I would even pay to see the video of the ESV translation committee if Tim and David Bayly were members. Here’s why:
A Christian confesses his faith, today, when he stays married to the same woman until death. When he continues to name his race “man” rather than “humans” or “human beings.” When he chooses a church where he’s sanctified rather than one where his wife is happy. A Christian confesses her faith, today, when she lets herself notice the beautiful diversity of manhood and womanhood, then calls attention to it.
32 Comments
I followed the link and read the whole thing. It provided proof that they truly are out of their minds.
Huh?
Come now, Jon, don’t let your theonomic sympathies for the Baylys obscure the humor of the imagined scenario.
Boy, if only they could show the same hairy man chutzpah for paedobaptism. But then temper it with sanity and humility.
Don’t you just know they have gender-specific welcome packets at the front door with corresponding pamphlets for hysterosalpingography for the women folk and transrectal for the men. Sorry for the clinical terms but I was trying to keep it PG.
No, I just didn’t get the connection to the ESV translation committee. I read your older posts and now I get it.
“hysterosalpingography for the women folk and transrectal for the men. Sorry for the clinical terms…”
Sean, those are the ugliest euphemisms in the history of forever.
MM,
I try.
Leaving the ESV translation committee scenario (however funny) aside for a moment, I have noticed a trend in what might be called “confession creep.” No longer is confession of myself as sinner and Jesus as Lord and Savior enough; no longer are deeds and words contrary to my confession viewed as sin that needs to be corrected; no longer are valid disagreements seen as issues which we can agree to disagree on. No, these things are an outright denial of the faith, of the gospel, of our confession. On the whole Pat Robertson brouhaha over the admittedly problematic and idiotic (but c’mon, consider the source) assertion that a man should be allowed to divorce his Alzheimer’s-afflicted wife, Russell Moore said that taking Robertson’s advice would be a denial of the gospel. Others from the six, twenty-four-hour days creation crowd have hinted that veering away from this understanding is getting dangerously close to denying the faith. Then you have these theonomists who won’t let you into the “real Christians” club if you don’t see all the wide world in terms of sex and the sexes. This is not, to say the least, an encouraging trend. Hmmmm…perhaps an ecclesiastical council should come up with a confession of faith that would be authoritative for the church so that we would all know the boundaries?
And here was me, going to have the congregation confess just the Nicene Creed at tomorrow’s service…
Is that an all or nothing list? From the Baylys I imagine it would be, but I’ve met a few atheists and agnostics who, by those measures, are confessing Christians.
Jon,
In recent news, the ESV translation oversight committee is trying be PC and trying decide whether translate the word doulos, slave or should they should transliterate the word doulos into the word bond servant instead.
Gospel Coalition has posted video of the Committee discussing this issue
Here’s a link to the committee’s revision to the ESV in the next update
http://theaquilareport.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5959:changes-to-the-esv-text-in-2011-reprint-only-500-words-out-of-750000-involved&catid=51:ministries&Itemid=134
You better get back to epistemological self-consciousness and justification priority- the only satisfactory answer to moral dilemma’s.
It doesn’t appear to me that the Baylys are saying that you don’t have to confess Christ in order to be a Christian, but quite the opposite — that if you truly confess belief in Jesus Christ, obedience of the whole Bible would follow and through that obedience these other things will be portrayed in your life.
Actually, Jessica, if one reads the whole post, they seem to be suggesting some sort of odd connection between Christian obedience and machismo, which is not an odd Bayly theme.
>>>>When he continues to name his race “man” rather than “humans” or “human beings.”<<<<
Real Christians also looks for feminist agendas behind every bush. And if they learn that the Greek word "anthropos" is a generic term for human beings, they ignore it. Just like the good people at the ESV translation committee did in 2001.
Jessica, if it seems that there is no obedience and no fruit in someone’s life, then questioning someone’s confession may be prudent, but the problem is that the Bayly/theonomist logic often goes something like
If you confess Christ, then you will obey the Bible
Obeying the Bible means (among other things) working toward a theocracy so we can stone infidels
Therefore, if you don’t work toward and theocracy and stoning infidels, you are not obeying the Bible
If you are not obeying the Bible, then your confession is false or on shaky ground at best.
With these guys, there’s no judgment of charity, no room for agreeing to disagree. They just go straight into attacking someone’s confession of Christ, which, to me, is a gravely serious thing to do, and if one finds himself doing it frequently, this may be a sign of arrogance, bitterness, or pride on the part of the accuser.
I think the Baylys are controversial to some because they don’t pronounce “grace” with a hiss.
Craig, actually, I wish they’d pronounce it with a hiss. At least then they’d mention grace. Gracious is not something I associate with Tim and David.
BTW, what is your phone number and where are you a church member?
Our old buddy Craig French is back
Darryl,
you know I’m a member of Christ the Word Church in Toledo, OH, and that David Bayly is my pastor. I’ve had personal correspondence with you and one of your pastors. Send me an email and I’ll give you my phone number, too. Feel free to make the request using the email address I already have, or feel free to use one entered at the Bayly Blog for the purpose of making comments. Today’s a sick day for me, so I have time.
Or maybe the Baylys are controversial because they make such gravely serious accusations, whether explicit or implicit, from afar without knowing those that come under their gaze? Or perhaps because they come dangerously close to making certain species of obedience dangerously close to a grounds for salvation?
John Y., I’m surprised his pastor lets Craig interact with us sinners.
Craig, I was kidding about the phone number, just seeing how Tim and David’s ploy felt to a 2ker. But I wasn’t kidding about graciousness.
Darryl, I appreciate that; it’s still a I’ve got more of the Law written in my heart and am living it out by the power of the Holy Spirit better than you are thing to the theonomists. Or, I am more courageous than you and bringing that Law into the culture better than you are. I don’t function under that theology anymore. I believe the Gospel is better than me in accomplishing the work it has to do. And the Church’s accurate proclamation of the Gospel is what heralds and brings in the Kingdom of God as God sovereignly works it out. I’m just trying to get under Craig’s skin a bit.
I find it ironic that the Bayly’s misuse Luther’s quote on their web site to justify their warring against abortion, sexual deviancy and other moral ills in the culture as if that is what Luther was really talking about. The theonomists never really did understand Luther.
I wonder if they’d be ok with naming the race “mankind”. Is a sanctified husband, by this standard, one with an unhappy wife? I wonder…
Actually, it’s probably best not to mention grace at all because there’s too much chance of saying it with a hiss, which is just way too effeminate and homosexual-y.
What do you expect from theonomists who think it is their duty to fulfill the Law just like Christ did. They have a fundamental misunderstanding of the power of the Gospel and lack trust that it is the Gospel that will accomplish the redemptive plan of God in Christ. I still think they have a misunderstanding of the doctrine of justification by faith alone, but this doctrine is easy to get led astray about considering all the elements involved in the doctrine; as the 480 or so remarks in the Where’s Waldo the power to confuse post reveals. Most of us are unclear about it. I am coming to the conclusion that the more clear you get about understanding the Gospel, the more power the Gospel impacts the believer. The theonomists fundamental belief is that the more you obey the Law the more power one gets from the Holy Spirit. At least that is the impression I get from reading their literature and blog posts.
I should have said that I am coming to the conclusion that the more clear one gets in understanding the Gospel, the more powerfully the Gospel impacts the believer. We cannot overcome our sin in our own power, it is the Gospel that overcomes our sin and God changes our hearts (a new creation) so that we believe the Gospel in perpetuity. Even during times when our belief becomes weak and our sin predominates. The Holy Spirit continually moves us to repent and believe. The churches role is to continually preach the Law and the Gospel so we are continually reminded of our sin and the power the Gospel has over it. We can also be assured by our shephards (pastors) of the continual forgiveness in the Gospel and the Sacraments strengthen our faith which is easily weakened.
Thanks, Joe C.