The newest issue of Cradenda Agenda is out here. There is good reason that someone who has paid any attention to my blog should check out this issue, lest you think that I am just trying to promote Wilson's devious scheme of world conquest. The issue is entitled Stinkers in the Church and the first article is The Genesis of Church Split. Starting from James 4 Wilson discusses the causes of quarrels in churches.
I know most of you are thinking, "How could he handle the text any better than Isaac did (yeah right)?" What I found painfully clear when I preached at Concord at the beginning of the Summer is that there is a big difference between following an argument in a text and actually knowing what the real life manifestation of such things looks like. It's a difference between theory and flesh, between knowledge and wisdom, between Torah and incarnation. I feel disapointed whenever I hear a teacher who can follow the text's argument, but then they flesh it out in a way that is like hammering a square peg into a round hole. As I have learned over the years, if all else fails tell the congregation that they can fulfill the text by evangelizing more.
I found that when I preached from James 3 all my pontificating was worth very little until I had an example of the type of men who were violated James' commands. Wilson's experience and study have given him a very concrete understanding of the types of people who cause quarrels in the church. Recently in studying with Shawna we came across this chilling verse, "As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him (Titus 3:10)" It was clear to us that churches do not take divisive people seriously enough, and accept them as a healthy part of the church rather than a cancerous limb. "Well, that's just old lady Jenckins; she pretty much runs the church. She was the one to alert everyone that the last pastor's wife wanted to paint the women's lounge. It was good that we got rid of him."
I hope that everyone will read Wilson's article and take head. I found myself very convicted by what it says. I realized while reading it the secret motive of a sin that I had already sought forgiveness for. You too might find that this article knows you better than you know yourself.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
I read this article. This is a real dilemma. When do you stand up and when do you let things go? At first, I was thinking we could have a list of things we just don't fight about: paint colors, robe colors, contemporary music vs the Broadman Hymnal, etc. Then it hit me: if I love my brother and sisters in Christ, then the problem will take care of itself. I will not get into fights over draperies but on important issues I will pray and let God deal with it. What do you think Rockin I?
-your mother
Not so much that one cannot voice one's opinion, but some people cannot state their opinion without causing a riff, and inciting others to take sides. Such people bring themselves under threat of church discipline.
Ultimataly, what I think this article draws out is that we need to place the unity of the body, respect for our leaders, and love for our brothers in top priority, and examine our hearts to make sure that there is no envy or hatred in our hearts in any action we take. If a person is prone to speak in a way that destroys and stirs up strife they probably should refrain from speaking until they have reached a place of Christian maturity, where their words may be used for the good of the congregation.
Hey Isaac. Just letting you know that I put up a link to your blog on my blog. Looking forward to reading some of your stuff when time allows. See you later!
Gabe M.
Hey Isaac. Enjoying your blog. Looking forward to more stuff. I read the article as well and was painfully aware that all these causes are present in me, too. We truly have to come to grips with the fact that Christ calls, commands, and prays for us to live in faithful unity with one another as His people. That's especially good to remember as we struggle with doctrines and choose where and how we draw boundaries. I pray for a united body of Christ even when we disagree on VERY important issues. Proclaiming the truth in love, pointing out error with humility, and striving together for the success of the gospel is mandatory for maturity and growth as the kingdoms of this world become the kingdoms of our Lord.
Isaac,
Hey, I'm really enjoying your blog. Thanks for the thoughts on baptism, humility, division, John 3:16 - very helpful and encouraging.
As an aside, I also very much enjoy Derek Webb, particularly his first CD and Caedmon's Long Line of Leavers. Considering your desire for the Word of Christ, you might enjoy Sons of Korah (put the psalms to music). myspace.com/sonsofkorahmusic
BTW, which book did the Newsboys member recommend? I think we have some similar threads of personal history.
blessings in our Lord Jesus the Christ,
Shawn
Shawn,
The book was God.com: Extreme Intimacy with an Interactive God (which sounds a little creapy now that I write the entire title out).
Isaac,
I think that Wilson is on to something here, however, when I consider the context, I become concerned. This article was well written, and the reader should immediately come under conviction. The problem is that I fully understand the sort of conflict that the author is describing, and I cannot help but wonder, "did Wilson feel convicted by his own words?" I understand that individuals on both sides of the Federal Vision argument are sinful, and at times have overstepped their bounds, BUT:
(1) When terms like "Covenant" and "Regeneration" are redefined - when preaching something from the pulpit sounding *extremely* similar to baptismal regeneration - is it entirely fair to question the motives of someone who (initially) questions my orthodoxy?
(2) By ignoring the question at hand (my orthodoxy) and counter-accusing my accuser of "jealousy", am *I* not, in fact, the one who is being divisive?
Clearly, I am not sold out to the FV, but I believe that several of Wilson’s critiques of the modern Church are valid. I want to give my brothers and sisters on the other side of the aisle the benefit of the doubt, but, so often, anyone questioning the authority/teaching of Wilson and his comrades is accused of divisiveness - and this does not lend itself to any sort of Christian unity. I wonder, would you agree with this assessment?
I disagree with your assessment, which was made so long ago, but I did not see it. I think that with the FV it is not that he has been critical of those who initially have trouble with the teaching, but with all those people who are willing to accuse him and others but are not willing to discuss when he offers, are not willing to continue in prolongued debate, and are not willing to deal with his teaching on its own terms. I do not think that Wilson is only addressing these issues, however, but is addressing something present universally.
Post a Comment