug Wilson’s questionable (heretical?) theology: It is important to say that a lot of what the Wilson's say, *seems* orthodox and right, and a lot of it IS orthodox. However, their false doctrine/teaching is extremely sneaky and subtle. I will share a lot of what others have written/said since they have done more extensive work and say it better than I could.

 

His view of Justification This is one of the biggest and most serious concerns. I really don’t have time to write out a whole explanation and argument, plus the two below do it very well:

https://theocast.org/is-doug-wilson-a-false-teacher/

https://thelondonlyceum.com/on-justification-doug-wilson-and-the-moscow-doctrine/

 

On Federal Vision: This is rather complex, but to summarize for you, Wilson says he’s Reformed, but the views he holds on the Covenants and on justification do not line up with traditional/orthodox Reformed theology. A lot of Reformed people outside his camp have serious concerns with views on this (and obviously Arminians would strongly disagree with him in this area of theology as well).  https://carm.org/about-theology/what-is-federal-vision-theology-and-is-it-biblical/

 

(P.S. Doug Wilson has claimed he no longer holds to “Federal Vision” however, it is very important to note that he has NOT rejected the theology that Federal Vision holds to - and that is the problem. In other words, he’s rejecting the label but keeping the theology. Tricksy… and completely hypocritical.)

 

Views on men’s/women’s roles:  The more I have read/heard from the Wilson's on this topic, the more I have been seriously concerned - and downright disgusted. The extreme patriarchy is very subtle at times, but I would assert is NOT in line with Biblical complementarianism. Again, they say a lot of things thare are actually right or at least *seem* right, but digging deeper I have often seen some red flags and have thoughts like “ehhh I’m not sure that’s quite right/balanced”. And on further study, I've found their view to not be in line with Scripture. As Rachel has written more about the area of womenhood it's important to address her specifically here. But as she is collusion with her father, I cannot freely trust her view on being a Biblical woman/wife/mother. While I have seen she does have many good and right things to say, there are also some huge concerns and wrong theology... At best, I would have to give too many cautions to feel I could recommend her to anyone.

Here is something from Rachel's own mouth... she's being grossly mistreated/controlled and doesn't even see it... seriously? What Christ-like husband would treat his brand new wife like this???: https://www.facebook.com/ExaminingMoscow/videos/346749201336488 

And while we're at it, here's another video from Rachel with a rather shocking condemning and hypocritical attitude. Other's "know for absolute certain?" You're a woman, you can't do anything right - that is the main message I've gotten from Rachel.  https://www.facebook.com/ExaminingMoscow/videos/1920306348165019

And one more for you: 

I can also talk about Nancy Wilson and her parenting advice.... you can watch clips of her "Biblical parenting advice" here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=75lZfjq_GWg  The whole Wilson family also appears in this video - notice the gaslighting from several of them - Dean (the host/critic) is really good at pointing out the red flags you should notice. (P.S This is very similar to the Pearl's borderline(at best?) abusive parenting advice - STAY AWAY! P.S.S. I am not at all anti-spanking, I think it can be fine done correctly, but it can very easily be done wrongly.)

I will add here that I have personal experience of having to submit to and respect a husband who was in the wrong - who was going the wrong direction theologically - it was hard, I had to learn and grow a lot in my obedience to God in my submission and attitude towards my husband, however, my complementarianism/beliefs about submission are NOT the same as the Wilson's. I would absolutely not put them in the same category.  

I have seen too many quotes and heard things Doug Wilson himself has said that are downright demeaning to women and completely unbiblical. Here’s an example: It might just be a woman's fault if she gets raped.... “But women who genuinely insist on ‘no masculine protection’ are really women who tacitly agree on the propriety of rape.” (Douglas Wilson, Her Hand in Marriage, p. 13) (And no, I’m not taking this out of context, you can read more in articles I’ve shared).

 

Here’s some people who have written about concerns in this area:

https://fullmetalpatriarchy.wordpress.com/category/doug-wilson/

https://mereorthodoxy.com/sex-submission-and-evangelicals-doug-wilson-controversial-words

https://spiritualsoundingboard.com/2016/01/15/pastor-doug-wilson-on-rape-submission-feminists-and-boobs/

 

Doug Wilson/Christ’s church handing of sexual sin and sexual abuse:

This is another HUGE concern. I'm not sure there is another area of all of life that makes me more angry than the ignoring/injustice of abuse in "Christian" environments. If I were to curse like Doug Wilson and his crew does, this is where I'd do it. Not only do the above patriarch views allow for this kind of thing to flourish, there continues to be very little accountability or serious concern for protecting others and dealing with abusers appropriately. There has been NO admission of “hey maybe we got this wrong” only defensive tactics. I have looked into this probably the most extensively - I have listened to the victims and others who witnessed the situation(s), read reports, the actual court cases, etc.

You can find more information about the abuse cases at this link (which also provides links to actual court cases): https://bredenhof.ca/2023/07/10/doug-wilson-the-ugly/

 

Another article on this issue:

https://religiondispatches.org/sexual-abuse-is-inevitable-in-christian-patriarchy-just-take-a-look-at-doug-wilsons-christ-church-and-its-new-documentary-eve-in-exile-the-restoration-of-femininity/

 

Other personal/character concerns:

His crude language and sexualized content. This is mentioned in several of the resources I’ve shared, but worth stating again. Much of it is downright disgusting and inappropriate for a Christian. I have directly read and personally listened to SO many crude things, and swear words (F-word, s-word, d-word and so much more) from Doug Wilson and from others who work closely with him. I will not link any videos or proof of this one but it's easy to find. They literally throw these words around the same as an unbeliever would. Is this really the kind of people you want to recommend to others?

 

Also, when he first was trying to become pastor of his current church, the elders didn’t think he conformed to their statement of faith (mainly having to do with his view of justification above). They asked him to either conform or step down. Instead, he mobilized church members to support him and basically forced the other elders to resign/leave and took over the leadership of the church. It was a forcible power struggle that he won. This is not an appropriate way to be any kind of respectable leader and I consider this a very bad indication of his character - but it lines up with other control issues that are reported. (This whole thing is common knowledge and a number of people have written about it - it’s mentioned in several of the resources I shared.) The main reason Wilson formed his own denomination is that none of the other main (Presbyterian Church of America is where he first tried to join) denominations would accept him. There’s nothing necessarily wrong with starting your own denomination, but if it’s because you can’t find a single one you could at least be acceptable in - that indicates a problem. Not to mention I'm pretty sure he's just a narcissist who wants to be in complete control.

 

 

Other resources:

I would recommend checking out this facebook page (they are also on Instagram) - I wouldn’t agree with all their angles or everything they say, but they bring to light a lot of what I mentioned above and a lot of provide evidence in videos, quotes, documents, etc. https://www.facebook.com/ExaminingMoscow

 

This is written by a unitarian, so obviously there are some things in there we wouldn’t agree with him on, however he tries to be fairly fair and goes through some of the other things mentioned above as well as some I didn’t take the time to mention (i.e. Doug Wilson’s controlling nature, sloppy writing and references in writing, his view on slavery in America, his extreme patriarchy, extreme political views, etc. - all of which I would agree are concerning).

https://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/ngier/wilsonempire.htm

 

 

In closing, so yes, I absolutely warn against the Wilson's, and anyone associated with them. If you're not convinced yet, take the time to listen to/read through the links provided.

Tuesday, August 15, 2023

Mama’s Tips for A Stress-Free Sunday

Sunday morning we go to church. Church is very important to us for various reasons. It’s important enough to be there weekly, to be on time, and for our kids to learn to behave/sit still so they are learning/participating and not being distracting to others.

 

Currently, my husband is teaching the adult Sunday School class at our church so we have to be leaving the driveway at 8:45 AM (and can’t be late!). Our kids (currently) have just turned 5, 3 and 1. Two years ago we lived down the street from church, so I stayed home with two littles ones while Mike went early to (again) teach Sunday School, and I got myself, a toddler and a baby ready and up to church by myself. So I have figured out a good routine to 1) make Sunday morning (mostly) stress-free and 2) get us to church on time! (I say mostly because as we all know, the unexpected happens with kids and they don't always wake up on the "right" side of the bed!) At the end I’m also going to share some tips for being in church with little ones and how to make that less stressful (and less distracting for others).

 

The #1 tip I’m going to give you for a stress-free Sunday morning is this: Prep Saturday night! I don’t think I can emphasize enough how important this is! It’s so important that I do not make plans Saturday evening if I can help it. You might not think there’s much to prep, but I’ll bet you’re running around Sunday morning before church doing at least most of these things. Doing all this Saturday evening, means (you guessed it) you don’t have to do it Sunday morning (AND you don’t have a messy house to make it feel more stressful). So here's my general Saturday evening routine:

 

1. Clean up: After dinner, the kids play (with Daddy or by themselves) and I clean up after dinner. I do the dishes, wipe counters (etc.), pick up our kitchen/living area (it’s all one room in our very small apartment) and vacuum. Having a clean house reduces stress over all, and means I have less to do late at night/in the morning…. Or later on Sunday for that matter!

 

2. Bathe kids. Around 7:15 is bath time for the kids. I wash their hair and then let them play for a while while I finish cleaning or move on to the next thing.

 

3. Pre-pack diaper bag. Diapers, extra clothes (for the baby at least), snacks, water bottle are the usual things I have to refill/check. Sometimes the diaper bag needs a quick cleaning out so I’ll do that too if needed.

 

4. Prep kids’ room so it’s ready for bed. I basically do this every night if it’s not already picked up… just a quick clean-up so it’s not a mess. Then I close the curtains and get their pj’s out.

 

5. Pick out clothes for Sunday. I will pick out the kid’s clothes and have them either laid out or at least obviously set-apart in case Daddy is the one to dress them. I also decide what I am going to wear as well (because I don’t want to waste time figuring that out in the morning).

 

5. By 8 the kids are out of bath and having a snack and I’m nursing the baby and getting him ready for bed. He goes down at 8:30. Then the kids have Bible Time with Daddy, brush teeth and go to bed at 9.

 

 

Sunday Morning Routine

We have a very simple and quick morning routine (an hour to an hour and 15 minutes is all we get):

 

Younger two kids are usually up around 7:30/7:45, which is when we usually get up as well. I take a shower and get dressed. Then I fix my breakfast and (try and) get kids to eat (3-year-old doesn’t like to eat breakfast usually – which is why I always have extra snacks packed for the car). My 5-year-old (Keller) usually sleeps late so I’ll often just bring him something to eat in the car… it’s wayyyy easier than waking him and trying to get him to eat. I’ll eat breakfast and do my hair, then do my daughter’s hair. I dress the baby while my husband helps Keller. Then we grab the diaper bag and Church activity bag (more on that below) and we’re out the door. The only extra things I grab are my phone and personal water bottle. (I usually do my make-up in the car since I don’t use a lot so that also saves time.)

 

If we got up earlier we could have more time for kids to eat, etc. but kids (and Mom and Dad too!) like to sleep later, and so this works for us. My biggest tip here is to figure out what time you need to leave and work backwards. Also, leave yourself 10 more minutes than you think you’ll need. As you get into a routine it may shorten, but when you’re first working on a routine you need to allow extra time (especially when you have little ones who unexpectedly will have a diaper blow-out or something). It might take some time to figure out your routine (and how much time you need) but you’ll get it! It’s worth it to have less stress and to be able to get to church on time! 

 

2024 Update: Currently, we are 40 minutes from the church my husband now pastors. We have to be heading out the door at 7:30am.  Our kids aren't big breakfast eaters so they get big reusable applesauce pouches in the car. I take my shower the night before now and we all get ready in less than an hour!

 

Tips for a less-stressful church experience with kids:

 

Work on sitting quietly at home: We didn’t start this till fairly recently, but when we have our evening “Bible Time” the two older ones are expected to sit quietly and listen. We will evolve this as time goes on and expand the time and our expectations for them. Kids can sit longer than you think. I remember being surprised when my son first sat through an entire prayer meeting (about 30 minutes) with zero issues (and he’s a very busy child)! I realized he could do a lot more than I thought he could! However, it is not fair to expect your kids to sit quietly at church if you do not practice at home.

 

Church Activity Bag: (or box or whatever!) This a bag that is ONLY for church with quiet toys, fidget toys, sticker books, books, coloring books, etc. Basically, whatever would help your particular child(ren) sit more quietly. This gives your kids something to do during the service if they get bored. We also try not to let them use the Activity Bag right away – ideally not until after the singing so they can participate in that. Kids do not “need” any kind of toys/coloring things during a service (or even during a sermon) because they can learn to sit quietly, but it’s an option, and a nice one especially when they are young.

 

If potty trained, take them to the bathroom BEFORE the service starts. This is easy to forget but it will hopefully eliminate the need for them to go during the service. This is a good general habit for adults as well... Valuing being in church means you think about even simple things like this so you’re not missing part of the service or being a distraction to others.

 

Sit in the Back: Have you ever sat behind a child in church who was fidgeting, moving a lot, and/or misbehaving? If so, you know why it’s respectful to sit near the back with your kids. If your kids are young, are still learning to sit still, and at an age where you need to be prepared to correct (or discipline) them during the service, it’s easiest and less stressful for you (not to mention much less distracting to others) if you sit in the back (or at least on the side/near an exit). I mean, full disclosure: we have on several occasions had to take a kid quickly out of church who was misbehaving…and loudly (anyone else???). So I was pretty glad we weren’t sitting up front! Valuing church means also helping others to not be distracted if you can help it. Sometimes it can’t be helped of course, and it is also important that we understand that kids make noise… and we shouldn’t segregate families or children because they can’t sit quietly like adults can. However, you can still do your part to help others be less distracted by sitting in the back with your little ones until they are at an age/stage where they can sit quietly. This is just generally respectful to others. And this will make church less stressful for you as well!  

 

I’ll add we have a general rule of no snacks in church. We haven’t always done this, but realized it was pretty distracting to others. Now my kids get snacks on the way to church (and right now they can have some during the Sunday School hour since there is no kids class), but once we’re in the sanctuary there’s no more snacks. This eliminates 1) them asking for snacks, 2) snack noises, 3) mess. The only exception to this is the baby who sometimes gets those little dissolvable baby snacks to help him be quiet (but make sure they are not the ones in loud packaging!). (Obviously nursing a baby doesn’t count either.)

 

Saturday, March 18, 2023

Book Review: Unholy Charade by Jeff Crippen

“Discernment is not simply a matter of telling the difference between what is right

and wrong; rather it is the difference between right and almost right.” -Charles Spurgeon

 

Incorrect interpretations of Scripture, no matter what Christian theologian may 

speak them, need to be treated as what they are:  false teaching. 

Poor interpretation must be corrected if we want to hold Scripture high. (-me)

 

Jeff Crippen (pastor, advocate and writer at https://unholycharade.com/) has written this very educational book on domestic abuse in the church. With the experience of nearly hundreds of interaction with victims (and abusers), Jeff reveals the Church-at-large’s arrogant ignorance of abusers and their damage to their family members all while wearing an effective mask of Christianity. He quotes extensively from victims (and some notable church leaders) proving the church-at-large’s weakness in this area to understand and help.

 

The Church (and I speak of the Church-at-large) does not take abuse in the church seriously. One reason is because we don’t want to believe there actually ARE wolves in our midst. Surely, not in OUR church. Surely, not THAT “nice” man who teaches Sunday School! But most people are also woefully ignorant of the nature of abusers – that they are people without conscience and extremely skilled at deceiving others. While I’m sure most of us have seen some news stories of a charming man who ruthlessly murdered his wife (or others), we don’t think (or want to think) that this kind of man could be part of our church – or even be in leadership! But the truth is that Jesus himself warned that this WOULD happen:

 

“Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will recognize them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? So, every healthy tree bears good fruit, but the diseased tree bears bad fruit. A healthy tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a diseased tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire…” (Matt 7:15-23)

 

Churches are also deceived by false repentance. We think that if someone SAYS they’re repentant and ACTS like it in the moment that they must be genuine. But the truth is that repentance is only really known by one thing: Fruit. And fruit takes time. It is false teaching to take the word of an abuser’s “repentance” and just expect the victim to “forgive and forget”. It is dangerous to rush reconciliation before we see evidence of true repentance. We not only may risk the physical life of the victim, but even more so, we put their emotional and spiritual health at risk.

 

Too many churches are also more concerned about their reputations than about dealing with situation. Abuse in the church looks bad, it’s far easier to just tell the victim to “submit more” “forgive and love him anyway” than actually help and deal with the sin of the abuser. Part of this is ignorance, but it’s a willful ignorance where they ignore the pleas for help and ignore the lack of repentance-fruit. I personally know several churches who were (or still are) either deceived or flat-out denied/ignored the plight of the victim, siding with the abuser and excommunicating the victim when she finally fled. Even when the elders were confronted with proof of abuse they have refused to apologize for the injustice they’d given. Instead of helping they tell her to submit in ways that she was NOT commanded by God to do, and to suffer unjustly. This is the total opposite of what church leaders are supposed to do. I have said elsewhere that those that don't deal with abusers are like the pharisees, here's what Jesus said about them:

 

“Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You give a tenth 

of your spices—mint, dill and cumin. But you have neglected the more important matters 

of the law—justice, mercy and faithfulness. You should have practiced the latter, 

without neglecting the former.” (Matt 23:23) You “pile heavy burdens on people's 

shoulders and won't lift a finger to help”. (Matt 23:4)

 

Christians can also idolize marriage so that their focus becomes on “preserving the marriage” rather than seriously dealing with the sin and protecting the victim. They do not understand that in their desire to “preserve marriage” they are actually degrading marriage by continuing to validating it when the vows have been broken (and continue to be broken with no true repentance). Many Christians also have a false interpretation of Malachi 2:16 that is so often quoted as “God hates divorce”. This is a completely inaccurate translation. This inaccuracy is prevalent despite the accurateness of the ESV says: “For the man who does not love his wife but divorces her, says the LORD, the God of Israel, covers his garment with violence, says the LORD of hosts. So guard yourselves in your spirit, and do not be faithless.” Hating his wife and being “faithless” is exactly what an abuser is. This isn't saying he should divorce (or that she shouldn't divorce him). Even if he does not pursue divorce (usually an abuser does not as he wants to stay in control of his victim, plus that would make him look bad) he has broken the marriage vows to “love and protect” his wife. THIS is what it means to have a high view of marriage. While no one will love their spouse perfectly, the idea is that there is a genuine desire to love and do good to their spouse. Abusers do not have this, and over time the true of any “repentance” should be very clear – if we are paying attention.

 

Jeff gives lots of practical instruction on how to spot abuse, how to recognize an abuser, questions to ask to help you see through any façade, ways to help the victim, how to know if divorce is Biblical, and more. This book is a must-read for Christians, especially those in leadership who are called to shepherd Christ’s flock.  To ignore abuse is to ignore justice and mercy just as the Pharisees did.

 

“Silence in the face of evil is itself evil.” – Detrick Bonhoeffer

 

 

May we repent of our blindness and arrogant ignorance in dealing with abuse victims within our walls. May we deal rightly with the sin of abuse, and not allow the victimization of others. May we set free the oppressed and show true justice to the sinner and the victim.

 

“Learn to do right; seek justice. Defend the oppressed. Take up the cause

of the fatherless; plead the case of the widow.” (Isa 1:17)

“Do not pervert justice; do not show partiality to the poor or favoritism to the great,

but judge your neighbor fairly.” (Lev 19:15)

 

Some excerpts from the book: 

 





Buy the book here: https://www.amazon.com/Unholy-Charade-Unmasking-Domestic-Abuser/dp/0692533222


Thursday, August 18, 2022

How to find a Good Church (Church Search Helps)

I would argue that being committed to a good local church is foundational to one's walk with Christ. We were saved to be part of a body, a community. We are not the "church" alone; not without other believers to meet with, grow alongside of and learn from. We need others to walk this Christian walk, we were not meant to go it alone. Paul specifically tells believers he is writing to that they should not be "giving up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but encouraging one another—and all the more as you see the Day approaching" (Heb 10:25). If you've been in not-good churches, or even been hurt by people in a church, don't give up looking for a good one!

First, I should probably define what a "good" church is.  Excluding specific secondary doctrinal issues, here's what you want to be looking for in a good church:

1. Expositional Preaching. This means that the preaching almost always is structured so that it goes through a book of the Bible verse by verse and carefully dissects and explains the text for the purpose of teaching and instructing the congregation accurately. Good preaching also interprets Scripture based on the rest of Scripture, not primarily presuppositions or assumptions or only looking at one text alone.

2. Biblical Theology. This may differ depending on how you interpret Scripture on some secondary issues (ex. baptism), but the point is, the church needs to be rooted in theology that is defensibly Biblical and orthodox.

3. Biblical understanding of the Gospel. The Gospel message should be clear and not watered down. A clear, Biblical explanation of sin, Christ's atonement and the need for repentance and faith are central to a healthy church.

4. Biblical understanding of Conversion. This goes in part with the last point; a church can present a fairly clear gospel and yet still have a muddled view of conversion and what it really means to become a Christian, which is really important. 

5. Biblical understanding of evangelism. Basically, we're supposed to be doing it, but the way we do it also matters. Is the church winning people to their church, to their programs, or to truly following Christ? This is why the previous point is also really important.

6. Biblical understanding of Church membership. Belonging and being committed to a local community of believers is really important for accountability, relationships and building community (see next two points).

7. Biblical church discipline. This really can't be practiced well without the last point. Holding church members accountable, correcting and rebuking if needed is important for a healthy church. 

8. Promotion of church discipleship and growth. It's not a healthy church if people aren't growing in their faith practically in daily life and in their understanding of Scripture. We should also be growing relationally, growing in what it means to love others. Church is more than Sunday morning, the church should be at least seeking to grow it's members with Bible study and discipleship opportunities as well as fostering relationships/community outside of Sunday mornings.

9. Biblical understanding of Church leadership. The Biblical model for church leadership is a plurality of elders/pastors. This is not as common today as it should be, but it is ideal for a healthy church. (Note that some churches/pastors view this as important and desire to move in this direction but it takes qualified men and often time to be able to make this happen.) At the very least the church should have a pastor/leaders who are faithful and committed to Scripture,

Credit for these points goes to 9Marks Ministries, for more on these points see this article.  

 

Here are the links I share when people are looking for a church: 

Master's Seminary Alumni church finder. This is an excellent, solid seminary and graduates of here would be assumed to be leaders of likewise solid and healthy churches: https://tms.edu/find-a-church/

9Marks has a database/church finder with churches that meet these 9 qualifications: https://www.9marks.org/church-search/

Of course there's more churches out there that would also meet the qualifications but for various reasons are not on these sites, and you should also keep in mind that there are still churches in there that are healthier than others based on how important they view these things or how well they do them - which can make a big difference. 

 

When checking out a church, here's some tips:

1. Look for a church website.

a) You're particularly looking for their statement of faith and other statements/documents like "church mission" or "what we value". How clear is it, and what do they stand for that's also important to you? (I always look for a clear and more specific statement of faith, some churches statements are more vague which, to me, can be an indication of something lacking.)

b) Most websites will have information on the pastor(s)/leadership team so you can learn a bit about them. Where the pastor(s) went to seminary or their past experience can be an indication of the kind of church it will be. Not always of course, but it can be telling. Denominational or church affiliation can be really helpful as well.

c) Look for online sermons, or even a livestream that you could watch. This can give you a great feel for the church before you actually visit. Obviously, a church is going to be different in-person, but watching a service online will let you know what they value about a church service, a general feel for the "church culture", the kind of music/songs/lyrics they are using to teach the congregation (which can sometimes be telling), the leadership and preaching style, and a whole lot more. If there's no livestream, then listen to some sermons (I usually recommend listening to at least 2 in case for some reason a particular sermon just wasn't that good that week). 

d) Websites also usually have information on other ministries in the church. Do they do small groups, Bible Study or prayer meetings? Adult and children's education/Sunday school? Outreach? What other ministries do you value for your family? (ex. youth group, Awana-type kids ministry, mens/ladies Bible studies.) Some churches may not have much going on outside of Sunday's - for various reasons, some out of their control. But at least some of these are pretty valuable and should at least be areas the church leadership desires to grow in... mainly because they help a great deal in fostering relationships and discipleship. 


2. Visit in-person. And visit more than once! (It's always good to give a church a second chance unless you're very sure it's not for you).

a) Assuming you think the 9 Marks are already met, look for a sense of community. Friendliness is not an indication of community. Lots of churches have friendly people, but it doesn't always go beyond that. Do the people there seem to genuinely care about each other? About you? Do people just casually talk or does there seem to be deeper, more meaningful conversations happening? Church is much deeper than a service on Sunday mornings, it's supposed to be a community, a family.

b) Intentionally meet some of the members, and the pastor, his wife, and/or other leaders. Have some questions to ask them about the church, ministries, etc. Here's some great questions: "What do you value about this local church?" "Where do you see the need for growth in this local church?" "What needs does this church have?" "In what ways have you been blessed by the church here?" 


Good churches can be hard to find! Pray, pray, pray as you look for one. If you can't find one, move or consider starting one!











Monday, August 15, 2022

Home Sweet Homebirth: Daniel Alan's Birth Story

The original plan for this home birth was to have it at my mom’s house, because she has a nice jacuzzi tub in a lovely master bedroom suite – and that’s where my daughter was born two years ago. My mom had everything all ready for us there, but this little guy, like his older brother apparently, didn’t want to follow our plans for location. We had also hoped for Tuesday 8/9 for the birth because of some work-related things of my husband’s, but baby decided that he also liked having the same month and day for a birthday – again like his brother – and came a day early (2 days before due date).

 

Sunday (the day before) was a busy day! We went to a picnic with Faith Baptist where Mommy’s nephew got baptized and we went swimming in the lake. Big sister Liberty was making Mommy be pretty active with her love of the water. We had ice cream for dinner because it was really hot out and apparently it ended up being out last outing as a family of 4! That evening while getting out of the shower, I slipped just a bit pulling some muscle between my legs. That was rather painful and left me wondering if/how it would affect labor. Not sure if it did trigger something or not, but just before 1am on Monday morning, I had what they call “the bloody show”. Contractions started shortly after, but I tried going back to bed to get some sleep… after calling the midwife to let her know the status. Mild contractions continued, but they were 7-10 minutes apart so I didn’t think too much of it (and didn’t want to bother people in the middle of the night!). I dozed some and around 6am I got up after the contractions seemed to be getting more intense (but were still consistently about 10 minutes apart). Almost immediately, the contraction pace picked up to 3-4 minutes apart. When I text updated the midwife and said I thought we should definitely leave for my mom’s, she called me and said “we’re going to come to you, you should go lay down”. So I did. Contractions slowed a little and gave us time for her and her assistant (Sue) to both get there around 7:30-7:45AM. I had called my sister (Auntie Alicia) around 6:30 who came over to help get Liberty and Keller up and then she took them to her house (thanks sis!!!!)

 

Daniel was born at 8:59AM, after me pushing for about a half an hour. He came out in one final push, fairly fast, and cried right away! It’s such an amazing feeling seeing/holding your baby after all that hard work! His cord was pretty short, so he was next to me until it stopped pulsing. Once it was cut he was on my chest. After the placenta came out a bit later, I did have some mildly serious bleeding that the midwives managed fairly quickly and successfully (but I did have to get two shots and extra pushing on my tummy for the next half hour-hour to make sure I wasn’t still unusually bleeding inside). None of that was fun at all, and my poor husband got a bit scarred by it, but everything ended up fine! Because of that I was also a little weaker for the next day or so, but by the end of the 2nd day was feeling pretty good! A week later, I'm feeling pretty good except for tension in my back/neck that gives me headaches (chiropractor visit today hopefully will help), and my blood pressure is still a bit on the high side so I'm trying to rest as much as possible. Midwife is still checking on Daniel and I for another 5 weeks so I feel quite supported during this season.

 

Daniel weighed 6 pounds, 7 ounces, 21.75 inches long - my smallest baby by far... my other two were both over 8 pounds! I had rather hoped for a small baby and I got one! He’s so little! He was a rather uninterested eater the first two days… it took him a little bit to figure out that nursing was now how he was supposed to be fed, so it took quite a bit of time and patience nursing, especially through that first night and second day. You forget how hard it can be when they are so little and learning to nurse. But he figured it out and is turning into a champ! A week old and he's back up and over his birth weight!

 

On realizing we weren’t going to make it to my mom’s, I was slightly disappointed to not get a water birth, but in the end 1) we didn’t have to go anywhere which was nice, and 2) we didn’t have to travel home/going anywhere after having him either! As hard work as natural birth is, I’m a big advocate of it, and of home births. It was so sweet to be in our own room and home and have midwives there to help take care of us/things and avoid so many interruptions by nurses and extra people and who knows what else. I was able to just lay in my own bed holding my baby until I was ready to hand him over for his newborn check, and just stay there.

 

I felt very weak going into this birth, for various reasons. I’ve dealt with a bit more anxiety/fear this time and prayed a lot for God’s strength, through the delivery especially. I was given the strength I prayed for. I am also so thankful for such a helpful husband and a supportive family who’s helping us in various ways these first days and weeks, and friends who have offered meals/help. Big brother Keller was a bit confused at first that “baby brother” was no longer in my belly but is quite sweet about his arrival. Big sister Liberty could pretty much care less, and is mostly ignoring him. Haha! It will be a bit of an adjustment for her as she’s been very much a Mommy’s girl, but she’s already getting used to spending more time with Daddy so that’s sweet too. I’ve been rather apprehensive of going to 3 kids, but I know we will adjust and have a “new normal”. God will continue to give grace and strength.

 

Why we chose his name: Names and their meaning are important to us so we prayed and waited for the name we thought our son should have.

DANIEL: His name means "God is my Judge", and he is named after the man of great wisdom, faith and courage in the Bible. The name felt special as it seemed to almost come to Mike, waking him up in the middle of the night, even though it would not have normally been one of his picks. When he talked to me the next day, I told him that I’d actually been thinking a lot about that name too even though we hadn’t discussed it! I’ve always liked the name but didn’t think I’d really end up using it because it’s more common. But we’re very happy with his name.

ALAN: Alan is the name of his paternal grandfather and we are glad to honor him in this way. There are various opinions on the meaning of the name; the Gaelic origin means "handsome, cheerful" (and we certainly hope he's both of these characteristics!), but we also like the Celtic meaning which is "little rock; harmony, peace".

 

"For the LORD is our judge, the LORD is our lawgiver, the LORD is our king; it is He who will save us." (Isaiah 33:22)

 

"If we are thrown into the blazing furnace, the God we serve is able to deliver us from it, and He will deliver us from Your Majesty’s hand. But even if He does not, we want you to know, Your Majesty, that we will not serve your gods or worship the image of gold you have set up.” (Daniel 3:17-18)

 



 

Tuesday, June 21, 2022

Major Views on Baptism

When you start looking into specifics, it is rather astonishing how many different views there are on the subject of Christian baptism. It’s actually a little disheartening that there’s so many different views since we should hope that Christians would agree more on important doctrines like this one, but here we are. In this post I have laid out a summary of each of the major positions trying not to show (much) bias. These are just the major ones, there are often variations within each group as well. Each group will appeal to Scripture for support and often many of the same Scriptures, some better than others, but the real difference in the views usually comes down to Biblical interpretation, which is why figuring out how to properly interpret Scripture is so important. Everyone is prone to interpret Scripture in light of their own denomination or church tradition and being able to break out of that and look at Scripture with fresh eyes is super important. We should never just believe something because our church or pastor or tradition teaches it.

A few things to keep in mind as we think about baptism and it's relationship to salvation: Scripture talks about believers as those who have been saved (past tense, usually referring to conversion), who are being saved (present tense) and who will be saved (future tense). In the discussion of baptism, “conversion” is rather central to the argument and whether that comes before baptism, after baptism, or during or partially through baptism. The discussion comes down to these two key questions: What does it mean to be in the New Covenant? And when/how does God change the heart and give new life to someone?

I did not cite Scriptures in each view since again most views will use the same Scriptures to defend their view. Key verses on baptism used by most or all groups in their defense are: Matthew 28:19, Acts 2:1-41; 8:36-39; 16:30-33, Romans 6:3-4; Colossians 2:11-12, Titus 3:5, 1 Peter 3:21, I have discussed many of these Scriptures and more in a previous post here.

 

Major Views on Baptism:

 

Symbolic-Only Credo-Baptist View: Baptism is the proper response to God’s grace in salvation through faith and repentance. It is an act of obedience through faith, and an initiation into the church. It symbolizes and demonstrates the death and resurrection of the soul through the death and resurrection of Christ. It is a visible sign and seal of the person’s entrance into the visible church and a confirmation to those witnessing it of the individual’s faith and repentance. Thus, baptism should only be given to professing believers. Baptism is not a "means of grace" it is strictly symbolic, and a testimony to one's conversion. It is not essential for someone to be considered "saved," however, as it is commanded by Christ/Scripture, true believers should be obedient to the Lord’s command.

Here’s a longer explanation on this view: https://www.gotquestions.org/Christian-baptism.html

 

Low-sacramental/Reformed Credo-Baptist view: This view is very similar to the last, but slightly different and views it as a little more important. Baptism is the proper response to God when He has converted the heart and brought about faith and repentance. It is an act of obedience through faith, and an initiation into the church. It symbolizes and demonstrates the death and resurrection of the soul through the death and resurrection of Christ. Thus, baptism should only be given to professing believers. Furthermore, (and this is what distinguishes this view from a strict symbol view) Christ (and the Holy Spirit) are spiritually present in the act of Baptism and thus it is also a “means of grace” and an opportunity for spiritual blessing/encouragement. It is a visible sign and seal of the person’s entrance into the visible church, a confirmation to those witnessing it of the individual’s faith and repentance, and a grace-filled, powerful reminder of their position in Christ. While this view sees Baptism as more than just a physical act and more accurately as also a spiritual one that Christ meets us in in a rather mysterious way, baptism does not bestow forgiveness, wash away sin, or put the person "into" Christ. It is Christ that accomplished our forgiveness/justification on the cross, and new life/adoption is bestowed upon us the moment we believe by the Holy Spirit. Baptism could be considered the culmination of the "salvation experience," but it is not “essential” in the sense that one can temporarily or ignorantly delay their baptism and still be considered saved. However, it is commanded, and true believers must be obedient to the Lord’s commands to have true assurance of their salvation and for admission of their "official" membership in the visible Church. Like a wedding where the witnesses give their testimony to what has occurred, baptism is an important moment where the individual is outwardly joined with the visible church. While baptism can be said to “save” (lower case “s” referring to our ongoing salvation) or be an “effectual” means of grace, baptism doesn’t “save” (justify) us or put us "into Christ". It is meaningful and important, but still largely a symbol and outward sign of the work God has already accomplished internally.

Longer discussion and Q&A here: https://www.eng.auburn.edu/~sjreeves/personal/baptism_faq.html

 

Presbyterian/Low Anglican View: Baptism is “a sign and seal of the covenant of grace, or one’s ingrafting into Christ, of regeneration, of remission of sins, and of one’s giving up unto God, through Jesus Christ, to walk in newness of life.” (WCF) Baptism is the act of God bringing a person into the Covenant family. In addition to adult believers, children of believers should also be baptized. Like circumcision in the OT brought children of Israelites into the Covenant, so baptism also brings the children of believers into the visible church and the New Covenant. By itself it is incomplete. It is an outward sign that must be completed/fulfilled through personal faith and repentance. Therefore, baptism is not a guarantee of regeneration or salvation, faith and repentance must (eventually) be evident. Baptism is required to be considered a Christian but one can be saved prior to being baptized.

The Presbyterian view is based largely on the Westminster Confession of Faith (WCF) here: https://www.creeds.net/Westminster/c28.htm  

For the official Anglican position see below.

(These last 3 views are the most controversial, and [in my opinion] the furthest from Scripture.)

Efficacious Church-of-Christ View: Man’s response to God in salvation is six-fold: Hear the Word, Believe, Repent of sin, Confess faith in Christ, Be baptized, Be faithful to the end. Baptism is but one aspect of the being saved. Furthermore, baptism is the “occasion of salvation,” the moment that God brings a person into Christ, into His body, His Church. It is not a work that we do, rather it is God’s work in which He washes away our sin, gives the Holy Spirit and bestows new life. Baptism is absolutely necessary for one to be a Christian and be saved. Therefore, baptism should only be given to those who make a profession of faith and should be administered with no delay.

Depending on who you talk to, some COC folks will say that one may still go to Heaven if they die on the way to their baptism, but others will say that God would not allow a genuine believer to die before being baptized (thus that person would be lost). However, all would agree that if a professing Christian delays their baptism for any reason they cannot be considered saved.

See a longer defense of this view here: http://www.christianlandmark.com/the-church-of-christ-teaches-the-truth-on-baptism/

 

Sacramental High Anglican/Lutheran view: Baptism is a means of grace whereby God gives or cultivates the gift of faith and graciously bestows new life on the individual, bringing them into his family. It works forgiveness of sin and eternal life for all who believe. Baptism should thus be administered to believing adults or children of believers. Although baptism kindles God’s grace and turns our hearts towards God, it does not necessarily “convert” our heart. God’s work in baptism may be resisted because for baptism to truly be beneficial, it must be combined with a personal profession of faith (will be later if they are baptized as an infant) and continued faith and obedience, otherwise the baptism becomes ineffective. We should look to what God did in our baptism and trust His ability to save us. Most would believe that one can ignorantly delay baptism and still be saved, but their salvation may still be questioned. This view also usually believes that the grace given in baptism can be lost, and the person baptized be unsaved.

The “official” Anglican position on baptism in the 39 Articles is rather vague. Some Anglicans hold to this higher sacramental view, for others, it’s more a “sign and a seal” (similar to Presbyterian above). For a more thorough explanation see: https://anglicancompass.com/holy-baptism/

The main difference of Lutheranism from Anglicanism is that Lutherans believe infants can actually have faith and that baptism cultivates that faith. The official Lutheran position is largely based on Luther’s shorter catechism: “[Baptism] works forgiveness of sins, rescues from death and the devil, and gives eternal salvation to all who believe”. The official Lutheran position believes in security of the elect, and while they believe baptism does "work forgiveness" they will also say that baptismal grace can be lost if the person does not continue to believe. Further Lutheran explanation: https://www.patheos.com/blogs/justandsinner/what-is-the-lutheran-view-of-baptism/

 

Sacramental Roman Catholic View: Baptism is a means of grace whereby God cleanses one of original and previously committed sin. Faith is not given at baptism, rather the faith of the parents sustains them until confirmation. Thus, those baptized must be confirmed later when the child is older for it to be truly effective. Baptism is to be administered to infants or professing adults for forgiveness of original sin without which there is no entrance into Heaven.

Catholic explanation: https://www.aboutcatholics.com/beliefs/a-guide-to-catholic-baptism/


A few observations from this study: In case you didn't already know, I personally am convinced of the Reformed Credo-Baptist position. Baptism is very important and special and there is "grace" given in it, but it is still completely separate from conversion and, other than being a spiritually encouraging/enriching experience, and an affirmation/witness of one's acceptance into the visible church, it does not change anything spiritually. Every other view in this post falls short of what I see Scripture teaching and/or adds to it in some way.

-It is interesting to note that the more "sacramental" one gets, the more (conscious) personal faith is separated from baptism. And the more unique spiritual conversion is blurred and ultimately eliminated altogether. Baptism becomes something done in order to attain forgiveness, which completely distorts the Gospel message.

-Also, the more sacramental you go, the more baptism becomes what "makes" someone a member of the New Covenant, or even a "Christian", and, the more likely it is that they could lose that status. At the very least, "baptismal grace" can be lost and thus the meaning/symbolism of baptism is ultimately lost. 

-When it comes to Infant Baptism, faith and/or salvation is often assumed unless it is not confirmed, the individual rejects their baptism, or they show themselves to be unrepentant. In keeping with this, there is sometimes not a clear calling of the child to personal saving faith in Christ and their need for salvation/conversion. There may be a call to "keep their baptism vows," the need to be confirmed, or something like that, but especially the more sacramental you get, the less there is a call or an emphasis on the need for conversion.  My biggest concern with infant baptism is exactly this, and it's one way the Old Covenant failed: If they are already part of the "covenant community" what need is there for conversion? The New Covenant is better than the old - those that are in it, are truly saved not just quasi-members. You cannot be a member of Christ by birth or by baptism. Let's make one thing clear: One is united with Christ by the Spirit and by the Spirit alone. No circumcision or water baptism needed. To deny this is to deny basic Biblical teaching on justification. Furthermore, if baptism ingrafts one into Christ or into the New Covenant, it minimizes (or even destroys) the deep symbolism and meaning of baptism and ultimately, what Christ has accomplished for His people.

 

P.S. I highly recommend this sermon series by James White on this subject. It goes through all the various Scriptures and arguments.